Responses to 9/11 and Benghazi

[disneydude]

Lol !!

Obama bragged about a stable Iraq and then de-stabilized it.

If Obama really believed Iraq was stable....then he is a fool. I suspect he was just playing politics. Iraq has never been stable since we invaded.

 

[disneydude]

The Clinton camp started the Birth Certificate " fiasco "

And Katrina was just a pathetic attempt by the Democrat party to slam a honest man, as was everything Iraq war.

In 2002 Hillary Clinton stated publicly that Sadaam Hussein was giving aid and confort to Al Qaeda.

The Banks collapsing ? Yup, the Democrats had far more to do with that then Bush did.

Bill Clinton was the one who deregulated the Financial industry not to mention the one who co-opted the GSEs into the Subprime market.

His " Fair lending " task force sued banks who refused to lower their lending standards

I think that you may have officially replaced "Conservative" as the biggest Bush Apologist out there.

 

[dimensionallava]

Hey man, don't blame me. Nancy Pelosi is the one who took impeachment off the table, remember?

she did say she supported it but as speaker of the house she said it would be too divisive (as if republicans gave a dam about that lol)
Why Pelosi Opposes Impeachment | The Nation

but since you have already said bush should be in jail is it fair too say you believe, its the democrats fault for not going after bush the same way republicans went after hillary or obama (or bill clinton for that matter he got a blow job that got more attention than anything bush did)

why didn't they?

 

[ballantine]

she did say she supported it but as speaker of the house she said it would be too divisive (as if republicans gave a dam about that lol)
Why Pelosi Opposes Impeachment | The Nation

So she's going to make that decision all by herself? She decides that "it's too divisive", and that's it? That's all? Just like that?

Nah man - the rotten byotch completely fell down on the job. As a representative of the American People it was her job to pursue people like BushCo.

but since you have already said bush should be in jail is it fair too say you believe, its the democrats fault for not going after bush the same way republicans went after hillary or obama (or bill clinton for that matter he got a blow job that got more attention than anything bush did)

why didn't they?

Because they were complicit in everything Bush did. They still are. Haven't you noticed? Mr. Hope and Change has brought us more wiretapping, and more drones, and more middle eastern intervention. He's Bush on steroids!

 

[Absentglare]

So she's going to make that decision all by herself? She decides that "it's too divisive", and that's it? That's all? Just like that?

Nah man - the rotten byotch completely fell down on the job. As a representative of the American People it was her job to pursue people like BushCo.



Because they were complicit in everything Bush did. They still are. Haven't you noticed? Mr. Hope and Change has brought us more wiretapping, and more drones, and more middle eastern intervention. He's Bush on steroids!

I think the more realistic explanation is that President Obama and his administration are afraid of retribution attacks under future administrations. Just look at what they've done to Hillary even though she's done virtually nothing wrong.

 

[ballantine]

I think the more realistic explanation is that President Obama and his administration are afraid of retribution attacks under future administrations.

I think the more realistic explanation is we have a bunch of nazi's in charge of the friggin' government, and the parties are just a charade to fool the people into thinking their vote actually matters.

Just look at what they've done to Hillary even though she's done virtually nothing wrong.

The Obama administration has done its best to protect Hillary "so far". It covered for her when she lied about Benghazi, and the president's already invoked executive privilege once about the e-mails, and the administration will continue to cover for Hillary "until it becomes politically impossible to do so".

At this point I'd say she's lost the confidence of even the inner circle, so we'll see how that plays out. Right now she's in that middle space the Chinese call "dangling", it's when even you know you're busted but you haven't been actually charged yet, the cruel Orientals just let you dangle there for a while...

This whole e-mail thing is really abjectly stupid, wouldn't you say? How the heck could anyone do something this stupid? Hello? This woman's supposed to be reasonably smart, and she goes and pulls a boner like this? This is power-tripping, plain and simple, the only reason anyone would justify something like this is for reasons of control. Really, this is highly unseemly behavior, it's stupid and arrogant and corrupt all at once.

One of the interesting things is that the DNC has been completely silent throughout this. Wonder what they're thinking?

 

[Vern]

Benghazi was an illegal weapons smuggling operation. Just like Iran-Contra. Exactly like Iran-Contra.
.

that's good information. That would explain why the CIA purposely gave the admin false talking points to the admin. mmmmm, but how is it just like Iran Contra? In Iran contra we were running guns to the country that held our people hostage for over a year. Literally negotiating with terrorists then sending the money to fight a democratic govt in Nicaragua. Literally funding terrorists. For you example to work, we have to ignore that we were supporting the anti Assad groups and then explain how we were trying to overthrow a democratic govt? I'm sure we'll be getting proof of this in the 8th republican Benghazi investigation right?

which brings up a good point. Susan rice says exactly what the CIA said and she's a liar. But bush and company lie about what the CIA intel and then use those lies to invade Iraq and we pass if off as "faulty intel"?

 

[Rentoc]

that's good information. That would explain why the CIA purposely gave the admin false talking points to the admin. mmmmm, but how is it just like Iran Contra? In Iran contra we were running guns to the country that held our people hostage for over a year. Literally negotiating with terrorists then sending the money to fight a democratic govt in Nicaragua. Literally funding terrorists. For you example to work, we have to ignore that we were supporting the anti Assad groups and then explain how we were trying to overthrow a democratic govt? I'm sure we'll be getting proof of this in the 8th republican Benghazi investigation right?

which brings up a good point. Susan rice says exactly what the CIA said and she's a liar. But bush and company lie about what the CIA intel and then use those lies to invade Iraq and we pass if off as "faulty intel"?

So what you are saying is that during the Bush administration the White House controlled the CIA, but during the current administration the CIA is in control?

Total BS.

This whole fiasco concerning Benghazi and the e-mails is about one thing. Why didn't the President send help? Why didn't the administration even try to help OUR PEOPLE who were under attack? My guess is that it was so close to the reelection and Obama was not going to risk a "Blackhawk Down" scenario that close to the election. He and his people were not going to risk that. She (Hillary) is protecting the him and herself. The unfortunate thing is we will probably never know the truth, if the FBI gets close someone will either die or give themselves up as the bad guy and the trail will stop there.

 

[Absentglare]

So what you are saying is that during the Bush administration the White House controlled the CIA, but during the current administration the CIA is in control?

Total BS.

This whole fiasco concerning Benghazi and the e-mails is about one thing. Why didn't the President send help? Why didn't the administration even try to help OUR PEOPLE who were under attack? My guess is that it was so close to the reelection and Obama was not going to risk a "Blackhawk Down" scenario that close to the election. He and his people were not going to risk that. She (Hillary) is protecting the him and herself. The unfortunate thing is we will probably never know the truth, if the FBI gets close someone will either die or give themselves up as the bad guy and the trail will stop there.

President Bush 2's administration specifically manipulated the intelligence organizations for their agenda to invade Iraq. They were looking for an excuse since election day. Luckily, people are so stupid and gullible that they actually gave it the green light after 9/11.

Yellow cake uranium lie

Bush and Iraq: Follow the Yellow Cake Road - TIME

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niger_uranium_forgeries

Powell's translation lies to the UN

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/...s-media-still-cant-get-iraqi-wmd-story-right/

They did send help. You're reading too much editorialized garbage and treating it like objective fact.

 

[Vern]

. Why didn't the President send help? Why didn't the administration even try to help OUR PEOPLE who were under attack?

Quite the false narrative you got their RT. Bush cherry picked the intel the CIA gave him and ignored anything that disputed his secret day 1 agenda to invade Iraq. (now don’t get mad at that fact and rush to post “nuh uh” because Bush admitted he had a secret day 1 agenda to invade Iraq. )

Read this slowly, 7 republican investigations have proven that to be a vile and disgusting lie. I guess you’ve put so much effort into the deluded fantasy to explain the vile and disgusting lie, that you have some sort of emotional attachment to it. Try coming up with a theory that isn’t based on that lie.

