• 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!

Responses to 9/11 and Benghazi

dimensionallava

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
6,414
Reaction score
1,524
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Communist
There have been millions of dollars spent, dozens of investigations and, official calls for impeachment over benghazi, yet 9/11 was given a complete pass? Why did we not investigate Bush's and Cheney's emails? what about condaleeza rice? or Rumsfeld? who famously told us WMD's are "in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north "?

My question isn't just about 9/11 though, it's also about the embassy attacks under bush which happened many times more, with far more total deaths yet these weren't brought up either? Why? Is this the democrats fault?

It couldn’t be more obvious that the true motive here is to either build a case for impeachment or to further damage Obama’s would-be successor, Hillary Clinton. Probably both. If the GOP’s Benghazi conspiracy theorists were legitimately making an honest effort to ascertain what went wrong, rather than to exploit the deaths of four Americans in order to operate a publicly-funded smear campaign, I might be inclined to support that effort. But that’s not what’s happening. This is a political witch hunt, pure and simple. And as with the conspicuous lack of outrage over the 13 embassy attacks during the Bush years, the GOP’s Benghazi-obsessed screechers never once showed similar investigative zeal in the years following another attack against America that’s been weirdly overlooked in the context of this discussion: September 11, 2001, eleven years earlier to the day.

Indeed, there are legitimate and numerous instances where the Bush administration failed to act in accordance with CIA warnings and subsequently attempted to cover up not only its inaction but also aspects of the aftermath — with zero outrage or obsessive hobby-horsing from Fox News or the congressional Republicans. Instead it was all met with the usual refrain: don’t try to undermine the commander-in-chief while troops are in harm’s way, you unpatriotic, terrorist-loving, America-hater.

Author and Vanity Fair editor Kurt Eichenwald reported back in 2012 that the infamous August 6, 2001 president’s daily brief (PDB) wasn’t the first time the administration had been warned of a large-scale attack being prepared by Osama Bin Laden and his co-conspirators, and yet there’s no indication President Bush took any significant or even cursory action to disrupt the plot. I hasten to note, however, this isn’t to suggest Bush was to blame for the attacks nor is it an endorsement the absurd theory that he deliberately allowed the attacks to occur. This is simply to illustrate a very dichotomous reaction from the GOP.

–From the beginning, Richard Clarke, a holdover Clinton administration counter-terrorism adviser, tried to repeatedly warn then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice about an impending Bin Laden attack. Clarke warned of “an immediate and serious threat to the United States” at the hands of Bin Laden.
The Grossly Lopsided Republican Responses to 9/11 and Benghazi - The Daily Banter
 
fb455b0c58c049c6373955d4d1e95141.jpg

0414d8133f9855dae536b2c275af2bb4.jpg

HmPgKickemPhoto.jpg

the-enemy-isnt-foreign-its-domestic.png

11335557_945495232169280_2090962158_n.jpg
 
Last edited:
Why waste trillions on the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong enemy... ?

It was not wasted, but was probably too expensive.
 
Why waste money on honest men?

Wow, that goes quickly to the heart of the matter. This is how so many americans think--Dubya and Dark Side Dick were the most honest and patriotic men to have held the Office. It reminds so much of how we have the government we deserve, as Barack refused to "look back" on the crimes of Bush & Co.
 
Wow, that goes quickly to the heart of the matter. This is how so many americans think--Dubya and Dark Side Dick were the most honest and patriotic men to have held the Office. It reminds so much of how we have the government we deserve, as Barack refused to "look back" on the crimes of Bush & Co.

Oh, he looked back. But he couldn't find any. But I will admit that I never greatly liked that Vice President.
 
Why waste money on honest men?

i can't honestly believe this is anything but a sarcastic defensive reaction to what you view as an insult

you might as well have just said that i made a good point
 
There have been millions of dollars spent, dozens of investigations and, official calls for impeachment over benghazi, yet 9/11 was given a complete pass? Why did we not investigate Bush's and Cheney's emails? what about condaleeza rice? or Rumsfeld? who famously told us WMD's are "in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north "?

My question isn't just about 9/11 though, it's also about the embassy attacks under bush which happened many times more, with far more total deaths yet these weren't brought up either? Why? Is this the democrats fault?

The Grossly Lopsided Republican Responses to 9/11 and Benghazi - The Daily Banter

Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld ought to be sitting behind bars.

But that doesn't excuse Hillary. She was running an illegal arms pipeline in violation of domestic and international law. What she did is exactly equivalent to Iran-Contra, except there weren't any drugs involved (that we know of, yet).

Hillary is in the exact same boat as Bush. They're birds of a feather. Establishment bootlickers, they'll do whatever the money wants.
 
Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld ought to be sitting behind bars.

But that doesn't excuse Hillary. She was running an illegal arms pipeline in violation of domestic and international law. What she did is exactly equivalent to Iran-Contra, except there weren't any drugs involved (that we know of, yet).

