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.
And to suppose this is true then 10 years of additional funding for national security PLUS them actually being in the country means they don't know what the hell is going on to dismiss all other intelligence information from other countries, including Libya for 2 weeks straight.
So they ignored all the other countries for 2 weeks because they didn't know sh*t about what happened and "thought" it was the movie.
Rice told the President of Libya on CBS that he was a liar and it was the "movie guy".
Rice did not say the President of Libya was a liar or imply that the President of Libya was a liar.
I have no idea what you are talking about in the first paragraph.
"On Sept. 12, The New York Times reported having spoken with "fighters involved in the assault," who told the paper "in interviews during the battle that they were moved to attack the mission by anger over a 14-minute, American-made video that depicted the Prophet Muhammad, Islam’s founder, as a villainous, homosexual and child-molesting buffoon."
Joseph Kahn, the Times' foreign editor, told The Huffington Post in an email that the paper stands by its original report that there were demonstrators and attackers responding to the video in Benghazi that night:
The reporting you are referring to was done on the ground in Benghazi as the attack was unfolding and in its immediate aftermath. We have a reporter who was in Benghazi as the attack was unfolding (a Libyan contract writer).
...
It may well be true that the attack was planned before the video or simply took advantage of the video. But there is no reason to believe that what participants in the attack told our reporter was false, or that we were wrong to report it.""
I saw this report, and no one else reported this. To me this is just another lying ass, agenda driven reporter, making stuff up. There was no movie protest, much less a NYT reporter on the scene at Benghazi, interviewing the terrorists on 9/11. The video only had a couple hundred hits before the attacks on Sept 11. This attack was the culmination of months of attacks against this consulate, the Red Cross and the British embassy.
You realize the village idiot has a higher death count than bush right? I doubt it our you wouldn't be posting stupid **** like this. Go do some research and get back to us when you know what your talking about.
"On Sept. 12, The New York Times reported having spoken with "fighters involved in the assault," who told the paper "in interviews during the battle that they were moved to attack the mission by anger over a 14-minute, American-made video that depicted the Prophet Muhammad, Islam’s founder, as a villainous, homosexual and child-molesting buffoon."
Joseph Kahn, the Times' foreign editor, told The Huffington Post in an email that the paper stands by its original report that there were demonstrators and attackers responding to the video in Benghazi that night:
The reporting you are referring to was done on the ground in Benghazi as the attack was unfolding and in its immediate aftermath. We have a reporter who was in Benghazi as the attack was unfolding (a Libyan contract writer).
...
It may well be true that the attack was planned before the video or simply took advantage of the video. But there is no reason to believe that what participants in the attack told our reporter was false, or that we were wrong to report it.""
Meanwhile no one else saw protesters. Only the NYTimes editor.
State Department: No video protest at the Benghazi consulate | The Cable
Prior to the attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi late in the evening on Sept. 11, there was no protest outside the compound, a senior State Department official confirmed today, contradicting initial administration statements suggesting that the attack was an opportunistic reaction to unrest caused by an anti-Islam video.
A team of 4, to be exact. And that was 100% the right call on the military's part. The ambassador was already dead, and special forces or not, 4 guys wouldn't have made a lot of difference. Putting special forces up against an armed mob at 10-1 odds was tried in Mogadishu, and it did not end well at all.
And yet, how many hours did these few men hold out in Benghazi? They held out for hours, and hours, and hours, with only two men, think what they could have done with some real help, of any kind.
0bama did go off to bed not knowing or caring if Stevens was alive or dead. obama destroyed the Libyan military, deposed their president, dissolved their government, and then washed his hands of anything to do with Libya. Even when his consulate was under attack ten months later, 0bama could not be bothered for more then 15 min, before he then washed his hands of it once again.
You've been listening to rightwing radio again, haven't you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha
Testifying to the Senate Armed Services Committee, Mr. Panetta said the president told them to “do whatever you need to do to be able to protect our people there,” though when it came to specifics the president “left it up to us.”]
Doesn't sound like he "went off to bed not knowing or caring if Stevens was alive or dead" to me. It sounds like he directed his Defense Secretary to "do whatever you need to do to be able to protect our people there." What else should he have done?
LOL. Wow, you liberals just dont know what to donor say at this point. You seem so desperate. Give this a try: try to put your allegiance and agenda aside and care about the truth. Seriously, try it for once. You might actually be able to sleep at night.
This is incompetence and or corruption. I say, its both.
just think, if liberals had their way, wed still all think it was due to a video and the evil doer filmmaker is in jail and that's all she wrote. Screw liberals
LOL. Wow, you liberals just dont know what to donor say at this point. You seem so desperate. Give this a try: try to put your allegiance and agenda aside and care about the truth. Seriously, try it for once. You might actually be able to sleep at night.
Funniest thing I've heard a right winger say on C-D in a long time. You should take that act on the road.
You've been listening to rightwing radio again, haven't you?
Doesn't sound like he "went off to bed not knowing or caring if Stevens was alive or dead" to me. It sounds like he directed his Defense Secretary to "do whatever you need to do to be able to protect our people there." What else should he have done?
I love when you guys debunk yourselves.
There's no way with this going on that any president worth anything would go to bed.
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.
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.
