I hate to have to post this again but...
I hate to have to post this again but...
Times Bush and his Administration blamed them on YouTube videos?
Times Bush and his Administration blamed them on YouTube videos?
just a simple question where was the outrage?
just a simple question where was the outrage?
I hate to have to post this again but...
Six members of the Yemeni security forces, six attackers (one of whom wore an explosives belt), and seven bystanders (one of whom was discovered later[8]) were killed in the attack.[4] Though no Americans working at the embassy were injured or harmed during the attack,
lol 10,000 people killed in auto accidents and you insist on going on and on and on about the one I backed over.just a simple question where was the outrage?
So it's not that an embassy was attacked and people died. It's that you feel a black man lied to you.
Black woman, technically speaking. Why don't we have a right to be outraged? You all were outraged over Iraq. Is there some magic number of deaths where a lie becomes complaint-worthy?
Don't let Bill tell you what to think. Did you read Rhodes' actual message? It wasn't focused on Benghazi alone. It was addressing all of the unrest in the region: "these protests" (plural).
Ah, a piece that I had either not been aware of or simply forgotten. It has been many months since this subject was broached. Forgive me for not addressing something very important. There are two parts to the CIA involvement in this story.Also remember that at that time, even the CIA believed the Benghazi attack was likely related to the video. The CIA stated this in their original Benghazi talking points, before the White House and State Department started revisions. Rhodes' message is consistent with this.
2: But the men on the ground were calling it a terrorist attack.One page of the documents released showed handwritten changes ordered by Mike Morell, former deputy director of the CIA and a current CBS News contributor. In his congressional testimony earlier this month, Morell said an intelligence analyst said on Sept. 13, 2012 that the attack evolved spontaneously from a protest.
Mr. Morell told the administration a day before Rice spoke. Her information was out of date before she even spoke it, but it's reasonable to suggest our chain of command doesn't work fast enough to properly communicate that to her.Before the Obama administration gave an inaccurate narrative on national television that the Benghazi attacks grew from an anti-American protest, the CIA’s station chief in Libya pointedly told his superiors in Washington that no such demonstration occurred
Rhodes' comments are consistent with what they knew at the time.
A perfect demonstration that you have no idea what Benghazi is.
Illegal arms smuggling to Syrian terrorists aside, we suffered a terrorist attack and our people died. The White House then fearing their re-election narrative of defeating terrorists, instead of calling it what it was decided to blame Americans for the "protest".
Yes, this President's administration blames YOU, me, and everyone else for our free speech, for our youtube videos, for making people angry. For making them "protest" and for them killing Americans in Benghazi. Weeks later, after these lies became clear and repugnant, the President still spoke to the UN of the "video". Of America's fault.
All so they could save face and not be embarrassed. What are they covering up? Pretty much nothing. But they're doing it. They are corrupt and lying and breaking the law and the media is complicit in assisting, as demonstrated by that second Presidential debate.
This is conspiracy of corruption rooted down to nothing more than petty partisan politics. Where the White House fabricates a hateful lie against the American people, stood by that lie, and the media stood with them. The video maker was even arrested. They never came clean and had to be dragged against their will to divulge any information. Just this week we finally learn that the White House was directly involved in orchestrating this lie.
Perhaps if this was not the most secretive white house in history, then none of their covering, lying, and scheming would have felt necessary. Maybe then they would have been honest and not try to pawn the terrorist attack off as a protest caused by Americans.
One administration was totally transparent and the other was not. Just a simple question...which one do you prefer?just a simple question where was the outrage?
One administration was totally transparent and the other was not. Just a simple question...which one do you prefer?
One administration was totally transparent and the other was not. Just a simple question...which one do you prefer?
Sweet mother of Mary... that's one of the lamest false equivalencies ever offered.
Iraq was voluntary on our part. We did *not* have to invade Iraq. The incident in Benghazi was due to forces beyond our control.
Tens of thousands died in Iraq, thousands of them Americans. Untold hundreds of billions were spent in the process.
While regrettable, Benghazi isn't a pimple on the Ass of the malfeasance of the Bush years.
Did you really just call the Bush administration transparent? Are you stroking out or something?
What did the Bush administration do to cover up the circumstances surrounding the embassy attacks? Nada...total transparency.Did you really just call the Bush administration transparent? Are you stroking out or something?
What did the Bush administration do to cover up the circumstances surrounding the embassy attacks? Nada...total transparency.
Context...you speak it?Yep, and those WMD'S are still out there...
Context...you speak it?
Idiot.Me no speake or be readed good. Me no uderstany why someone that should know better chooses to be less....
But, hey!
BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI!
Idiot.
So. Is it a scandal yet?