Hillary is in the exact same boat as Bush. They're birds of a feather. Establishment bootlickers, they'll do whatever the money wants.

alright well i havent been following the benghazi nonsense it seems just like the birth certificate fiasco, so if you beleive there was some wrongdoing I'll beleive you, but I also know theres no proof, and there really doesn't even seem to even be a clear accusation of a crime its more like "whatever we can find about this confusing event in a country most americans can't point out on a map, that we can use against hillary in the next election we'll use it". Honestly do you think if Hillary wasn't running for president next election fox news would talk about this every day of every week like they've been doing?

but more importantly why wasn't this amount of investigation not put into bush and 9/11 or iraq or hurricane katrina, or the banks collapsing, or even the embassy attacks under bush which were far more numerous and deadly, all of which effect millions of people, yet benghazi effected 4 people?

do you blame the democrats?
 
alright well i havent been following the benghazi nonsense it seems just like the birth certificate fiasco, so if you beleive there was some wrongdoing I'll beleive you, but I also know theres no proof,

Wrong-o. Stop right there. There is proof. There's plenty of proof. We know the name of the middleman who was delivering the arms. We know the name of the boat that was delivering them. We have a signed and sworn statement by the owner of the boat. We know where the boat docked. We know how the weapons got from the boat to Saad Hariri, and we know how we got them back across the Syrian border. We know a lot.

and there really doesn't even seem to even be a clear accusation of a crime its more like "whatever we can find about this confusing event in a country most americans can't point out on a map, that we can use against hillary in the next election we'll use it". Honestly do you think if Hillary wasn't running for president next election fox news would talk about this every day of every week like they've been doing?

Don't worry, you'll be hearing about Benghazi again.

but more importantly why wasn't this amount of investigation not put into bush and 9/11 or iraq or hurricane katrina, or the banks collapsing, or even the embassy attacks under bush which were far more numerous and deadly, all of which effect millions of people, yet benghazi effected 4 people?

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

do you blame the democrats?

No, I blame Hillary Clinton.
 
Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld ought to be sitting behind bars.

But that doesn't excuse Hillary. She was running an illegal arms pipeline in violation of domestic and international law. What she did is exactly equivalent to Iran-Contra, except there weren't any drugs involved (that we know of, yet).

Hillary is in the exact same boat as Bush. They're birds of a feather. Establishment bootlickers, they'll do whatever the money wants.

On what charges?
 
Wrong-o. Stop right there. There is proof. There's plenty of proof. We know the name of the middleman who was delivering the arms. We know the name of the boat that was delivering them. We have a signed and sworn statement by the owner of the boat. We know where the boat docked. We know how the weapons got from the boat to Saad Hariri, and we know how we got them back across the Syrian border. We know a lot.

Don't worry, you'll be hearing about Benghazi again.

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


No, I blame Hillary Clinton.

Citation?
 
Wrong-o. Stop right there. There is proof. There's plenty of proof. We know the name of the middleman who was delivering the arms. We know the name of the boat that was delivering them. We have a signed and sworn statement by the owner of the boat. We know where the boat docked. We know how the weapons got from the boat to Saad Hariri, and we know how we got them back across the Syrian border. We know a lot.
well theres obviously no proof otherwise she would be in jail, you can also say you have proof the moon landing was faked, doesn't mean thats real either



Don't worry, you'll be hearing about Benghazi again.
its better than hearing obama's birth certificate, and honestly the way things are going, if this benghazi thing dies out, I have no reason to beleive republicans won't just fabricate some brand new thing too scream and rant about.



Benghazi was an illegal weapons smuggling operation. Just like Iran-Contra. Exactly like Iran-Contra.
i thought it was something about not calling it a terorsit attack or not ordering an evacuation, which automatically screams of conspiracy theory nonsense, so honestly you might as well say hillary clinton was talking to aliens from the moon and was plotting their takeover, you'll have just as much proof hillary clinton was plotting an alien invasion in benghazi



No, I blame Hillary Clinton.
again I have no interest in debating the finer points of this conspiracy theory with you or anyone else for that matter, if you say YOU honestly beleive there was a law broken (whatever it maybe) i beleive that, YOU beleive that is true, after all your getting your info from the "news" aren't you

what im asking is why obama's birth cetificate and benghazi are investigated with millons of dollars of taxpayer, funds for what is essentially a politcal smear campaign ad, but none of this was time and money was spent on any of the republicans? DO you blame democrats for not shutting down congress, and holding up appointee's, spening millions on investigations, because outside of an alex jones' conspiracy website nobody did anything about the iraq war or 9/11 or the hundreds of other screwups like blackwater and torture of innocent people, why is that?
 
what im asking is why obama's birth cetificate and benghazi are investigated with millons of dollars of taxpayer, funds for what is essentially a politcal smear campaign ad, but none of this was time and money was spent on any of the republicans? DO you blame democrats for not shutting down congress, and holding up appointee's, spening millions on investigations, because outside of an alex jones' conspiracy website nobody did anything about the iraq war or 9/11 or the hundreds of other screwups like blackwater and torture of innocent people, why is that?

