• 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!

Republican-led report debunks Benghazi theories and accusations

Amadeus said:
Over a DOZEN embassies were attacked under Bush, 60 deaths total, yet the left didn't use those tragedies as avenues of attack against the Bush administration. See the difference? Of course not.
Click to expand...

You don't see the difference because you're a liberal hack and an Obama apologist.

Of those 60 deaths, how many were Americans? How many occurred on US embassy soil? How many Ambassadors died? The answer in all cases is none.

So don't give me your "Bush did it too" crap - it doesn't fly with me.
 
j-mac said:
Aw boo freakin hoo....Your guy is a lying, and possibly criminal buffoon...No they won't stop as long as his lying ass is in office.
Click to expand...

In other words, they'll keep raping Ambassador Stevens' corpse for political hay, even though that dog has been proven it don't hunt.

"My guy." Okay. :roll:

Those lying bastards you go to bat for constantly have politicized the deaths of four Americans in order to attempt to embarrass the president. They are shameless, soulless ****bags.
 
Amadeus said:
Over a DOZEN embassies were attacked under Bush, 60 deaths total, yet the left didn't use those tragedies as avenues of attack against the Bush administration. See the difference? Of course not.
Click to expand...

The Bush Admin referred to those attacks as "terrorist attacks" and did not attempt to sugar coat it
 
Bodhisattva said:
The Bush Admin referred to those attacks as "terrorist attacks" and did not attempt to sugar coat it
Click to expand...

So what? Does immediately branding something a terrorist attack make the victims any less dead?
 
Kobie said:
So what? Does immediately branding something a terrorist attack make the victims any less dead?
Click to expand...

If we are in a war against certain terrorists and they attack us it should be properly defined... the "so what" Hilary parroting only illuminates the problem.
 
CanadaJohn said:
You didn't read the report or the article presented in the OP, did you?
Click to expand...

Yeah nice dodge there champ! :lol:

Either YOU didn't read it or just read it and dismissed it outright to instead opt to pursue this ridiculous overly partisan rant that you don't want to let go of... all while shamelessly pretending to take a fake moral high ground of feigned indignity about the deaths.
 
CanadaJohn said:
You don't see the difference because you're a liberal hack and an Obama apologist.

Of those 60 deaths, how many were Americans? How many occurred on US embassy soil? How many Ambassadors died? The answer in all cases is none.
Click to expand...

So only the lives of American ambassadors are worth anything?

January 22, 2002. Calcutta, India. Gunmen associated with Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami attack the U.S. Consulate. Five people are killed.

June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. Suicide bomber connected with al-Qaida attacks the U.S. Consulate, killing 12 and injuring 51.

October 12, 2002. Denpasar, Indonesia. U.S. diplomatic offices bombed as part of a string of “Bali Bombings.” No fatalities.

February 28, 2003. Islamabad, Pakistan. Several gunmen fire upon the U.S. Embassy. Two people are killed.

May 12, 2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Armed al-Qaida terrorists storm the diplomatic compound killing 36 people including nine Americans. The assailants committed suicide by detonating a truck bomb.

July 30, 2004. Tashkent, Uzbekistan. A suicide bomber from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan attacks the U.S. Embassy, killing two people.

December 6, 2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al-Qaida terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate and occupy the perimeter wall. Nine people are killed.

March 2, 2006. Karachi, Pakistan again. Suicide bomber attacks the U.S. Consulate killing four people, including U.S. diplomat David Foy who was directly targeted by the attackers.

September 12, 2006. Damascus, Syria. Four armed gunmen shouting “Allahu akbar” storm the U.S. Embassy using grenades, automatic weapons, a car bomb and a truck bomb. Four people are killed, 13 are wounded.

January 12, 2007. Athens, Greece. Members of a Greek terrorist group called the Revolutionary Struggle fire a rocket-propelled grenade at the U.S. Embassy. No fatalities.

March 18, 2008. Sana’a, Yemen. Members of the al-Qaida-linked Islamic Jihad of Yemen fire a mortar at the U.S. Embassy. The shot misses the embassy, but hits nearby school killing two.

July 9, 2008. Istanbul, Turkey. Four armed terrorists attack the U.S. Consulate. Six people are killed.

September 17, 2008. Sana’a, Yemen. Terrorists dressed as military officials attack the U.S. Embassy with an arsenal of weapons including RPGs and detonate two car bombs. Sixteen people are killed, including an American student and her husband (they had been married for three weeks when the attack occurred). This is the second attack on this embassy in seven months.
Click to expand...

13 Benghazis That Occurred on Bush's Watch Without a Peep from Fox News | Bob Cesca
 
CanadaJohn said:
You don't see the difference because you're a liberal hack and an Obama apologist.

Of those 60 deaths, how many were Americans? How many occurred on US embassy soil? How many Ambassadors died? The answer in all cases is none.

So don't give me your "Bush did it too" crap - it doesn't fly with me.
Click to expand...

So only American Deaths matter? It surprises me, that you as a so called Canadian, are only concerned with American Deaths.

What I think is you are an American hiding in Canada. the whole Draft thing I'm thinking.
 
TheNextEra said:
So only American Deaths matter? It surprises me, that you as a so called Canadian, are only concerned with American Deaths.

What I think is you are an American hiding in Canada. the whole Draft thing I'm thinking.
Click to expand...

Your thinking is what Gruber was referring to.
 
TheNextEra said:
So only American Deaths matter? It surprises me, that you as a so called Canadian, are only concerned with American Deaths.

What I think is you are an American hiding in Canada. the whole Draft thing I'm thinking.
Click to expand...

You know, I've suspected the same thing and I'm glad you pointed it out. However, Amadeus already pointed out that at least 10 Americans died in attacks on US embassies/consulates during the Bush administration. Not a single one of those carried non-stop investigations by the Republican Congress. This point goes way over the heads of many in the GOP.

So one has to wonder, what's so special about the Benghazi bombing? Okay, the administration thought it was caused by a video, it was proven to be wrong and then it corrected its mistake. Does that change the actual events in any way shape or form? How many congressional investigations have gone into who conducted the attack? How many investigations have gone into the motives behind it? Why was that specific target chosen and not one in say Egypt or Tunisia?

The questions that are normally asked during an investigation have been completely ignored and the GOP has focused on finding the Obama administration guilty of something. The fact that this is the 6th investigation to find absolutely nothing that is headline material (even for the fringe conservatives at WND) is pretty telling of how much wrongdoing was involved on the American side.
 
poweRob said:
Yeah nice dodge there champ! :lol:

Either YOU didn't read it or just read it and dismissed it outright to instead opt to pursue this ridiculous overly partisan rant that you don't want to let go of... all while shamelessly pretending to take a fake moral high ground of feigned indignity about the deaths.
Click to expand...

Only posters involved in political rants are those who believe the report says what they want it to say without actually reading it - that would be posters like you.
 
TheNextEra said:
So only American Deaths matter? It surprises me, that you as a so called Canadian, are only concerned with American Deaths.

What I think is you are an American hiding in Canada. the whole Draft thing I'm thinking.
Click to expand...

That's a pretty bull**** analysis, even for you. When you don't have an argument, you resort to personal attacks. I'm a very proud Canadian from a long line of proud Canadians.

American lives are the only ones in this context that matter because America is responsible for protecting Americans and can't be held responsible for other nation's citizens who lose their lives in attacks on Americans.
 
Grant said:
And of these attacks how many were lied about, covered up, or blamed on an innocent third party??
Click to expand...

Since there's no proof that the Obama administration lied about and covered up the Benghazi attacks, your question is hereby dismissed as irrelevant and nonsensical.
 
Amadeus said:
Since there's no proof that the Obama administration lied about and covered up the Benghazi attacks, your question is hereby dismissed as irrelevant and nonsensical.
Click to expand...

Lol !!

Susan Rice a week after Leon Panetta KNEW that it was a Terrorist attack and not a " spontaneous protest " went on 5 different Sunday News shows and LIED HER ASS OFF.

You people were Grubered again.
 
I wasn't so concerned about what happened. I was more concerned about why an American Ambassador had such lack security before the attack. And concerned about the lax response. These people only know violence. Parking a single destroyer isn't as intimidating as an aircraft carrier buzzing the city.
 
Grant said:
Your thinking is what Gruber was referring to.
Click to expand...

Yep, that must be it. Didn't vote for Obama in 2012, but somehow "I'm" what Gruber was referring to. :roll:

Maybe you should just sit this one out and continue hiding out in Canada.
 
CanadaJohn said:
That's a pretty bull**** analysis, even for you. When you don't have an argument, you resort to personal attacks. I'm a very proud Canadian from a long line of proud Canadians.

American lives are the only ones in this context that matter because America is responsible for protecting Americans and can't be held responsible for other nation's citizens who lose their lives in attacks on Americans.
Click to expand...

Given that you don't seem to give a **** about PAST Americans that have died in Embassy positions and your obvious obsession with Jeb Bush, yes my point stands.
 
imagep said:
This is impossible.

The congressman from my district said that he is going to disclose whatever it is that Obama was hiding. Surly Trey wasn't implying that he had knowledge that Obama was hiding something when he didn't have such knowledge. That would make him a lier, we all know that a lifelong politician who has never held a private sector job would never tell such a lie.
Click to expand...

Huh? Surly Trey? Why do you say he's surly?

Lifelong politician?

Is an attorney only valuable when he works for a private law practice or a corporation?
 
Fenton said:
Lol !!
Click to expand...

On September 16, the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice appeared on five major interview shows to discuss the attacks. Prior to her appearance, Rice was provided with "talking points" from a CIA memo,[198] which stated:

The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi and subsequently its annex. There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.

This assessment may change as additional information is collected and analyzed and as currently available information continues to be evaluated. The investigation is ongoing, and the U.S. government is working with Libyan authorities to bring to justice those responsible for the deaths of U.S. citizens.[199]

Using these talking points as a guide, Rice stated:

Based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is in fact what began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy—sparked by this hateful video. But soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi, we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals, joined in that-- in that effort with heavy weapons of the sort that are, unfortunately, readily now available in Libya post-revolution. And that it spun from there into something much, much more violent." "We do not-- we do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned." "I think it's clear that there were extremist elements that joined in and escalated the violence. Whether they were al Qaeda affiliates, whether they were Libyan-based extremists or al Qaeda itself I think is one of the things we'll have to determine.
Click to expand...

Fenton: Susan Rice a week after Leon Panetta KNEW that it was a Terrorist attack and not a " spontaneous protest " went on 5 different Sunday News shows and LIED HER ASS OFF.
Click to expand...

Panetta: "I didn't have any specific information, but the fact was that when you bring grenade launchers to a demonstration, there's something else is going on. From the very beginning I sensed that this was an attack, a terrorist attack on our compound. I remember saying to him look, based on the weapons that I see and the nature of the attack, I think this was a terrorist attack. He said look, the information we are getting from intelligence sources is that it really was a demonstration. I said you know, David, I don't see it that way. I think we are dealing with what in effect, with a group of terrorists who took advantage of the situation in order to go after our people."

So while Panetta SENSED it was a terrorist attack, the actual intelligence was conflicted and unclear. I'm afraid that Panetta's gut instinct is not proof of anything.
 
Fenton said:
Nonsense.. You people need to remind yourselves occasionally that WE ( Conservatives ) were NOT the people Gruber was referring to when he called the American voters idiots.'

We KNEW Obama and the Democrats were lying scum long before Gruber's comments were disclosed.

And why do you people continue to run and hide behind the false narrative of Bush's supposed " lies " about WMD ??

Oh that's right, you WERE the people Gruber was referring to....



"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998


"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998


"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999


"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002


"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

Final votes for Iraq Resolution

Party Yeas Nays Not

Republican 215 6 2
Democratic 82 126 1
Independent 0 1 0
TOTALS 297 133 3
Click to expand...

I can't see the reminders of all of the Democratic lies that got us into Iraq enough.
 
TheNextEra said:
Given that you don't seem to give a **** about PAST Americans that have died in Embassy positions and your obvious obsession with Jeb Bush, yes my point stands.
Click to expand...

I see you're not man enough to admit your post and personal attack was a load of crap. Noted.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Hi, MMC. Had to stay away for a while - life happened. You'd have loved it - a grand case of government overreach.
The state came by and shut down our business thanks to pictures that we have since proven were staged and sent in with false claims...but the state investigator never asked our side of the story, and now we're going through the appeal process and they're represented by an Assistant Attorney General...whereas it's just me representing my wife and myself. But I sorta feel sorry for that AAG because the state handed them a bum case, and - God willing - I'm going to rub their noses in it. It's a long, long story, but I can prove that the state witnesses changed their testimony, that the investigator changed words from her notes to her official allegations, and that in most of the investigation, never ever asked our side of the story concerning the allegations. So if we do indeed win, I can't go around bragging I beat an AAG - they were handed a mostly-indefensible case. In mid-January I'll drop off the radar again so I can prepare for the last three days of the case in early February.

Government overreach shutting down my wife's small business on false pretenses - it's almost enough for this liberal to start yelling for small government. The irony is that the lead investigator and her husband are prominent Republicans in the county....

But back to the discussion -

Well, seeing as how Graham wouldn't say why he dismissed the report's findings, but would only 'suggest' people were lying, well, no, I don't really give a whole lot of weight to his claim. That, and this IS the 7th investigation in the GOP-led House's quest to blame it all on the Dems. And they've shot nothing but blanks. So either Dems are THAT good and THAT sneaky and THAT organized and THAT dedicated to an unbreakable code of silence...or there's no 'there' there. From The Hill:

Graham didn’t clearly pinpoint why he dismissed the report’s findings, but suggested its information was provided by people in the intelligence community who had previously lied to Congress about the attack.
Click to expand...

Hey there Glen...Good luck on your case...I hope you prevail.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom