Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When the US Consulate in the Karachi, Pakistan was attacked and 10 were killed in 2002, did you call for an investigation? When the US embassy in Uzbekistan was attacked and two were killed and another nine injured in 2004 did you demand that the president be held accountable? When the US Consulate in Saudi Arabia was stormed and eight died in 2004 did you call for Congressional hearings?
Nope.
There were no hearings after any of these attacks, even though there were more casualties. Yet no one in this thread will address this. Why?
When the US Consulate in the Karachi, Pakistan was attacked and 10 were killed in 2002, did you call for an investigation? When the US embassy in Uzbekistan was attacked and two were killed and another nine injured in 2004 did you demand that the president be held accountable? When the US Consulate in Saudi Arabia was stormed and eight died in 2004 did you call for Congressional hearings?
Nope.
Blather on. You fool no one.
Karachi - 12 people killed, all Pakistanis. One fertilizer truck bomb, not a 7-hour firefight. No previous attacks and repeated requests for security. See the difference?
Uzbekistan - 2 people killed, both Uzbekistani guards. Two suicide bombs, not a 7-hour firefight. Against, see the difference?
Saudi Arabia - 9 killed, none Americans. There was actually a firefight at this one that lasted several hours, but the Saudi Arabian guards actually defended us instead of leaving. And guess what? There were U.S. Marine guards there because it was considered a vulnerable target, just as Libya should have been.
If you really can't see the differences between those events and Benghazi, then I don't know what to tell you. If the same thing happened in Benghazi under a different president, I would have been just as upset.
Karachi - 12 people killed, all Pakistanis. One fertilizer truck bomb, not a 7-hour firefight. No previous attacks and repeated requests for security. See the difference?
Uzbekistan - 2 people killed, both Uzbekistani guards. Two suicide bombs, not a 7-hour firefight. Against, see the difference?
Saudi Arabia - 9 killed, none Americans. There was actually a firefight at this one that lasted several hours, but the Saudi Arabian guards actually defended us instead of leaving. And guess what? There were U.S. Marine guards there because it was considered a vulnerable target, just as Libya should have been.
If you really can't see the differences between those events and Benghazi, then I don't know what to tell you. If the same thing happened in Benghazi under a different president, I would have been just as upset.
Jeddah was a US Embassy not an unmanned consulate. The US Embaqssy in Libya had marine guards.
It was a spook operation folks. Not a State Dept one. And the Ambassador knew better than anyone else how dangerous it was.
Just as I thought. No one who blathered through 20 pages could answer this question. It's an apt way to close a bogus thread.
Oh yea, it is bogus in HeyJudes eyes because the thread is not a bunch of coooooing over Obama. HeyJude, why don't you get in line after Chris Matthews and just do him already.
I believe the truth will be revealed soon about the cover up of Benghazi and both Hillary Clinton and Obama will be nailed as the lying scumbags that many people already think they are.
Too bad these two scumbags won't be paraded down Main Street in the towns where the murdered Americans' families live.
There were no hearings after any of these attacks, even though there were more casualties. Yet no one in this thread will address this. Why?
Good question, seems rather selective for things to get to this level when many embassies were attacked in the past, what could possibly be the reason Benghazi draws such attention.
Good question, seems rather selective for things to get to this level when many embassies were attacked in the past, what could possibly be the reason Benghazi draws such attention.
How about the death of a US Ambassador? I realize that liberal freaks care nothing for human life, but conservatives do, and when the US is attacked, as it was in Benghazi we expect the President to do something more than lie to the American people and apologize to the Libyans for getting their bullets all bloody.
As one might expect, only Democrat Presidents manage to get US Ambassadors killed. I am surprised that Clinton did not manage to get one or more US Ambassadors killed. Intentionally getting innocent Americans killed is a uniquely Democrat specialty.
How about the death of a US Ambassador? I realize that liberal freaks care nothing for human life, but conservatives do, and when the US is attacked, as it was in Benghazi we expect the President to do something more than lie to the American people and apologize to the Libyans for getting their bullets all bloody.
As one might expect, only Democrat Presidents manage to get US Ambassadors killed. I am surprised that Clinton did not manage to get one or more US Ambassadors killed. Intentionally getting innocent Americans killed is a uniquely Democrat specialty.
Who would possibly have known more about the security conditions in Benghazi than Ambassador Stevens? Does the right hold that he was carried there kicking and screaming by Hilary?
I gather he went their of his own volition - perhaps motivated by avoiding the mess expected at the Embassy.
I would presume he knew what the spooks were up to and was not frightened by it.
So why would anyone else be responsible for his decision?
I thought the right was into personal accountability.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.