Hey man, don't blame me. Nancy Pelosi is the one who took impeachment off the table, remember?
 
all that those trillions got us was the creation of ISIS. I would say that it was completely wasted.

No. That is untrue. Firstly, terrorism has been growing since the 1960s. Isis is only an extension of this development. Secondly, we did get the 2005 change in UN norms. This was let slip by the present administration, but that might be picked up, if we get a better foreign policy team in the next administration.
 
alright well i havent been following the benghazi nonsense it seems just like the birth certificate fiasco, so if you beleive there was some wrongdoing I'll beleive you, but I also know theres no proof, and there really doesn't even seem to even be a clear accusation of a crime its more like "whatever we can find about this confusing event in a country most americans can't point out on a map, that we can use against hillary in the next election we'll use it". Honestly do you think if Hillary wasn't running for president next election fox news would talk about this every day of every week like they've been doing?

but more importantly why wasn't this amount of investigation not put into bush and 9/11 or iraq or hurricane katrina, or the banks collapsing, or even the embassy attacks under bush which were far more numerous and deadly, all of which effect millions of people, yet benghazi effected 4 people?

do you blame the democrats?



Maybe you can tell us who at the State Dept hired Ansar al Sharia to act as a Security for Benghazi? That would be those who attacked and killed our Ambassador and our people.

Why didn't somebody in the State Dept listen to the Libyans who gave us 3 days advance warning about conducting business in Benghazi?

This is some of what has come up from those Benghazi hearings.
 
No. That is untrue. Firstly, terrorism has been growing since the 1960s. Isis is only an extension of this development. Secondly, we did get the 2005 change in UN norms. This was let slip by the present administration, but that might be picked up, if we get a better foreign policy team in the next administration.

Wrong. The formation of ISIS is a direct result of the Bush Administration not having thought through the ramifications of their ill-planned invasion of Iraq as well as their miscalculations. We would not have ISIS today without the destabalization of the region caused by the Iraq foreign policy blunder. That is a fact.
 
Wrong. The formation of ISIS is a direct result of the Bush Administration not having thought through the ramifications of their ill-planned invasion of Iraq as well as their miscalculations. We would not have ISIS today without the destabalization of the region caused by the Iraq foreign policy blunder. That is a fact.

Nope!

ISIS is a direct result of the US pulling out of Iraq too soon. Whether we should have ever gone there is one discussion, how we fought the war and how we left are separate discussions too. Once again we let ourselves get tied down by politics when we decided to flex our muscle. Just like Korea and Vietnam we didn't use overwhelming force to destroy the enemy's desire and ability to fight. Then we wouldn't force the issue on a Status of Forces Agreement (really I think Obama jus wanted out anyway) and we just left them to their own resources.
 
Wrong. The formation of ISIS is a direct result of the Bush Administration not having thought through the ramifications of their ill-planned invasion of Iraq as well as their miscalculations. We would not have ISIS today without the destabalization of the region caused by the Iraq foreign policy blunder. That is a fact.

This section of terrorism was certainly strengthened by the fact that the US did not neutralize Saddams officers. And certainly the destabilization of the region would have taken another course, had we not enforced the SC resolution. But it is quite unclear, where we would be, had Saddam been allowed to go on.
 
Nope!

ISIS is a direct result of the US pulling out of Iraq too soon. Whether we should have ever gone there is one discussion, how we fought the war and how we left are separate discussions too. Once again we let ourselves get tied down by politics when we decided to flex our muscle. Just like Korea and Vietnam we didn't use overwhelming force to destroy the enemy's desire and ability to fight. Then we wouldn't force the issue on a Status of Forces Agreement (really I think Obama jus wanted out anyway) and we just left them to their own resources.
The reality is...there would be no ISIS had not Bush/Cheney/Rumsfield invaded and destabalized an already volatile region without thinking through the ramifications.
 
alright well i havent been following the benghazi nonsense it seems just like the birth certificate fiasco, so if you beleive there was some wrongdoing I'll beleive you, but I also know theres no proof, and there really doesn't even seem to even be a clear accusation of a crime its more like "whatever we can find about this confusing event in a country most americans can't point out on a map, that we can use against hillary in the next election we'll use it". Honestly do you think if Hillary wasn't running for president next election fox news would talk about this every day of every week like they've been doing?

but more importantly why wasn't this amount of investigation not put into bush and 9/11 or iraq or hurricane katrina, or the banks collapsing, or even the embassy attacks under bush which were far more numerous and deadly, all of which effect millions of people, yet benghazi effected 4 people?

do you blame the democrats?

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
 
The reality is...there would be no ISIS had not Bush/Cheney/Rumsfield invaded and destabalized an already volatile region without thinking through the ramifications.

Lol !!

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