 

[Rentoc]

President Bush 2's administration specifically manipulated the intelligence organizations for their agenda to invade Iraq. They were looking for an excuse since election day. Luckily, people are so stupid and gullible that they actually gave it the green light after 9/11.

Yellow cake uranium lie

Bush and Iraq: Follow the Yellow Cake Road - TIME

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niger_uranium_forgeries

Powell's translation lies to the UN

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/...s-media-still-cant-get-iraqi-wmd-story-right/

They did send help. You're reading too much editorialized garbage and treating it like objective fact.

I would say you are the one reading the editorialized garbage and treating like fact. President Bush (both of them) are good men who care about their Country. President's Clinton and Obama have other primary concerns, country being far from the top of their list.

 

[Rentoc]

Quite the false narrative you got their RT. Bush cherry picked the intel the CIA gave him and ignored anything that disputed his secret day 1 agenda to invade Iraq. (now don’t get mad at that fact and rush to post “nuh uh” because Bush admitted he had a secret day 1 agenda to invade Iraq. )

Read this slowly, 7 republican investigations have proven that to be a vile and disgusting lie. I guess you’ve put so much effort into the deluded fantasy to explain the vile and disgusting lie, that you have some sort of emotional attachment to it. Try coming up with a theory that isn’t based on that lie.

Wow, I've never heard that before (about President Bush). Would you mind giving me some links to that?

What lie do I have an attachment to?

 

[Absentglare]

I would say you are the one reading the editorialized garbage and treating like fact. President Bush (both of them) are good men who care about their Country. President's Clinton and Obama have other primary concerns, country being far from the top of their list.

Actually, i agree with you. President Bush 2 was a good man, albeit he was a bit of a puppet and he isn't exactly a super genius.


That doesn't excuse the sins of his administration. I don't know who actually manipulated the intelligence agencies, who is responsible.

That's because democrats are too spineless to investigate it. Frankly; we have plenty of reason to look into it, the fact that we don't have any investigation should make everyone uncomfortable.

 

[MMC]

So what you are saying is that during the Bush administration the White House controlled the CIA, but during the current administration the CIA is in control?

Total BS.

This whole fiasco concerning Benghazi and the e-mails is about one thing. Why didn't the President send help? Why didn't the administration even try to help OUR PEOPLE who were under attack? My guess is that it was so close to the reelection and Obama was not going to risk a "Blackhawk Down" scenario that close to the election. He and his people were not going to risk that. She (Hillary) is protecting the him and herself. The unfortunate thing is we will probably never know the truth, if the FBI gets close someone will either die or give themselves up as the bad guy and the trail will stop there.

Yeah it is BS. As Hillary testified before the Senate and said the State Dept was tasked with acquiring Gadhafi's Warehouses of Weapons and tasked to get all the man-pads.

Then the man-pads showed up in Syria. Later in 2014 the Free Syrian Rebels Admitted they had got weapons from Libya and specifically the TOWS and ManPads. They also Admitted the US sent the aid.

 

[Vern]

Wow, I've never heard that before (about President Bush). Would you mind giving me some links to that?

I would love to.

" President Bush acknowledged for the first time yesterday that he was mapping preparations to topple Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein as soon as he took office.

Bush's comments came in response to former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill's contention in a new book that the chief executive was gunning for Saddam nine months before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and two years before the U.S. invasion of Iraq."

Bush admits he targeted Saddam from the start - seattlepi.com

It seems O'Neill ratted Bush out in his book and for some reason Bush admitted it. Notice how I had to use something from Seattle. It was oddly ignored in the mainstream media. I say oddly because it not only puts Bush's Iraq comments/lies in a different light in retrospect with that knowledge, it also puts the repeated and clear warnings that were ignored that could have prevent 9-11 in a different light also. mmmm, maybe its not so odd after all.

What lie do I have an attachment to?

this

This whole fiasco concerning Benghazi and the e-mails is about one thing. Why didn't the President send help? Why didn't the administration even try to help OUR PEOPLE who were under attack? My guess is ........

the vile and disgusting stand down lies have been refuted in every Benghazi investigation, 8 and counting. Yet it persists among conservatives. And in case it wasn't clear, Susan rice said exactly what the CIA said. Oddly, she's called a liar for us not knowing the correct story for two weeks but bush lies us into Iraq, kills 4000 GIs, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, costs over a trillion dollars and destroys our credibilty in the world and all we get is "oops, it was an honest mistake" from cons.

 

[Absentglare]

I would love to.

" President Bush acknowledged for the first time yesterday that he was mapping preparations to topple Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein as soon as he took office.

Bush's comments came in response to former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill's contention in a new book that the chief executive was gunning for Saddam nine months before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and two years before the U.S. invasion of Iraq."

Bush admits he targeted Saddam from the start - seattlepi.com

It seems O'Neill ratted Bush out in his book and for some reason Bush admitted it. Notice how I had to use something from Seattle. It was oddly ignored in the mainstream media. I say oddly because it not only puts Bush's Iraq comments/lies in a different light in retrospect with that knowledge, it also puts the repeated and clear warnings that were ignored that could have prevent 9-11 in a different light also. mmmm, maybe its not so odd after all.



this



the vile and disgusting stand down lies have been refuted in every Benghazi investigation, 8 and counting. Yet it persists among conservatives. And in case it wasn't clear, Susan rice said exactly what the CIA said. Oddly, she's called a liar for us not knowing the correct story for two weeks but bush lies us into Iraq, kills 4000 GIs, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, costs over a trillion dollars and destroys our credibilty in the world and all we get is "oops, it was an honest mistake" from cons.

It just blows my mind that this insanity is allowed to continue. Why do conservatives seem to have so little integrity ?

 

[ballantine]

It just blows my mind that this insanity is allowed to continue. Why do conservatives seem to have so little integrity ?

LOL - this from the clowns that want to elect a crook for President? :lamo

 

[Kobie]

LOL - this from the clowns that want to elect a crook for President? :lamo

I don't think Absentglare is a Donald Trump supporter.

 

[Vern]

LOL - this from the clowns that want to elect a crook for President? :lamo

Ah deflection. Ball, see how you didn’t respond to the facts. You do realize your post’s only purpose is to allow you to ignore that Bush had a secret agenda from day 1 to invade Iraq. It’s a certain lack of fortitude that requires cons to deflect. When you feel up to it you should read the 9-11 commission report. Notice how I don’t have to specify which one because there was only one. If I was referring to any Benghazi report I would have to be specific. Lucky for President Obama they all confirm the “stand down” lies were in fact lies.
Anyhoo, Bush’s secret day 1 agenda to invade Irag not only explain his lies about Iraq, they explain why the clear and repeated warnings that could have prevented 9-11 were ignored.

 

[ballantine]

Ah deflection. Ball, see how you didn’t respond to the facts. You do realize your post’s only purpose is to allow you to ignore that Bush had a secret agenda from day 1 to invade Iraq.

Goddamit, this is not about Bush. What part of NOT ABOUT BUSH don't you understand? ???

It’s a certain lack of fortitude that requires cons to deflect.

It's not about Bush. It's not about Obama. It's not about Clinton. It's not even about Cheney or Rumsfeld. Wake up.

When you feel up to it you should read the 9-11 commission report. Notice how I don’t have to specify which one because there was only one. If I was referring to any Benghazi report I would have to be specific. Lucky for President Obama they all confirm the “stand down” lies were in fact lies.

I'll bet you believe the Warren Commission Report too. Come on, admit it. You believe all the government lies, don't you?

Anyhoo, Bush’s secret day 1 agenda to invade Irag not only explain his lies about Iraq, they explain why the clear and repeated warnings that could have prevented 9-11 were ignored.

