• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Wow this is stunning!!!!!! [W:188]

iguanaman said:
Good then you realize that this event can never even come close to Bush's blunder of leaving us defenseless despite repeated warnings of an attack with airplanes. I have never heard of a President that is in charge of defenses in an foreign Embassy. The CIA was right next door.
Click to expand...

Thank you for illuminating exactly why this is such an issue.

I've nothing to say about your attempting to compare 9-11 to this 9-11; there obviously isn't one. But there is no point in trying to bring up breadth, scope, and situation with you because you've yet to grasp the big-picture distinction.
 
Grant said:
Bush didn't come out the next day and claim his 9/11 attack was about an internet video. He immediately blamed terrorists. There was no attempt at a cover-up.
Click to expand...

Surely you jest? GWB and his administration pulled one of the biggest cover-ups ever in the history of this country by using 911 as an excuse to attack Iraq. Have you forgotten this....or are you one of the ones who think that Iraq was actually involved in 911?
 
Jonsa said:
Yes an ambassador engaged in weapons smuggling in collusion with the CIA. Yep I understand that with crystal clarity.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, this is one of the facts that remains to be clarified (although I did post the Godfrey/Washington Times link several days ago now).

But is that how all this will be spun? Nefarious arms-dealing by the CIA and Ambassador Stevens's complicity? Just curious.

Won't make him any less assassinated, of course. And certainly won't explain away the heroic deaths of Ty Woods and Glen Doherty, will it?
 
Grant said:
Bush didn't come out the next day and claim his 9/11 attack was about an internet video. He immediately blamed terrorists. There was no attempt at a cover-up.
Click to expand...

seriously? come on, man lets not go overboard here. don't compare apples to oranges.
The cover up was arms smuggling into syria. the reason was pretty damn straightforward if you know how covert ops are run. Especially when it appears that opsec may have been breached.
 
disneydude said:
Surely you jest? GWB and his administration pulled one of the biggest cover-ups ever in the history of this country by using 911 as an excuse to attack Iraq. Have you forgotten this....or are you one of the ones who think that Iraq was actually involved in 911?
Click to expand...

How about getting off Bush now and focusing on Benghazi?
 
nota bene said:
Unfortunately, this is one of the facts that remains to be clarified (although I did post the Godfrey/Washington Times link several days ago now).

But is that how all this will be spun? Nefarious arms-dealing by the CIA and Ambassador Stevens's complicity? Just curious.

Won't make him any less assassinated, of course. And certainly won't explain away the heroic deaths of Ty Woods and Glen Doherty, will it?
Click to expand...

It wont make him any less dead, it wont "explain away" the other deaths of cia operatives. But it isn't about explaining it away. Its about a quasi military operation getting blown with regrettable deaths.

its not as tho, there was an attempt at covering up the deaths, nor the heroics surrounding those deaths. It was obfuscation to maintain opsec on a major covert cia operation that may have had its security blown. Buying time I beleive its called to find out if there was a leak, where was the leak, which might have been confirmed if the syrians waiting for the shipment. A little plot twist that might not be known for decades.
 
Jonsa said:
seriously? come on, man lets not go overboard here. don't compare apples to oranges.
The cover up was arms smuggling into syria. the reason was pretty damn straightforward if you know how covert ops are run. Especially when it appears that opsec may have been breached.
Click to expand...

Well whatever the reason for the cover up in Libya, there was no cover-up about 9/11/01. Bush was not afraid to call it terrorism.
 
roflpublican said:
the point here is why are these coverups ok when republicans do them, but not democrats?
Click to expand...

So you admit there is a Presidential cover-up about Benghazi, which is why you choose to talk about George Bush instead. It's not often you see a Leftist this honest.
 
Grant said:
Well whatever the reason for the cover up in Libya, there was no cover-up about 9/11/01. Bush was not afraid to call it terrorism.
Click to expand...

and obama didn't cover up anything either. Why do you insist that not jumping up and down on his desk in the oval office declaring that the deaths were the result of "terrorism" is the measure of "cover up"?

Any idiot could discern that a bunch of guys with AKs and RPGs were not out for a peaceful protest that night.
Now contemporaneous to this terrorist action, there were a number of demonstrations and riots that went of for a week or so (iirc). It go so bad that more than 30 whacked out Islamists lost their lives. Attempting to educate the people who have to live with these fanatics to counteract the fanatics perverse twisted blaming of all things american is not a cover up. Explaining to these people that freedom of worship and freedom of expression are cornerstones of American democracy, using the reaction to the video to do so, is not apologizing.

the right continues to attempt to make political hay out of two distinctly seperate things, conflated for a short period of time by the administraton so they could examine the evidence and ensure operational security. Amazing.
 
roflpublican said:
spin or no spin, this needs to be fully investigated, we don't know the whole truth yet one way or the other.
Click to expand...

It is being fully investigated. The GOP started spinning this as a scandal even before the investigation got started good. We have to be patient, an investigation worth it's salt takes time, and Obama vowed to get to the bottom of this. Once the information is ready to be presented, then if Obama did something wrong we call him on it. The right wing puts out these stories that can't be substanciated and in my opinion, that makes it harder to investigate fully.
 
Hairytic said:
It is being fully investigated. The GOP started spinning this as a scandal even before the investigation got started good. We have to be patient, an investigation worth it's salt takes time, and Obama vowed to get to the bottom of this. Once the information is ready to be presented, then if Obama did something wrong we call him on it. The right wing puts out these stories that can't be substanciated and in my opinion, that makes it harder to investigate fully.
Click to expand...

they have to take attention off their own borderline-satanic policies somehow.
 
nota bene said:
What spin is this?
Click to expand...

When Fox News and the rght wing media puts out a made up story, they always say things like sources said this or that but they never name thier sources. When the MSM doesn't pick up on these stories the right wing media claims it is because they are trying to cover for Obama.The truth is reporters would make big stride on their career if they could break a scandal regardless of who the scandal is about. The MSM isn't breaking their backs to pick this story up. Also, this story makes the claim that Obama ordered the strike team to back down. Why would Obama do this? I don't think Obama wanted our people killed in Benghazi. WHy would he want them killed? It simply makes no sense.
These right wing media organizations have a reputation for making stories up, but, if this story turns out to be true then I will be the first person to call for Obama's empeachment.
 
Hairytic said:
It is being fully investigated. The GOP started spinning this as a scandal even before the investigation got started good. We have to be patient, an investigation worth it's salt takes time, and Obama vowed to get to the bottom of this. Once the information is ready to be presented, then if Obama did something wrong we call him on it. The right wing puts out these stories that can't be substanciated and in my opinion, that makes it harder to investigate fully.
Click to expand...

All the President ever had to do was bark, "I want ALL the facts now, DAMMIT." Think about this. He's the "leader of the free world." Seven weeks later, the President doesn't know? He's needed seven investigative weeks to learn the facts?

Please.
 
nota bene said:
All the President ever had to do was bark, "I want ALL the facts now, DAMMIT." Think about this. He's the "leader of the free world." Seven weeks later, the President doesn't know? He's needed seven investigative weeks to learn the facts?

Please.
Click to expand...

lol Right. So you think an invstigation team is psychic and can just tell Obama what happened without time to investigate the situation? 7 weeks isn't a long time given the complicated situation in the ME. You seem to be someone who doesn't understand how an investigation works. I worked for the Texas Prison system and we had many investigations going on all the time. It would take months, not weeks. People need to be tracked down and statements made. Forinsics need time to sift through all the evidence. Lead need to be tracked down. That is sometimes difficult here in the US, so it is bound to be even more difficult in another country.
The question is, do you want a good accurate investigation? Or do you just want an investigation that has no integrity.
 
roflpublican said:
they have to take attention off their own borderline-satanic policies somehow.
Click to expand...

Well, I know that when the right wing spins a story as "the biggest scandal in US history", they are going over board. Honestly, I would think the Iran Contra scandal was much bigger than what they are making this story out to be.
 
Simple question, how many people who are jumping on Benghazi also jumped on the Zimmerman case definitively arguing it was self defense or murder?

Seems to me we have the same issue here. History would suggest that we not repeat the same mistakes we did with that case here.

But then again, that would be the adult thing to do and we know that ain't going to happen.
 
disneydude said:
Navy pride is getting more and more desperate. When is he going to start the birther or Rev Wright threads....LOL
Click to expand...

Your LOL is quite telling.

You laugh at that notion of the POTUS covering up his incompetence/malfeasance in the the death of four Americans?

You laugh at the fact that the media has covered up this travesty/tragedy for their desired candidate? You like it that much??

You equate outrage over both these miscarriages of ethics/law/professionalism to the 'birther' meme - which itself was an arrogant display of 'in your face' disrespect for a valid question.

You sir, have a weird sense of humor.

You should be ashamed that your standard bearer is such an incompetent leader.

you should be even more ashamed that you will laugh at serious issues relating to his malfeasance.
 
Hairytic said:
lol Right. So you think an invstigation team is psychic and can just tell Obama what happened without time to investigate the situation? 7 weeks isn't a long time given the complicated situation in the ME. You seem to be someone who doesn't understand how an investigation works. I worked for the Texas Prison system and we had many investigations going on all the time. It would take months, not weeks. People need to be tracked down and statements made. Forinsics need time to sift through all the evidence. Lead need to be tracked down. That is sometimes difficult here in the US, so it is bound to be even more difficult in another country.
The question is, do you want a good accurate investigation? Or do you just want an investigation that has no integrity.
Click to expand...

A good accurate investigation will take time - agreed.

But perhaps that should have guided the POTUS before he and his minions spent two weeks blaming the tragedy on a stupid movie trailer and the spontaneous mobs protesting over it that didn't exist.

You cannot have it both ways. You cannot approve of the POTUS spending two weeks blaming an obviously non relevant cause and then disapprove of those who can logically say this is an example of a cover up of enormous magnitude.

Unless this "investigation" comes up with the conclusion that this attack was, indeed, caused by the movie trailer, then this POTUS is very seriously wrong - magnitudes of wrong more than Nixon/Watergate. This 'investigation' should result in recommendations for impeachment unless it shows the movie trailer really really really caused the attack.

Obama is incompetent not only as a leader on domestic issues, he is downright dangerously incompetent on issues of national security.

And he is a consummate liar in all areas.
 
obvious Child said:
Simple question, how many people who are jumping on Benghazi also jumped on the Zimmerman case definitively arguing it was self defense or murder?

Seems to me we have the same issue here. History would suggest that we not repeat the same mistakes we did with that case here.

But then again, that would be the adult thing to do and we know that ain't going to happen.
Click to expand...

My first reaction to the Zimmerman case was that he was a trigger-happy cretan that needed to be arrested for voluntary manslaughter at the least.

My first reaction to the Benghazi attack was that it was 'Muslims being Muslims" and it was indeed a bunch of ignorant Islamists who knee-jerk respond to anything their Imams spew out.

In other words, I followed the meme that the media put out and that was officially endorsed by the administration.

It was only afterwards, when those awful twin evils of FOX News and Right Wing Hate Radio, began to do due diligence in revealing some of the inconvenient truths, that were being purposely withheld by the media and the administration, that it began to dawn on people that the original meme being promoted was absolute horse-hockey.

Sorry - this whole mess is being covered up solely for the convenience of the POTUS in his re-election campaign. If this were a GOP POTUS, the media would be neck-deep pounding on doors demanding answers and issuing 'white papers' and going apoplectic on every news cast.

The bias is palpable - and you know it.

If you even try to argue that this response from the media is anything at all equivalent to what they would be doing if BUSH were POTUS, then you have zero credibility.

And if you even intimate that the DEMs would not be frothing at the mouth if this were BUSH as POTUS, then you are just a liar.
 
disneydude said:
Navy pride is getting more and more desperate. When is he going to start the birther or Rev Wright threads....LOL
Click to expand...

Don't think an Obama re-election will end this. It'll probably flame the fire more. You know it too.
 
nota bene said:
All the President ever had to do was bark, "I want ALL the facts now, DAMMIT." Think about this. He's the "leader of the free world." Seven weeks later, the President doesn't know? He's needed seven investigative weeks to learn the facts?

Please.
Click to expand...

True dat.

At this point, the president is either very culpable in this cover-up - or someone should already have been summarily FIRED for their malfeasance in withholding information from the POTUS.

There is no other alternative.

So, since he has not fired anyone for the unforgivable malfeasance of withholding relevant information (or worse, providing knowingly false information) from the POTUS - allowing him to go out and publicly make false statements, then it is obvious that the POTUS himself, or someone acting directly on his behalf, is to blame for the cover-up.

This is not going away. The only way Obama avoids impeachment is if he loses the election. We as a nation don't go after defeated Presidents for their malfeasance.

Well, that is unless their name is BUSH - in which case we continue to make up lies about them in order to whip up on strawmen to deflect attention from the current chaos-in-chief.
 
American said:
Don't think an Obama re-election will end this. It'll probably flame the fire more. You know it too.
Click to expand...

Yep - I see impeachment in the future for this.

This is orders of magnitude worse than Watergate and the POTUS is more intimately involved in the cover-up than RMN was.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom