Jump to content

Republicans and Bhengazi

Rate this topic


Gamakatsu

Recommended Posts

Do they really care that four Americans are dead and holding those responsible accountable? Or is the most important thing to make political hay out of a cover-up, be it real or created in the back room of the RNC? Considering that Obama came out a day or two afterward insisting that we will hold the responsible "terrorists" accountable, it would seem to be more of a Republican created scenario. We need something to draw attention from the 47%.

 

I always read on here that using terror victims as political tools was despicable. Guess not...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Quote:

Originally Posted by Gamakatsu View Post

Do they really care that four Americans are dead and holding those responsible accountable? Or is the most important thing to make political hay out of a cover-up, be it real or created in the back room of the RNC? Considering that Obama came out a day or two afterward insisting that we will hold the responsible "terrorists" accountable, it would seem to be more of a Republican created scenario. We need something to draw attention from the 47%.

I always read on here that using terror victims as political tools was despicable. Guess not...



You WISH!  Sorry pal, your guy is busted lying has ass off, and he is going to wear it for the next three weeks.



 



Hillary is attacking Obama now as well, have you written to the State Department to try to shame them into clamming up as well?

“My happiness is not the means to any end. It is the end. It is its own goal. It is its own purpose.”

 

Ayn Rand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do they really care that four Americans are dead and holding those responsible accountable? Or is the most important thing to make political hay out of a cover-up, be it real or created in the back room of the RNC? Considering that Obama came out a day or two afterward insisting that we will hold the responsible "terrorists" accountable, it would seem to be more of a Republican created scenario. We need something to draw attention from the 47%.

I always read on here that using terror victims as political tools was despicable. Guess not...

 

Gami,

 

He lied!!!! His admin. lied. They went on tv to the nation and lied. What part of lying is it you don't understand? What is dispicable is the failed Messiah lying his ass off to cover up a terrorist attack one month before the election. That is dispicable. Stop carrying water for this failure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do they really care that four Americans are dead and holding those responsible accountable? Or is the most important thing to make political hay out of a cover-up, be it real or created in the back room of the RNC? Considering that Obama came out a day or two afterward insisting that we will hold the responsible "terrorists" accountable, it would seem to be more of a Republican created scenario. We need something to draw attention from the 47%.

 

I always read on here that using terror victims as political tools was despicable. Guess not...

 

He said it once, and then the whole Administration did a 180 and marched back to the film... then carried the film forward as the explanation, It is what it is... I can understand why Partisan Republicans are eager to hammer the fiasco into a political tool... I can understand why the most Partisan of Democrats want to hide their heads in the sand,and remain silent, or deny reality and carry on with the denial (which takes brass nuts BTW)

 

But in the end.. it is what it is and no amount of spinning is gonna change that.

 

As far as I'm concerned, personally, it would despicable not to talk about this, not to make it a political issue... four Us Citizens died because Obama et al. wanted to keep a low profile in the region and ignored the handwriting on the wall... then for political reasons, tried to spin it after the **** hit the fan...

 

It is what it is

A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices. – William James

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's not my guy anymore and I'm not voting for him, but all the outrage is about something that is covering up right wing blogs as opposed to even being minutely directed at the perps. The right seems to have no interest in holding them accountable at all. It may be there, but I haven't read one post saying "let's get the bastards". It's all about political points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Quote:

Originally Posted by Gamakatsu View Post

He's not my guy anymore and I'm not voting for him, but all the outrage is about something that is covering up right wing blogs as opposed to even being minutely directed at the perps. The right seems to have no interest in holding them accountable at all. It may be there, but I haven't read one post saying "let's get the bastards". It's all about political points.



Well the attack lasted six hours.  The chance to hold "them" accountable is long gone.  one F 18 with one of those cool bombs that breaks up into a hundred little bombs would have "held them accountable" real good.



 



 



The administration decided instead to send some cameras to LA where local sherrifs perp walked some paperhanger out of his house at one in the morning.



 



Kinda like OJ "looking for the real killers".

“My happiness is not the means to any end. It is the end. It is its own goal. It is its own purpose.”

 

Ayn Rand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's not my guy anymore and I'm not voting for him, but all the outrage is about something that is covering up right wing blogs as opposed to even being minutely directed at the perps. The right seems to have no interest in holding them accountable at all. It may be there, but I haven't read one post saying "let's get the bastards". It's all about political points.

IMO we need to find out who "the bastards" are first and figure out what kind of threat they pose in the future. We certainly shouldn't help Libya with anything if they don't cooperate and give up some intel. The political "hay" will be made later, right now we need to find out if this will happen again in Libya and if it's tied to something that is about to happen elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obama is an amateur. The great ones invade Grenada or bomb an aspirin factory within a week of a terror attack. Definitely not fit to be President.

 

We invaded Granada two days before the Lebanon attack. Get you time line right on that incident. I think the worst thing Reagan did during his presidency was go into Lebanon in the first place, if you remember, to save Yassar Arafat and the PLO. That was stupid on its face. Then he left the Marines there as a big sitting target (but they were also incompetent for holing up in that one building instead of disbersing.) Worst part of the Reagan 8 years. But he never tried to cover it up nor did he ever call it anything but what it was.

 

I was still serving at the time and I remember both the Granada invasion and the Marines being killed very well. BTW, Reagan was correct to go into Granada. "Communism Stops Here." First rock of the avalanche.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hussein lied! people died! let it happen on purpose! funny how some roles have reversed here :)

 

Hussien should just quote Condi Rice on 9/11 "yes we were warned OBL was going to attack and we would have acted if we knew when and where the attack was coming from..." :shock:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gama the Dems spokes Person tried to hang the blame on Romney and Ryan last week. This article has some sobering new information on the State Dept. Out Sourcing Diplomatic Security. It is an interesting read.

 

 

 

The Benghazi attack: Who really is “politicizing” the death of 4 Americans.

 

Mark Steyn, a National Review columnist, 10/12/2012

 

 

'The entire reason that this has become the political topic it is is because of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.”

 

 

Thus, Stephanie Cutter, President Obama’s deputy campaign manager, speaking on CNN about an armed attack on the 9/11 anniversary that left a U.S. consulate a smoking ruin and killed four diplomatic staff, including the first American ambassador to be murdered in a third of a century.

 

 

To discuss this event is apparently to “politicize” it and to distract from the real issues the American people are concerned about. For example, Obama spokesperson Jen Psaki, speaking on board Air Force One on Thursday: “There’s only one candidate in this race who is going to continue to fight for Big Bird and Elmo, and he is riding on this plane.”

 

 

She’s right! The United States is the first nation in history whose democracy has evolved to the point where its leader is provided with a wide-body transatlantic jet in order to campaign on the vital issue of public funding for sock puppets. Sure, Caligula put his horse in the senate, but it was a real horse. At Ohio State University, the rapper will.i.am introduced the president by playing the Sesame Street theme tune, which oddly enough seems more apt presidential-walk-on music for the Obama era than “Hail to the Chief.”

 

 

Obviously, Miss Cutter is right: A healthy mature democracy should spend its quadrennial election on critical issues like the Republican party’s war on puppets rather than attempting to “politicize” the debate by dragging in stuff like foreign policy, national security, the economy, and other obscure peripheral subjects. But, alas, it was her boss who chose to “politicize” a security fiasco and national humiliation in Benghazi. At 8:30 p.m., when Ambassador Stevens strolled outside the gate and bid his Turkish guest good night, the streets were calm and quiet.

 

 

At 9:40 p.m., an armed assault on the compound began, well planned and executed by men not only armed with mortars but capable of firing them to lethal purpose — a rare combination among the excitable mobs of the Middle East. There was no demonstration against an Islamophobic movie that just got a little out of hand. Indeed, there was no movie protest at all. Instead, a U.S. consulate was destroyed and four of its personnel were murdered in one of the most sophisticated military attacks ever launched at a diplomatic facility.

 

 

This was confirmed by testimony to Congress a few days ago, although you could have read as much in my column of four weeks ago. Nevertheless, for most of those four weeks, the president of the United States, the secretary of state, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, and others have persistently attributed the Benghazi debacle to an obscure YouTube video — even though they knew that the two events had nothing to do with each other by no later than the crack of dawn Eastern time on September 12, by which point the consulate’s survivors had landed safely in Tripoli.

 

 

To “politicize” means “to give a political character to.” It is a reductive term, capturing the peculiarly shrunken horizons of politics: “Gee, they nuked Israel. D’you think that will hurt us in Florida?” So media outlets fret that Benghazi could be “bad” for Obama — by which they mean he might be hitting the six-figure lecture circuit four years ahead of schedule. But for Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and Tyrone Woods, it’s real bad. They’re dead, over, gonesville.

 

 

Given that Obama and Secretary Clinton refer to Stevens pneumatically as “Chris,” as if they’ve known him since third grade, why would they dishonor the sacrifice of their close personal friend by peddling an utterly false narrative as to why he died? You want “politicization”?

 

 

Secretary Clinton linked the YouTube video to the murder of her colleagues even as the four caskets lay alongside her at Andrews Air Force Base — even though she had known for days that it had nothing to do with it. It’s weird enough that politicians now give campaign speeches to returning coffins.

 

 

But to conscript your “friend”’s corpse as a straight man for some third-rate electoral opportunism is surely as shriveled and worthless as “politicization” gets.

 

 

In the vice-presidential debate, asked why the White House spent weeks falsely blaming it on the video, Joe Biden took time off between big toothy smirks to reply: “Because that was exactly what we were told by the intelligence community.” That too is false. He also denied that the government of which he is nominally second-in-command had ever received a request for additional security. At the risk of “politicizing” things, this statement would appear also to be untrue.

 

 

Instead, the State Department outsourced security for the Benghazi consulate to Blue Mountain, a Welsh firm that hires ex-British and -Commonwealth special forces, among the toughest hombres on the planet. The company’s very name comes from the poem “The Golden Journey to Samarkand,” whose words famously adorn the regimental headquarters of Britain’s Special Air Service in Hereford. Unfortunately, the one-year contract for consulate security was only $387,413 — or less than the cost of deploying a single U.S. soldier overseas. On that budget, you can’t really afford to fly in a lot of crack SAS killing machines, and have to make do with the neighborhood talent pool. So who’s available? Blue Mountain hired five members of the Benghazi branch of the February 17 Martyrs’ Brigade and equipped them with handcuffs and batons. A baton is very useful when someone is firing an RPG at you, at least if you play a little baseball. There were supposed to be four men heavily armed with handcuffs on duty that night, but, the date of September 11 having no particular significance in the Muslim world, only two guards were actually on shift.

 

 

Let’s pause right there, and “politicize” a little more. Liberals are always going on about the evils of “outsourcing” and “offshoring” — selfish vulture capitalists like Mitt shipping jobs to cheap labor overseas just to save a few bucks. How unpatriotic can you get! So now the United States government is outsourcing embassy security to cheap Welshmen who in turn outsource it to cheaper Libyans.

 

 

Diplomatic facilities are U.S. sovereign territory — no different de jure from Fifth Avenue or Mount Rushmore. So defending them is one of the core responsibilities of the state. But that’s the funny thing about Big Government: The bigger it gets, the more of life it swallows up, the worse it gets at those very few things it’s supposed to be doing. So, on the first anniversary of 9/11 in a post-revolutionary city in which Western diplomats had been steadily targeted over the previous six months, the government of the supposedly most powerful nation on earth entrusted its security to Abdulaziz Majbari, 29, and his pal, who report to some bloke back in Carmarthen, Wales.

 

 

In the days before the attack Joe Biden had been peddling his Obama campaign slogan that “bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive.” The first successful terrorist attack on U.S. sovereign territory since 9/11, and on the very anniversary and by al-Qaeda-linked killers, was not helpful to the Obama team. And so the nature of the event had to be “politicized”: Look, over there — an Islamophobic movie! “Greater love hath no man than this,” quoth the president at Chris Stevens’ coffin, “that a man lay down his life for his friends.” Smaller love hath no man than Obama’s, than to lay down his “friend” for a couple of points in Ohio.

— Mark Steyn, a National Review columnist,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Responsibility always lies at the top, but justice often does not get very high up the pyramid. Some bean counter in State Department was certainly wrong and perhaps even criminally negligent. Some supervisor was not clear on the mission priorities and did not notice that. But at some point, the next manager up was just tasked with "staying within budget" and as long as the numbers added up, that was their job.

 

Remember the O-rings of the Challenger boosters? Do you remember what happened to the people responsible, aside from a scolding by Congressional committee? But even though the POTUS is in charge of NASA, and twice as many people died, no one serioulsy thought RR should be making technical launch decisions for NASA. What he could do was have an extensive stand-down to improve decision-making on safety. Ultimately, we still fly into space on a rocket built by the lowest bidder.

 

In the same way, if a president put into their budget "we will spend whatever necessary to ensure the safety of our diplomats, period" who here would not be crying about excess and waste? Frankly, as sad as it is to lose 4 in Benghazi, I am equally distressed when 4 die in roadside bombings with IEDs. I am just as sad for a PFC to be killed as a general or an ambassador. The reason we should care more about generals and ambassadors is not that their lives are more valuable, but that we've invested time and training to develop an expertise and experience level that is not easy to replace, and that if we cannot protect high-value targets then everyone below them is at risk. Do you remember "hill-billy armor" tack-welded to the sides of Humvees in Iraq? It took a while for the IED threat to creep up the command chain, and for the "politicians" to acknowledge that it was more than a rabble of "dead-enders". Was that politicizing, or just lack of information

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Quote:

Originally Posted by midwestexile View Post

Responsibility always lies at the top, but justice often does not get very high up the pyramid. Some bean counter in State Department was certainly wrong and perhaps even criminally negligent. Some supervisor was not clear on the mission priorities and did not notice that. But at some point, the next manager up was just tasked with "staying within budget" and as long as the numbers added up, that was their job.

Remember the O-rings of the Challenger boosters? Do you remember what happened to the people responsible, aside from a scolding by Congressional committee? But even though the POTUS is in charge of NASA, and twice as many people died, no one serioulsy thought RR should be making technical launch decisions for NASA. What he could do was have an extensive stand-down to improve decision-making on safety. Ultimately, we still fly into space on a rocket built by the lowest bidder.

In the same way, if a president put into their budget "we will spend whatever necessary to ensure the safety of our diplomats, period" who here would not be crying about excess and waste? Frankly, as sad as it is to lose 4 in Benghazi, I am equally distressed when 4 die in roadside bombings with IEDs. I am just as sad for a PFC to be killed as a general or an ambassador. The reason we should care more about generals and ambassadors is not that their lives are more valuable, but that we've invested time and training to develop an expertise and experience level that is not easy to replace, and that if we cannot protect high-value targets then everyone below them is at risk.



But that isn't the issue.  Thats the sideshow. 



The issue is the White house and the state department weaving this tale about some protesters being peeved about some movie trailer.  Three short weeks later we find out that the state department knew what actually happened-cause they were watching it on tv.



 



if they had enough money to buy a fleet of chevy volts then they had enough to hire a mess of Marines.  We know that, but it doesn't matter.  Its not the problem.

“My happiness is not the means to any end. It is the end. It is its own goal. It is its own purpose.”

 

Ayn Rand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...