No, they don't. There is no apparent relationship between Iraq and 9/11.

You're blowing smoke just like everyone else.

 

[Vern]

Goddamit, this is not about Bush. What part of NOT ABOUT BUSH don't you understand? ???

It's not about Bush. It's not about Obama. It's not about Clinton. It's not even about Cheney or Rumsfeld. Wake up.

I'll bet you believe the Warren Commission Report too. Come on, admit it. You believe all the government lies, don't you?

wah wah deflect,wah wah deflect. got it. Don't worry, you're not the first con to throw a childish tantrum at the facts. It's not your fault. getting you're info from the conservative entertainment complex has depleted your ability to handle reality.

No, they don't. There is no apparent relationship between Iraq and 9/11.

You're blowing smoke just like everyone else.

mmmm, what explanation do you have for the clear and repeated warnings about Iraq being ignored? And the sad fact is that Bush couldn't have told enough lies to justify invading Iraq if 9-11 didn't happen. sorry con, they're connected. childish tantrums and large fonts don't change that.

 

[ballantine]

wah wah deflect,wah wah deflect. got it. Don't worry, you're not the first con to throw a childish tantrum at the facts. It's not your fault. getting you're info from the conservative entertainment complex has depleted your ability to handle reality.

That kind of idiotic partisan trash will get you on ignore. Fast.

mmmm, what explanation do you have for the clear and repeated warnings about Iraq being ignored? And the sad fact is that Bush couldn't have told enough lies to justify invading Iraq if 9-11 didn't happen. sorry con, they're connected. childish tantrums and large fonts don't change that.

This kind of partisan claptrap is truly disgusting. Maybe you could get a clue before opening your mouth again?

 

[Vern]

That kind of idiotic partisan trash will get you on ignore. Fast.


This kind of partisan claptrap is truly disgusting. Maybe you could get a clue before opening your mouth again?

con, this is partisan claptrap

Benghazi was an illegal weapons smuggling operation. Just like Iran-Contra. Exactly like Iran-Contra.

so did you figure out your unsubstantiated claim is nothing like IranContra yet? wait, is that why you started deflecting ( and quite desperately I might add)? and don't forget this

No, they don't. There is no apparent relationship between Iraq and 9/11.

without 9-11, there would have been no invasion of Iraq. that's a pretty significant relationship.

 

[Vern]

Wow, I've never heard that before (about President Bush). Would you mind giving me some links to that?

RT, I realize you're probably still reeling from the fact that Bush had a secret agenda from day to invade Iraq but you need to see this. This is a report from the Arizona FBI about terrorists in flight schools. its from the 9-11 commission in case you're curious

"In July 2001, an FBI agent in the Phoenix field office sent a memo to FBI headquarters and to two agents on international terrorism squads in the New York Field Office, advising of the “possibility of a coordinated effort by Usama Bin Ladin” to send students to the United States to attend civil aviation schools.The agent based his theory on the “inordinate number of individuals of investigative interest” attending such schools in Arizona.8 "

In a vacuum, that one paragraph is pretty damning. lets put it into context. Al queda hijacking airplanes was a known conspiracy. Its why the FBI monitored flight schools. So they actually found something they were looking for and ignored it. And don't forget, Bush had a secret Day 1 agenda to invade Iraq. Yea, context didn't really help did it?

 

[ballantine]

con, this is partisan claptrap

so did you figure out your unsubstantiated claim is nothing like IranContra yet? wait, is that why you started deflecting ( and quite desperately I might add)? and don't forget this

lol - liberals. "Hillary did nothing wrong". Every piece of airtight evidence is an "unsubstantiated claim". :lamo

No sir. Your pathetic attempts at distortion are laughable. Everyone can see how liberal "logic" works. it's right here in print in this thread.

without 9-11, there would have been no invasion of Iraq. that's a pretty significant relationship.

You believe that? In spite of the PNAC documents?

The invasion of Iraq was going to happen anyway. Maybe someone just needed an excuse.