64 replies to this topic

[CommunitarianKevin]

Merc14, on 14 November 2012 - 06:42 PM, said:

Did you think Watergate was a big deal?  O h hell, I don't expect an honest answer from you and have no idea how old you were at the time but that was a bungled burglary that hurt no one and took downm a President.  Coverting uop teh death of an ambassador to get yourself reelected makes Wtergate look like child's play.  The fact that people like you on the left and the MSM are willing to bury it to protect your guy speaks volumes for the character of the people on the left.

Personally, I'd be outraged if my side did something like this and it find it abhorrent that the media is acting as a willing accomplice.  If this was Watergate, Woodward and Bernstein would be helping Nixon cover up the crime and outing Deepthroat as a crazy extremist.

Hey dude...why don't you just let the story develop...everything you are saying is total speculation. I am waiting to get the facts before I call someone out on it. If someone is guilty of something, they should be punished...but we do not have any evidence of that yet. Also if someone is to blame, what makes you think it is the president? You are aware that things happen in our government and military without the president's knowledge right? Take a chill pill before you accuse people. My guess would be that the president was also in the dark about the mater. BOTH sides (Dems and Repubs) are upset they did not know about Petraeus before the fact.

[Merc14]

HuttonEtAl, on 14 November 2012 - 06:43 PM, said:

Wait, what? Man, I missed this news story...It must be a new one...I didn't realize any of this was proven, or even had evidence to support it, as of yet...

And no talking about Bush...that was 4 years ago...

The point here is that you don't want any of this even investigated!  You don't care because it is your side!  Instead of being ashamed of yourself you are proud!  You couldn't care less if the law is broken if it helps your side.  Thanks for letting us all know what kind of a person you are.  

[CommunitarianKevin]

Merc14, on 14 November 2012 - 06:48 PM, said:

The point here is that you don't want any of this even investigated!  You don't care because it is your side!  Instead of being ashamed of yourself you are proud!  You couldn't care less if the law is broken if it helps your side.  Thanks for letting us all know what kind of a person you are.  

Wow you are really pulling stuff out of your ass now. When did I ever say that it should not be investigated? Stop making stuff up...even though that is what your type depends on...made up stuff...

See, you think you know so much about everything...you think you even know what I am thinking. You will come on here and make claims about what I am thinking or what kind of person I am because you KNOW what I am thinking. You KNOW as much about Benghazi as you know what I am thinking...to you, a fact and an opinion are the same thing...

Edited by HuttonEtAl, 14 November 2012 - 06:56 PM.

[Neognosis]

Quote

So the Director of the CIA giving false testimony about the death of an ambassdor because the administration is blackmailing him is nothing to fuss about?

GOOD POINT... except that there is no indication that ever happened.

Quote

Did you think Watergate was a big deal?  O h hell, I don't expect an honest answer from you and have no idea how old you were at the time but that was a bungled burglary that hurt no one and took downm a President.

the president of the united states ordered a felony to be committed, or at the very least, had knowledge of it happening, and then broke the law again to cover it up. So it's not ENTIRELY the same. And by "not entirely" I mean "Not at all."

Edited by Neognosis, 14 November 2012 - 07:11 PM.

[Merc14]

Neognosis, on 14 November 2012 - 07:10 PM, said:

GOOD POINT... except that there is no indication that ever happened.

Real;ly?  None at akll hus?  I guess you didn't view the clip or read the article.  Investifgations have been ordered on far, far less evidence than this.  LMAO

Neognosis, on 14 November 2012 - 07:10 PM, said:

the president of the united states ordered a felony to be committed, or at the very least, had knowledge of it happening, and then broke the law again to cover it up. So it's not ENTIRELY the same. And by "not entirely" I mean "Not at all."

At least you're consistent.

[OverSword]

Neognosis, on 14 November 2012 - 06:11 PM, said:

No it's not. You can't staff an embassy with an unlimited amount of security personnel. I don't know enough details to say what happened there, but it is not as if someone fell asleep and forgot to lock the front door....
It's not like 5 people with slingshots walked in.


A cable was sent to higher ups that the embassy was vulnerable to attack because it was in a city where the gov't was not firmly in control, there are Al Quada camps were in the countryside, and there is limited host nation support. That's EVERY US EMBASSY IN THE MIDDLE EAST.

Unless you put every middle east US embassy in the middle of a military base, you are never going to have a completely secured area. And even then.....

That's your opinion no doubt.  My opinion is that to not fully oufit and man (and there is no doubt this was not done) a new embassy in an unstable country which is historically hostile to the USA, is criminal.  That all of the shortcomings in the staffing of this embassy led to the deaths of our ambassador shows just how criminally negligent the entire fiasco is.  Someone should be brought to task.  Deny it neog, deny it one more time please.

[Neognosis]

Quote

Real;ly?  None at akll hus?  I guess you didn't view the clip or read the article.  Investifgations have been ordered on far, far less evidence than this.  LMAO

Let's hold off crying about how obama can shoot someone, smoking gun, blah blah blah until after the investigation, eh?

Quote

My opinion is that to not fully oufit and man (and there is no doubt this was not done) a new embassy in an unstable country which is historically hostile to the USA, is criminal.

The embassy was fully outfitted and manned. This is really nothing more than trying to make the MOST political hay out of a terrorist attack on US soil. Something that seems to have a VERY familiar ring to it, coming from the right.....

what I am interested in, is whether or not, and why or why not, reports coming from the embassy asking for MORE were not heeded, and who failed in that.

Edited by Neognosis, 15 November 2012 - 12:11 AM.

[and then]

Neognosis, on 15 November 2012 - 12:07 AM, said:

Let's hold off crying about how obama can shoot someone, smoking gun, blah blah blah until after the investigation, eh?



The embassy was fully outfitted and manned. This is really nothing more than trying to make the MOST political hay out of a terrorist attack on US soil. Something that seems to have a VERY familiar ring to it, coming from the right.....

what I am interested in, is whether or not, and why or why not, reports coming from the embassy asking for MORE were not heeded, and who failed in that.

You mean the one that's supposedly taken 2 months with NOTHING of substance being reported?  The smoking gun thing was simply a comment not to be taken seriously.  But when I deal with pansy asses that report everything I say as though it's the end of civilization, what else should I expect?

[CommunitarianKevin]

and then, on 15 November 2012 - 01:03 AM, said:

You mean the one that's supposedly taken 2 months with NOTHING of substance being reported?  The smoking gun thing was simply a comment not to be taken seriously.  But when I deal with pansy asses that report everything I say as though it's the end of civilization, what else should I expect?

What is with you people? You demand to have all of the information NOW. I guess I should first point out that ANY investigation takes time. When ever you see a high profile case it often takes YEARS before it comes to trial and the trial is concluded. Chill dude, it takes time, especially something of this magnitude.

Also, what makes you think you are entitled to ALL of the facts NOW? First off, you are lucky to know anything at all. People, especially in America, seem to think it is their right to know everything about everything. Second, do you really want every little detail out there? Do you not think it might be a national security risk or an advantage to terrorists to put EVERY LITTLE DETAIL about how something went wrong or possible weaknesses? We are talking about the CIA, the government, and the military...possibly the FBI. You want them to just throw everything out there? Hell, we may as well throw all of our classified stuff and inner workings of the government on wikipedia or something. We could call the page "everything a terrorist needs to know about attacking the United States."

For as much as Repubs talk about national security and defense, they seem to not care about it a whole lot. I tend to fall on the side of actual security and letting people do their jobs to conduct an investigation that will not further damage any possible security issues we may have.

[F3SS]

You know Hut, its pretty clear the YouTube story was a lie. Being deceived makes some people mad and they want answers and little deception usually leads to more deception. I'd guess that most government happenings take more time to get the cover story together than it does to figure out real story.

Edited by -Mr_Fess-, 15 November 2012 - 02:15 AM.

[and then]

HuttonEtAl, on 15 November 2012 - 01:34 AM, said:

What is with you people? You demand to have all of the information NOW. I guess I should first point out that ANY investigation takes time. When ever you see a high profile case it often takes YEARS before it comes to trial and the trial is concluded. Chill dude, it takes time, especially something of this magnitude.

Also, what makes you think you are entitled to ALL of the facts NOW? First off, you are lucky to know anything at all. People, especially in America, seem to think it is their right to know everything about everything. Second, do you really want every little detail out there? Do you not think it might be a national security risk or an advantage to terrorists to put EVERY LITTLE DETAIL about how something went wrong or possible weaknesses? We are talking about the CIA, the government, and the military...possibly the FBI. You want them to just throw everything out there? Hell, we may as well throw all of our classified stuff and inner workings of the government on wikipedia or something. We could call the page "everything a terrorist needs to know about attacking the United States."

For as much as Repubs talk about national security and defense, they seem to not care about it a whole lot. I tend to fall on the side of actual security and letting people do their jobs to conduct an investigation that will not further damage any possible security issues we may have.

Look, man, I just got back from a 2 week "vacation" from posting here and the LAST thing I care to do is argue - sincerely.  But considering the trail of events and the obvious attempts to sweep this under a rug, I think 2 months is a sufficient time frame for SOMETHING to be forthcoming, don't you?  Even if the election wasn't part of the equation, that's over now and the president has another 4.  But it's time the people were told WHY  a terror attack - ON 9-11- was allowed and then denied.  Fox news or not, this one is NOT going to go away.  Things are usually never as good or bad as they seem at first glance and that's a good thing for the prez because if THIS is as bad as it seems to be then Impeachment could be on the table.  Conviction? Never... but he could still be dragged into court.

[MiskatonicGrad]

HuttonEtAl, on 15 November 2012 - 01:34 AM, said:

What is with you people? You demand to have all of the information NOW. I guess I should first point out that ANY investigation takes time. When ever you see a high profile case it often takes YEARS before it comes to trial and the trial is concluded. Chill dude, it takes time, especially something of this magnitude.

Also, what makes you think you are entitled to ALL of the facts NOW? First off, you are lucky to know anything at all. People, especially in America, seem to think it is their right to know everything about everything. Second, do you really want every little detail out there? Do you not think it might be a national security risk or an advantage to terrorists to put EVERY LITTLE DETAIL about how something went wrong or possible weaknesses? We are talking about the CIA, the government, and the military...possibly the FBI. You want them to just throw everything out there? Hell, we may as well throw all of our classified stuff and inner workings of the government on wikipedia or something. We could call the page "everything a terrorist needs to know about attacking the United States."

For as much as Repubs talk about national security and defense, they seem to not care about it a whole lot. I tend to fall on the side of actual security and letting people do their jobs to conduct an investigation that will not further damage any possible security issues we may have.

The problem I have with the whole thing is timing. the supposed affair was going on while the General was being vetted for the CIA. now I'm pretty sure the FBI had thier anal probes out and well lubed during this process and they didn't find out about the affair? Didn't they ever watch the show Cheaters? Do we have the keystone cops in the FBI? So if they did know about the affair they let it slide? Why? It's called having dirt on someone we can use at a later date.

The way I see it the left never liked Patraeus and decided to set him up. was the writer a "plant" she sure smells like one. no cred. and getting to write the bio on the most powerful general in the country? Are we ever going to know the truth? not just a no but a HELL NO!

[ninjadude]

Merc14, on 14 November 2012 - 06:33 PM, said:

So the Director of the CIA giving false testimony about the death of an ambassdor

did you even read this garbage from an onion-like site? He hasn't given any testimony.

[Merc14]

HuttonEtAl, on 15 November 2012 - 01:34 AM, said:

What is with you people? You demand to have all of the information NOW. I guess I should first point out that ANY investigation takes time. When ever you see a high profile case it often takes YEARS before it comes to trial and the trial is concluded. Chill dude, it takes time, especially something of this magnitude.

Also, what makes you think you are entitled to ALL of the facts NOW? First off, you are lucky to know anything at all. People, especially in America, seem to think it is their right to know everything about everything. Second, do you really want every little detail out there? Do you not think it might be a national security risk or an advantage to terrorists to put EVERY LITTLE DETAIL about how something went wrong or possible weaknesses? We are talking about the CIA, the government, and the military...possibly the FBI. You want them to just throw everything out there? Hell, we may as well throw all of our classified stuff and inner workings of the government on wikipedia or something. We could call the page "everything a terrorist needs to know about attacking the United States."

For as much as Repubs talk about national security and defense, they seem to not care about it a whole lot. I tend to fall on the side of actual security and letting people do their jobs to conduct an investigation that will not further damage any possible security issues we may have.

All you reactionary a-holes SHUT UP about the Benghazi affair, declares H-etal, because the most trusted and transparent administration in the history of the world  is diligently investigating this abomination and we can trust that the honorable Eric Holder (the same one covering up Fast and Furious but that doesn't matter anyways according to H-etal so bugger off) will get to the bottom of all this and tell us what to think.  LMAO.

Obama was defending Rice today and said when she went out and lied to the public on all 4 network Sunday shows she didn't know a thing and was just reporting what she told to by the administration. SO why the hell did they send her out if she had nothing to do with the attack and didn't know anything about the attack?  Where the hell was the SoS??  Why did Petraeus lie to congress?  Oh, sorry, I am not supposed to ask that till Holder tells me what really happened.  Yeah, that Eric Holder.

Why is that incompetent boob Hillary in Australia at a wine tasting?     Subpoena her and if she blows you off censure her, congress, you bunch of cowards!

[Merc14]

ninjadude, on 15 November 2012 - 03:07 AM, said:

did you even read this garbage from an onion-like site? He hasn't given any testimony.

So Charles Krauthammer is from the Onion?  Is that what you are saying because I'll put his credentials up against anyone from the MSM any day.  I don't care what site I linked, it is what Krauthammer said, verbatim, that we are talking about.  It was him in a clip so who cares where I linked to.

Seriously, you need to bring something more than strawman attacks on source sites if you want to participate as anything more than a blind zealot of the one.  Strawman attacks, such as you constantly use, are a sign of a person who has no legitimate argument and simply wants to change the direction of the debate or a person defending the indefensible or a person of limited intelligence who can do no better than ad-hominem attacks.  Which one are you ND?  

Edited by Merc14, 15 November 2012 - 03:24 AM.