• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is This Email About Benghazi or ME Policy?

Is This Email About Benghazi or ME Policy?


  • Total voters
    8
I'm starting to seriously wonder if Republicans will keep trying to play the Benghazi card until the day they die.
As long as you've got a White House just now releasing (forced by a court) subpenaed material? They deliberately previously withheld or redacted? Which contains damning and concerning information? Well you can count on "card playing" in this poker game of the administration's starting mid summer and running through August. At least.:cool:
 
You can view it HERE (For those who don't know, this is the email that the conservative website Judicial Watch, receive through a FOIA (Freedom Of Information Act)


  • Benghazi
  • Mid-East Policy
  • Other

One has to see the Judicial Watch FOIA access request to be able to adequately answer your question. As someone who administered a similar act here in Canada for a government institution, the actual wording of the request is all important.

If Judicial Watch requested all documents related to the White House response to the incidents in Benghazi, and this is what they provided, then the FOIA administrator along with the White House has deemed the content of this letter to be responsive directly to the request. So there's your answer. If, however, the Judicial Watch request was for all White House documents related to Middle Eastern policy and this was provided, then the FOIA administrator along with the White House has deemed the content of this letter to be responsive directly to that broader request. And that's the second possible answer.
 
One has to see the Judicial Watch FOIA access request to be able to adequately answer your question. As someone who administered a similar act here in Canada for a government institution, the actual wording of the request is all important.

If Judicial Watch requested all documents related to the White House response to the incidents in Benghazi, and this is what they provided, then the FOIA administrator along with the White House has deemed the content of this letter to be responsive directly to the request. So there's your answer. If, however, the Judicial Watch request was for all White House documents related to Middle Eastern policy and this was provided, then the FOIA administrator along with the White House has deemed the content of this letter to be responsive directly to that broader request. And that's the second possible answer.
By the way, in the embarrassing press briefing yesterday. As Carney referenced the part of the email that "was about" Benghazi, in the email he was saying was "not about" Benghazi? He forgot to realize he just admitted that said email was by his own admission at least partially a wee wee little bit about Benghazi. :lamo Aside from the reporters in the room, did anyone here feel that either they or perhaps Carney, was a wee bit dizzy? :stooges
 
Last edited:
By the way, in the embarrassing press briefing yesterday. As Carney referenced the part of the email that "was" about Benghazi, in the email he was saying was "not about" Benghazi? That he just admitted was at least partially about Benghazi? :lamo Aside from the reporters in the room, did anyone here feel that either they or perhaps Carney, was a wee bit dizzy? :stooges

I have little sympathy for media types who get played by other media types. They stupidly let themselves be played and then when one day they wake up and decide they don't want to be played anymore they get all butt hurt about being spun. How the hell do they think the public feels about all of them?
 
I have little sympathy for media types who get played by other media types. They stupidly let themselves be played and then when one day they wake up and decide they don't want to be played anymore they get all butt hurt about being spun. How the hell do they think the public feels about all of them?
I have no sympathy at all for them. Though not all the reporters in that room have been played. But in general the public holds a very negative view of the current state of affairs in journalism in the USA. This matter illustrates why. :shock:
 
I have no sympathy at all for them. Though not all the reporters in that room have been played. But in general the public holds a very negative view of the current state of affairs in journalism in the USA. This matter illustrates why. :shock:

Assuming I'm a somewhat average example of public view, IMO the state of affairs in journalism is that it barely exists at all anymore.

And does not exist at all when we're talking the major news outlets.
 
Middle East - and the world.

A big hoo-ha is being made about that line: "to underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy."

What was happening THE DAY that email was sent?

Oh, that's right -- protests about a video all over the freakin world.


"A report (PDF) from the Congressional Research Service published days after the attacks in Benghazi details how "Muslims in a number of countries have responded in recent days with anger at the United States that many observers describe as a response to a privately produced film circulating on the Internet that denigrates Islam and the prophet Mohammed."

According to the report, as of September 14, 2012, when Rhodes' email was sent, such protests - often violent and focused on U.S. diplomatic facilities -- had occurred in Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Sudan, Egypt, Lebanon, Turkey, Yemen, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq, Iran, Bangladesh, and Malaysia."


Remember? Muslim Protests Spread Around the Globe - In Focus - The Atlantic

^ Sept. 14, 2012 Article ^
 
Need a visual?

protests.jpg
 
BTW, that map is from headline news the same day that email was sent.

Sep 14, 2012 10:11AM ET / Global <-------

[h=1]A Map of Muslim Protests Around the World[/h]
lead_large.jpg
Reuters / Google Maps

If you can't keep track of all the Muslim protests erupting across the globe, you're not alone. The uproar over a 14-minute anti-Islam YouTube video has sparked furious protests from Somalia to Egypt to Sudan to Tunisia to Libya to Bangladesh to Indonesia to Pakistan. With new reports of protests surfacing every minute, we've compiled the latest reported incidents into this handy interactive Google Map. Click the locations and embedded links for more details about each incident."

A Map of Muslim Protests Around the World - The Wire
 
You can view it HERE (For those who don't know, this is the email that the conservative website Judicial Watch, receive through a FOIA (Freedom Of Information Act)


  • Benghazi
  • Mid-East Policy
  • Other

Other-Damage Control in an election season, from the most transparent administration in history-so transparent they only responded when forced to do so.

Its unsurprising that the left continues to paint this as a fake scandal-its going to catch them in the backside.

 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom