• 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!

Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that video w

Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

The error was mirror-imaging. We made the mistake of believing that since proving there were no WMD was most important to us it was therefore most important to the Iraqis. It was not. What was most important to the Iraqis was leading the Iranians to believe Iraq did have WMD. The Iranians were fooled, and so was the US. It does not, however, matter that much because the GWB group decided on war in advance of the intel, not because of it. They believed the intel was true, but they also very much wanted it to be true.:peace

NO, they did not believe the intel. The key there was the slam dunk comment. Put yourself in his shoes, honestly, and you look at the intel and it doesn't measure, so you say is this all there is? This is recognition that the case isn't adding up. Would slam dunk really make you go OK, with no change in the weak evidence? The reading of that which makes any sense is the one given by Tenet: "The slam dunk mean it was a rationale the people would buy." I'm sorry, but the evidence is far too great that they didn't believe it, nor even really cared about it.

But you are right that they started with the answer first. On that we agree.
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

I don't believe he was just fooled, I believe he jumped on that which supported his confirmation bias. He reported the information he had, though, and there is no evidence that he fabricated any information sent to the UN (and the US Congress), and the majority of the UN agreed with him (as did the majority of Congress). You and these credible analysts in the New York times are ignoring quite a bit that supported Bush's view. Regardless, Saddam was very invadable for all the other reasons the invasion occurred.

Now, there is no denying that Obama's administration covered up real information and outright lied about what they knew.

Confirmation bias? A very forgiving phrase. But the truth is the majority of the UN did not agree with him. We had to buy people into the coalition of the willing. The only belief held by a majority was that he had some left over, likely degrading wmds. Before all of this, there was talk of relaxing sanctions, and not fear of this crippled leader. The US itself was allowing him to smuggle oil, not at all afraid of what he might do. Nothing changed in the intel, but in the desire to go to war.
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

One problem with the comparison. Whether or not (and I think he was) Bush was engaging in confirmation bias, he pretty clearly thought there were active WMD production programs ongoing in Iraq. So did our allies. So (even) did some of our non-so-allies, like Russia (they just didn't think it justified an invasion).

There is no one in the, diplomatic, intelligence or defense communities who thought it was a Youtube video. It was a terrorist attack from the beginning.

The Bush Administration had a screwed up decision process that poorly weighed the evidence, and they were wrong. The Obama Administration lied.


Remember Sarcogito? Used to post here - great dude. A fairly left-wing dude, single-payer, two time obama supporter, all that. Except he was also a member of the diplomatic community, and left the Benghazi outpost about 2-3 weeks before all this went down. The man was torn up when he saw the administration he supported lie, repeatedly, about how his friends were killed and then about a man he respected, whom they tried to smear. I think he eventually basically quit here because he just became completely disgusted with politics from the situation.
 
Last edited:
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

The documents in question say otherwise.

In the email, which went to Press Secretary Jay Carney, Communications Director Jen Palmieri, and other communications officials in the administration, Rhodes laid out the goals of the administration in preparing then-U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice to appear on the Sunday morning talk shows just days after the attack. Conservatives have taken the bullet point stating that one of the goals of Rice’s appearance is to “underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy” as the smoking gun they needed to finally prove that the administration has been politically manipulating the response from the very beginning.

As everyone knows, Rice went on to do all five Sunday shows and was subsequently pilloried by Republicans and members of the right-wing media for placing such a strong emphasis on the role of the anti-Islamic video in prompting the attack. Such an interpretation of both Rice’s comments and Rhodes’ email, however, ignores the fact that when Rhodes’ email was sent, the Central Intelligence Agency had hours beforehand already drafted a set of talking points that placed the blame on the video. We learned that fact from the emails the White House released over a year ago. And it wasn’t until just prior to Rice’s appearance that intelligence agencies began to come to a consensus that the attack was less spontaneous and more planned that previously determined. That bit of information we learned all the way back in Nov. 2012.

Source: Please Don't Read This Benghazi Article | ThinkProgress

Again, nothing new here.
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

NO, they did not believe the intel. The key there was the slam dunk comment. Put yourself in his shoes, honestly, and you look at the intel and it doesn't measure, so you say is this all there is? This is recognition that the case isn't adding up. Would slam dunk really make you go OK, with no change in the weak evidence? The reading of that which makes any sense is the one given by Tenet: "The slam dunk mean it was a rationale the people would buy." I'm sorry, but the evidence is far too great that they didn't believe it, nor even really cared about it.

But you are right that they started with the answer first. On that we agree.

I was in that business for over three decades. The capacity to believe what is congenial from a policy perspective is without limit.:peace
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

No, it pretty much has gone away.... people just bringing it up because they can not comprehend that the party is actually over. Some people just can't move forward. Progressives can move forward though.

Benghazi is heading for political obscurity along with the other dozen or so embassy attacks that resulted in death. Three years from now when you mention Benghazi at a cocktail party someone certainly will answer with ".... he was a pretty good thirdbaseman, but just could not hit in the clutch.. I'm glad the Mets traded him....."

I guess we'll all have to wait and see, but I think you're mistaken. I won't forget. Their names are Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and Ty Woods. A United States ambassador was murdered. History will not forget this.

And I hope that if Hillary Clinton decides to run for the Presidency, her political opponents run non-stop vid clips of that irritated "What difference does it make?" in that shrewish voice.
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

I was in that business for over three decades. The capacity to believe what is congenial from a policy perspective is without limit.:peace

Well said.
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

I was in that business for over three decades. The capacity to believe what is congenial from a policy perspective is without limit.:peace

As I said, he gave it away when he recognized the evidence wasn't there.
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

As I said, he gave it away when he recognized the evidence wasn't there.

That rationale was given long after the fact when "slam dunk" had become an embarrassment. I know from direct contemporaneous conversation that he believed it was true at the time.:peace
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

That rationale was given long after the fact when "slam dunk" had become an embarrassment. I know from direct contemporaneous conversation that he believed it was true at the time.:peace

I just don't think the logic holds. There seems to be too much information at the time to the contrary to believe the president didn't no better. Add his comment, and I just can't buy it.
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

Confirmation bias? A very forgiving phrase. But the truth is the majority of the UN did not agree with him. We had to buy people into the coalition of the willing. The only belief held by a majority was that he had some left over, likely degrading wmds. Before all of this, there was talk of relaxing sanctions, and not fear of this crippled leader. The US itself was allowing him to smuggle oil, not at all afraid of what he might do. Nothing changed in the intel, but in the desire to go to war.

Doesn't really matter...he didn't lie about the info he had. He presented it. The same cannot be said for the current regime that has been caught in lies on every major issue that it has been involved with to date.
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

I just don't think the logic holds. There seems to be too much information at the time to the contrary to believe the president didn't no better. Add his comment, and I just can't buy it.

Believe what you will. I've given you the facts.:peace
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

Doesn't really matter...he didn't lie about the info he had. He presented it. The same cannot be said for the current regime that has been caught in lies on every major issue that it has been involved with to date.

Really, you might look closer at the last administration. Do I need to produce videos showing clear lies by Cheney? He's closer to the president than what you have.
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

Believe what you will. I've given you the facts.:peace

Not so much. You gave me something about conversations. I think I've as well or better concerning facts.
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

Really, you might look closer at the last administration. Do I need to produce videos showing clear lies by Cheney? He's closer to the president than what you have.

"Clear lies by Cheney?" Doubtful.:peace
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

Not so much. You gave me something about conversations. I think I've as well or better concerning facts.

I don't think you get it. I posted re "direct" conversations. First person, contemporaneous. There's nothing better.:peace
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

I don't think you get it. I posted re "direct" conversations. First person, contemporaneous. There's nothing better.:peace

I may have missed a link, but no conversation adds up to fact.
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

I may have missed a link, but no conversation adds up to fact.

The point at issue was what George Tenet believed. I can state unequivocally that he believed the Iraqis had WMD.:peace
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

Sorry, but no. A couple of micro-snippets in a period of evolving knowledge do not indicate a lie.:peace
I'm sorry, but that us quite clear.
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

Really, you might look closer at the last administration. Do I need to produce videos showing clear lies by Cheney? He's closer to the president than what you have.

I see, now that you can't deny that it came from the administration....you're going to claim he had nothing to do with it anyways?

lol, that's pretty desperate.
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

I'm sorry, but that us quite clear.

Not clear at all. The reason the snippets are so short is to exclude the context that shows the complexities. It's dishonest editing, in fact.:peace
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

The point at issue was what George Tenet believed. I can state unequivocally that he believed the Iraqis had WMD.:peace

No, that wasn't the issue. The issue was the president recognized a lack of evidence but was satisfied by a mere slam dunk comment, one Tenet said was meant not fir the evidence,but that it would sell. Such comment would not work for an honest rationale.
 
Re: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that vid

No, that wasn't the issue. The issue was the president recognized a lack of evidence but was satisfied by a mere slam dunk comment, one Tenet said was meant not fir the evidence,but that it would sell. Such comment would not work for an honest rationale.

You miss the point again. I have no interest in what was said later. At the time they believed it.:peace
 
Back
Top Bottom