They are going to reveal systemic failures in State ,Defense ,Intel and the White House ,before ,during ,and after the attack. They will also reveal an intentional cover-up of the facts because they did not want the truth known during the election cycle.
That is a minimum. Hopefully this will encourage whistle-blowers from CIA and the Defense Dept.to come forth and reveal the purpose of their special mission .

Hello again, tom:


They will also reveal systemic failures in State ,Defense ,Intel and the White House ,before ,during ,and after the attack. They will also reveal an intentional cover-up of the facts because they did not want the truth known during the election cycle.
Couple things...

Nobody is denying that there were mistakes made.

If they were trying to "cover up" their mistakes, they didn't do a very good job of it because within 3 or 4 days, EVERYBODY knew we were attacked by terrorists.. And, Obama STILL kicked Romney's a$$.

You want the CIA to reveal what they're "special mission" was?? Dude! If you want to call the times we LIE about covert CIA activities a coverup, then the government "covers up" EVERY DAY, and it SHOULD!

Excon

You're comparing election campaigns to the Iranian hostages, and 300 dead and wounded American service men?

DUDE????????

Iranian hostages? They were released when Reagan won the election. I don't know what your point on that is, but the issue is the coverup. It may not bother you if your guy is a lying weasel but this is a BIG deal and it ain't going to be pretty. Your side still only sees it as an election problem to sweep under the rug, protect Hillary at all cost.

Hello again, tom:


Couple things...

Nobody is denying that there were mistakes made.

If they were trying to "cover up" their mistakes, they didn't do a very good job of it because within 3 or 4 days, EVERYBODY knew we were attacked by terrorists.. And, Obama STILL kicked Romney's a$$.

You want the CIA to reveal what they're "special mission" was??? Dude! If you wanna call the times we LIE about covert CIA activities a coverup, then the government "covers up" EVERY DAY, and it SHOULD!

excon
I expect you applauded the revelations to the Church Committee.I expect you applauded the revelations of Iran Contra. What I think CIA will reveal is that the operation in Benghazi was not a CIA Op .It was being run in the basement of the White House ala Ollie North.

I guess you ignored all the links with the facts about Iran. That's okay, we are use to it.

Hello again,

Steve King, that crackerjack right wing congressman, says that if you take Watergate, add Iran Contra to it, and multiply by 10, you've got Benghazi...

Bwa, ha ha ha ha.

excon

Hello again,


It was being run in the basement of the White House ala Ollie North.Since the git go, you THOUGHT you had Obama by the balls. You THOUGHT Benghazi would be the end of him. Actually, it was more HOPE than thought. But, there's NOTHING there...

As PROOF, there's a noticeable SHIFT in WHO the bad guy is here, to Hillary Clinton instead of Obama.. I wonder if it has to do with her presidential aspirations.. Nahhh. Republicans wouldn't do that...

Excon

I guess you ignored all the links with the facts about Iran. That's okay, we are use to it.

I don't recall comparing Iranian hostages to anything, that was your thing. But I am curious what you're afraid of here, Zero is all about transparency so I'd think you would welcome a little sunshine.

Hello again,

Since the git go, you THOUGHT you had Obama by the balls. You THOUGHT Benghazi would be the end of him. Actually, it was more HOPE than thought. But, there's NOTHING there...

As PROOF, there's a noticeable SHIFT in WHO the bad guy is here, to Hillary Clinton instead of Obama.. I wonder if it has to do with her presidential aspirations.. Nahhh. Republicans wouldn't do that...

excon

I'm not the one shifting to Evita .
You do realize there is still a sap video maker still in jail over this lie ! Talk about someone taking a fall for a false political narrative ! Evita needs to go down too ; but she is just one of the pieces on this chess board.

Hello again, tom:

Talk about someone taking a fall for a false political narrative ! Evita needs to go down too ; but she is just one of the pieces on this chess board.

I don't know what's going on.. Lindsay Graham just said on TV that the blockbuster is the "political spin" Obama put on the attack. He said he was trying to bolster his claim that Al Quaida was decimated...

Blockbuster??

You also, tom, appear to be talking about POLITICS instead CRIME and COVERUP, and IMPEACHMENT, and SCANDAL.. So, if you want my agreement about the politics, you got it.

Excon

PS> (edited) You have SOME resource for your claim that the CIA was acting like White House plumbers, or something.. Would you SHARE that source?

If they were trying to "cover up" their mistakes, they didn't do a very good job of it because within 3 or 4 days, EVERYBODY knew we were attacked by terrorists.. And, Obama STILL kicked Romney's a$$.


They maintained the false narrative about a YouTube video for over 2 weeks. They went with this campaign narrative that AQ was on the run ,especially since they wacked OBL... You recall that in the debate about foreign policy Romney brought up the lie ;and Candy Crowley basically lied and said the Emperor called it a terrorist attack... and still they went on with the false narrative for as long as the press could cover for them.
Not only did the Emperor participate in the lie... I'm sure the facts will show he directed it !
The talking points were changed a number of times before Susan Rice hit the Sunday talk shows.
Now as you recall ,Nixon also directed a similar cover up to stall for time before the 1972 election. This is not quite Watergate.. it will not bring the Emperor down. I just want the public to know all the facts because they are key to future foreign policy decisions this "Commander in Chief " will make in the future.

Hello again, tom:


I dunno what's going on.. Lindsay Graham just said on TV that the blockbuster is the "political spin" Obama put on the attack. He said he was trying to bolster his claim that Al Quaida was decimated...

Blockbuster????

You also, tom, appear to be talking about POLITICS instead CRIME and COVERUP, and IMPEACHMENT, and SCANDAL.. So, if you want my agreement about the politics, you got it.

excon

PS> (edited) You have SOME resource for your claim that the CIA was acting like White House plumbers, or something.. Would you SHARE that source?

I don't know if or any crimes will be revealed .

Be nice if you could knock Obama down a few pegs before the mid terms and get the high flying ex Sec. of State back to earth before 2016. Benghazi is an attractive rock to throw.

I saw Lindsay and he blasts BO on his light foot print in the middle east. He and McCain, and they want WAR, doesn't matter with who because they have a list. You better let those Arabs handle their own mess.

I agree Tal let the arabs handle their own mess and let the Israeli's handle theirs too

Hello again, tom:

They maintained the false narrative about a YouTube video for over 2 weeks. Even IF they did, it's POLITICAL spin - NOT a coverup. I'm sure Frank Luntz said to use the "cover up" words, just like he told you to use the "government takeover" words..

You say Nixon did the same thing.. NO he didn't. He covered up a CRIME.

Excon

Be nice if you could knock Obama down a few pegs before the mid terms and get the high flying ex Sec. of State back to earth before 2016. Benghazi is an attractive rock to throw.

I saw Lindsay and he blasts BO on his light foot print in the middle east. he and McCain, and they want WAR, doesn't matter with who because they have a list. You better let those Arabs handle their own mess.

LOL, Barack has already knocked himself down a few pegs, and if you don't want WAR you might ask your Emperor to stop ad-libbing his way into one.

Hello again, tom:
Even IF they did, it's POLITICAL spin - NOT a coverup. I'm sure Frank Luntz said to use the "cover up" words, just like he told you to use the "government takeover" words..

You say Nixon did the same thing.. NO he didn't. He covered up a CRIME.

excon

Again ,it remains to be seen if there was a crime. I guess there was no purpose for the 9-11 Commission . Why should the American people know where the break down was ,or if there was one. Maybe not a cover up... who knows ? Maybe just a stone wall. I called it a 'white wash '

White wash is common in the arab world

Hello again, tom:


Why should the American people know where the break down was ,or if there was one.Oh, I'm all for finding out WHO made mistakes, and ferreting them out.

But, when Issa says (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57583149/issa-no-question-clintons-circle-involved-in-benghazi-cover-up/) that there's "No question" Clinton's circle is INVOLVED in the Benghazi "cover-up", he's NOT looking for answers. He's conducting a witch hunt..

Excon

Obama and Hillary both need to go to jail over Benghazigate. 4 people died over their gross incompetence.

It wasn't a cover up .It was a blatant lie to the American people that they repeated for as long as they could get away with it. If there is a cover up ,it is in State Dept.(Accountability Review Board's lies ) But
I'm looking for more . I want at least a special committee appointed ,if not a special prosecutor . There are accountability issues that demand answers from the military chain of command. Who told the special forces in Tripoli to stand down as they were boarding a plane to Benghazi.. less than 2 hrs away (more than enough time to be there in the 2nd wave of attacks )? Who told the commander in Aviano Italy to not deploy his F-16s and apache helicopters (they could've made the court yard a litter of dead enemy jihadists )? A “FAST team” (Fleet Anti-terrorism Security team) of Marines from Rota, Spain, were sent to guard the Embassy in Tripoli ,but not assist where they were needed .
A Special Operations force was moved from central Europe to Sigonella Air Base in southern Italy, just 480 miles from Benghazi ,but were not sent into action
Asked why the military did not do more, Sec Def Leon Panetta said the 'first rule in such a situation is not to deploy troops into harm's way unless there is a clear picture of what is happening'. Here was the picture he needed . A US ambassador called screaming that the compound was under attack . There were CIA ops and special forces ops on the scene reporting the nature of the attack up the chain of command.In fact an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up was made during the attack. Now either the chain of command made the call on their own not to assist... OR the White House made the call . Someone made the call . WE the people need to know who .

The Obots want to avoid responsibility for this .Why was the FBI given the lead ? Why was the cite of the attack not secured to prevent compromising evidence and loss of possible intelligence information? The FBI didn't make it there for weeks after the attack! How is it that CNN managed to get there are recover Ambassador Stevens journal but the FBI couldn't ? Too many unanswered questions for this one posting . But all questions we need to know the truth about.

Hello again, tom:


It wasn't a cover up .No, it wasn't..

I'd like to know the answer to those questions too, but Issa isn't the one to ask them. I'd support a special commission.

But, to repeat what you're saying. There's no crime, no coverup, no scandal, no underhandedness at ALL, UNLESS it can be proven in front of an unbiased committee or court of law. Until that time, all the talk about WATER/BENGHAZIGATE, is nothing more than Republicans flapping their gums..

Excon

It this wasn't a coverup... then Watergate wasn't either.

Just a bit of logic to go with the politics. Why would you spend all that money to protect many embassies and have one lone guy go to what he knew was a low security mission, on a day they had been gearing up for all along?

And your retort and outrage is to take those guys from the embassy and run to the mission? Where does that leave the embassy? He should have been in Tripoli on this particular 9/11. They all should have been.

I mean we already know Benghazi was a poor security risk, and maybe Hillary doesn't want to admit he had orders to get where its safe and get your head down. Sorry but the decision to even be in Benghazi on the anniversary of 9/11 was a bad decision for any reason and it had tragic results.

Sadly his faith in the his Libyan friends was misplaced because when tested they ran.

What's more sad is he had faith in his own State dept and government... Ultimately that's who was responsible for their security and safety. Not Libya.

Owebama couldn't have cared less... and the Sec of State Hillary was drunk as a skunk... neither of those were acceptable.

THe outright lies that followed deserve legal action against those responsible for NOT doing anything.

It was the height of arrogance for them to think most people would believe it was some dumb U-tube video... only the pathetic crowd bought into that lame excuse.

Just a bit of logic to go with the politics. Why would you spend all that money to protect many embassies and have one lone guy go to what he knew was a low security mission, on a day they had been gearing up for all along?
And your retort and outrage is to take those guys from the embassy and run to the mission? Where does that leave the embassy? He should have been in Tripoli on this particular 9/11. They all should have been.

Why indeed?. now you are getting closer to where I'm at .What would be so important that he would travel to a place he knew was a risk (it had been attacked before )... This after he begged for more protection ;to meet with a Turkish representative in secret ? What did a Turkish rep have to do with Libya ? Could it be that he was funnelling Libyan weapons to anti-Assad rebels (jiihadists ) through Turkey ?
How US Ambassador Chris Stevens May Have Been Linked To Jihadist Rebels In Syria - Business Insider (http://www.businessinsider.com/us-syria-heavy-weapons-jihadists-2012-10)

Hello again, tom:

No, it wasn't..

I'd like to know the answer to those questions too, but Issa isn't the one to ask them. I'd support a special commission.

But, to repeat what you're saying. There's no crime, no coverup, no scandal, no underhandedness at ALL, UNLESS it can be proven in front of an unbiased committee or court of law. Until that time, all the talk about WATER/BENGHAZIGATE, is nothing more than Republicans flapping their gums..

excon

And Watergate was nothing but a two-bit burglary

And this (https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/332173661018660865)is perhaps the most important angle to cover on the hearings...

PS> (edited) You have SOME resource for your claim that the CIA was acting like White House plumbers, or something.. Would you SHARE that source?

Fair enough . Found this article in October by former CIA Claire Lopez .It is properly linked with major news outlet reports as her sources. She just connects the dots .
Family Security Matters (http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/arms-flow-to-syria-may-be-behind-benghazi-cover-up)

I also think CIA and our counter-terrorism czar (who is now the CIA Director) John Brennan were not on the same page in Libya. While Petraeus and Stevens had a relationship with groups that were involved in the exchange of weapons; Brennan was using Joint Special Operations Command assets throughout Africa, the Middle East, and Southwest Asia striking at the same groups that Stevens was dealing with. I believe that retailation for one of these strikes was the real motivation for the attack on Stevens.

Hello...

HELLO... The blockbuster hearing happened... How come you're not crowing about the coverup that was revealed?

excon

Very busy today... I'll get to it . Suffice it to say that even as damning as the testimony was yesterday ,the State Dept whistleblowers were only scratching the surface.

Is the hearing over? I don't believe the goal is to crow, it's about truth, accountability, mitigating the damage and preventing another Benghazi. You apparently are OK with the administration's failures and lies.

Hello again, Steve:


You apparently are OK with the administration's failures and lies.Apparently, you haven't read where I said that I want the people who made mistakes to be thrown out of government...

That's WAY different than believing the conspiracy crap you're into.

Excon

And yet you helped reelect Obama... after 4 years of mistakes... so he can make 4 more years of mistakes.

His mamma made the mistake of not aborting him in-utero and now we are all paying for it..

And yet you helped reelect Obama....after 4 years of mistakes...so he can make 4 more years of mistakes.

His mamma made the mistake of not aborting him in-utero and now we are all paying for it..Going to quote this for posterity.

Gonna quote this for posterity.

Fee free to... a majority of Americans feel that sentiment right now.

Hello again, Steve:

Apparently, you haven't read where I said that I want the people who made mistakes to be thrown out of government...

That's WAY different than believing the conspiracy crap you're into.

excon

Dude, it's already clear that the 'conspiracy' as you call it is reality. And unless the media takes an interest in this as they SHOULD instead of writing it off as a witch hunt those who made the mistakes will never be held accountable. Instead, the whistleblowers will be smeared and you guys will do everything in your power to elect one of those that failed us and lied about it.

OK .This is what we know from yesterday's testimony (with more to follow)

First ; someone intentionally shut off the rescue apparatus in place for theater diplomats and CIA ops .They did not name names but it is clear the decision was made up the chain of command at State ,the White House and/or DOD . AFRICOM had the assets available .But they were told to stand down.
What we learned was that EVERYONE knew immediately that it was an attack ;and could NOT have known the timeframe of the attack (which lasted over 6 hrs. ) .But still the talking points are that they could not have deployed the assets in time. That may be true for the 1st wave . But it is a red herring and a falsehood to claim that they could not have gotten their in time. They could've made a difference at the CIA annex ;and they certainly would've held the compound thus preventing looting ,loss of intelligence ,and evidence being compromised.
Charlie 1/10 or Charlie Company, 1st Battalion, 10th Special Forces Group. the Commander's In-extremis Force (CIF) for Special Operations Command Europe ,was formed specifically for this type of mission . So is the Marine Fleet Antiterrorism Security Teams (FAST) and Recapture Tactics Teams (RTT). Both were available.

We have yet to hear from CIA on this . They also have their own field ops that could've been deployed rapidly .
So who on the night of 9-11-12 made the decision to stand down ? It had to come from the top... Evita ,Brennan ,Petraeus ,Panetta.(we know Zero was asleep at the wheels ,getting his beauty rest before he travelled on a fund raiser to Vegas)

Second.. It is now confirmed that the situation being an attack was established early . Yet Congress listened to a parade of witnesses claim that it was a demonstration due to a Youtube video . How many of these were testifying under oath ? Who made the decision to change the talking points ? Again ,that came out of the White House . Did they direct the people who testified to Congress to lie ? Can you say cover-up ? Can you say perjury ?

Nice GOP spin but I rather hear the logistical decisions from the experts in the CIA, and military not from a diplomat.

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/202446.pdf

If its to long to read, too bad.

Nice GOP spin but I rather hear the logistical decisions from the experts in the CIA, and military not from a diplomat.

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/202446.pdf

If its to long to read, too bad.

Like I said ,we have not heard from them yet .But once they get the same whistleblower protection the guys from State got ,the information I just laid out will be confirmed.

Nice GOP spin but I rather hear the logistical decisions from the experts in the CIA, and military not from a diplomat.

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/202446.pdf

If its to long to read, too bad.

The Accountability Review Board is part of the cover -up as the facts will reveal. They protected all of the department’s higher-ups and blamed career officials down the ladder. State’s inspector general is now investigating their report

And ;if you think that Gregory Hicks and Mark Thompson are not credible witnesses then there is nothing I can do for you .

LOL,I have no doubt they have strong opinions and knowledgeable in their own field but being more credible than others that have weighed into this is a stretch at this time. I will wait to see what else come to light before I impeach the prez or send Hillary to jail.

Right wing conspiracy theories have failed before. Well they have so far failed every time. Yeah credibility is an issue though.

But not for Hillary and Obama... no matter how many lies and criminal acts they get caught red handed in.. the left refuses to hold them responsible.

And Hillarly has had a long list of them... THere are lots of people that have served jail time for doing less than Hillary has been caught doing... heck... there are a lot of people who have done time for doing EXACTLY WHAT Hillary has been caught doing.

But not for Hillary and Obama....no matter how many lies and criminal acts they get caught red handed in..the left refuses to hold them responsible.

And Hillarly has had a long list of them....THere are lots of people that have served jail time for doing less than Hillary has been caught doing....heck...there are a lot of people who have done time for doing EXACTLY WHAT Hillary has been caught doing.

Links please or it just another right wing loony opinion.

LOL,I have no doubt they have strong opinions and knowledgeable in their own field but being more credible than others that have weighed into this is a stretch at this time. I will wait to see what else come to light before I impeach the prez or send Hillary to jail.

Right wing conspiracy theories have failed before. Well they have so far failed every time. Yeah credibility is an issue though.

What was it I said just a short while ago, the whistleblowers will get smeared? It begins...

Links please or it just another right wing loony opinion.

Whitewater, Travelgate, Filegate... etc... etc.

She was in contempt of court for 9 months over filegate...

FBI files ; WhiteWater ; Rose law firm,cattle futures fraud , Accepting a quid pro quo deal voter fraud in New Square NY in exchange for Presidential pardons for the "New Square Four "... just to name a few .
There are others like a cell phone franchise deal that was probably illegal too.


Edit... oh yeah ! Travelgate !

Edit... campaign finance fraud from a Hollywood fundraiser for her Senate campaign. She didn't report all the money contributed to the tune of $800K

You want to revise history, go ahead.

No this is telling history ,not revising it.

You want to revise history, go ahead.

Really... don't even think about going there... because those are very real and did happen... putting your fingers in your ears and chanting lalalalalalalalalalla loudly won't change that fact.

I defend your rights to express your opinions no matter how far from reality they may be. What stuck in your ear and your theme song is your business too.

I defend your rights to express your opinions no matter how far from reality they may be. What stuck in your ear and your theme song is your business too.

YOU are expressing an opinion... what Hillarly Clinton did in the previously reference stiuations is proven fact. Well documented facts that can not be disputed..

Yep, this administration is more Nixonian than Nixon's. Not only have they tried to silence (and intimidate) the Benghazi whistleblowers, the most transparent administration evah is apparently trying to silence the Inspector General for Afghanistan reconstruction.


The watchdog who tracks the billions of taxpayer dollars spent to rebuild Afghanistan says government officials have tried to silence him because they think he's embarrassing the White House and Afghan President Hamid Karzai by pointing out the waste and fraud.

John Sopko, the special inspector general for Afghanistan reconstruction, used a speech at the New America Foundation on Wednesday to blast government “bureaucrats”' who have told him to stop publicizing damning audits that detail case after case of waste, corruption and mismanagement of rebuilding efforts in Afghanistan. Some government officials have even complained that they aren't allowed to pre-screen or edit his reports, he said.

“Since my appointment by the president last summer, I have been surprised to learn how many people both in and out of the government do not understand the role of an independent inspector general,” Sopko said.

...

“Over the last 10 months, I have been criticized by some bureaucrats for not pre-clearing my press releases with them, for not letting them edit the titles of my audits, for talking too much to Congress, for talking too much to the press … and, basically, for not being a 'team player' and undermining 'our country’s mission in Afghanistan,'” he said.

“Many in our government, even some surprisingly senior officials you think would know better, seem to believe that an inspector general should be their partner — or, more correctly, their silent partner,” he said. “In their opinion, my reports should be slipped in a sealed envelope in the dead of night under the door — never to see the light of day — because those reports could embarrass the administration, embarrass President Karzai, embarrass Afghanistan.”

Read more: Watchdog says government has tried to silence him on Afghanistan - Stephanie Gaskell - POLITICO.com (http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/watchdog-says-government-tried-to-silence-him-91110.html#ixzz2Soy76rlf)


Goodness knows we should always put the Emperor's image ahead of everything else. Pretty soon he'll be demanding we all turn out for some hero worship a la the Norks.

Its actually a better story than what it appears here Tom and you ruined it with your spin In my opinion. But have you read his actual work?

Check this PDF out.

http://www.sigar.mil/pdf/audits/2012-09-10audit-12-14.pdf

Its limited but this one though dated gives a clear picture as to why this guy is at the top of the food chain. He takes no prisoners and isn't intimidated. If the prez was going to hide something this isn't the guy to appoint.

Discussion with Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction on Challenges Facing the US | Events | The Stimson Center | Pragmatic Steps for Global Security (http://www.stimson.org/events/2013SIGARevent/)

Credibility he has got.

Where Tom and I ruined it??

I was responding to your posts claiming Hillary is going to be nominated for Sainthood along with Obama.

I defend your rights to express your opinions no matter how far from reality they may be. What stuck in your ear and your theme song is your business too.

How about the guy that made the video allegedly behind the Benghazi attack, should he be the patsy? I mean hey, the Emperor got someone throw in the slammer for the attack, right?

What part of violating his probation agreement do you not understand? You know like all those criminals who lose rights when they get convicted?

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57546663/anti-muslim-filmmaker-sentenced-to-one-year-for-probation-violation/


Youssef served most of his 21-month prison sentence for using more than a dozen aliases and opening about 60 bank accounts to conduct a check fraud scheme, prosecutors said.

After he was released from prison, Youssef was barred from using computers or the Internet for five years without approval from his probation officer.

Federal authorities have said they believe Youssef is responsible for the film, but they haven't said whether he was the person who posted it online. He also wasn't supposed to use any name other than his true legal name without the prior written approval of his probation officer.

Discussion with Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction on Challenges Facing the US | Events | The Stimson Center | Pragmatic Steps for Global Security (http://www.stimson.org/events/2013SIGARevent/)

Credibility he has got.

Credibility you ain't got, do you actually check where your links go this one goes nowhere

Credibility you ain't got, do you actually check where your links go this one goes nowhereMust be blocked in your country.

Must be blocked in your country.

No it is a single page with a header and no actual text on the subject

There are videos and text on the page.

43428

What part of violating his probation agreement do you not understand? You know like all those criminals who lose rights when they get convicted?

Let's see, Obama ran PSAs in Pakistan, pandered at the UN saying, “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” and Hillary said "we will make sure that the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted”??

Right after that he was hauled away at midnight by 5 Sheriff deputies and thrown into a federal correctional facility on a probation violation without being summoned to court first. Coincidence, eh?

Dude, he may be scum but that was no coincidence. Zero needed a scapegoat, and instead of going before the world to defend freedom he pandered and had him hauled off for the underlying offense of exercising his first amendment rights, KNOWING full well the video had nothing to do with it. The wrong guy is paying the price for this terrorist attack and you know it.

Let's see, Obama ran PSAs in Pakistan, pandered at the UN saying, “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” and Hillary said "we will make sure that the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted”???

Right after that he was hauled away at midnight by 5 Sheriff deputies and thrown into a federal correctional facility on a probation violation without being summoned to court first. Coincidence, eh?

Dude, he may be scum but that was no coincidence. Zero needed a scapegoat, and instead of going before the world to defend freedom he pandered and had him hauled off for the underlying offense of exercising his first amendment rights, KNOWING full well the video had nothing to do with it. The wrong guy is paying the price for this terrorist attack and you know it.

What you are actually saying is this fellow has no more rights in the US than he has in his native country, but don't loose sight he is guilty of something, inciting to violence

what you are actually saying is this fellow has no more rights in the US than he has in his native country, but don't loose sight he is guilty of something, inciting to violence

In America we don't jail people for expressing an opinion... or at least we used to not do that.

Youssef served most of his 21-month prison sentence for using more than a dozen aliases and opening about 60 bank accounts to conduct a check fraud scheme, prosecutors said.

After he was released from prison, Youssef was barred from using computers or the Internet for five years without approval from his probation officer.

Federal authorities have said they believe Youssef is responsible for the film, but they haven't said whether he was the person who posted it online.

He also wasn't supposed to use any name other than his true legal name without the prior written approval of his probation officer.

You are really good at skipping pertinent FACTS!

In America we don't jail people for expressing an opinion...or at least we used to not do that.

Come on, the fellow is a criminal, a fraudister, does society really object when the law catches up with such people, the movie he made was some sort of scam and the mistake he made was releasing it anywhere

come on, the fellow is a criminal, a fraudister, does society really object when the law catches up with such people, the movie he made was some sort of scam and the mistake he made was releasing it anywhere

Then everything Hollywood puts out is a fraud. Because none of it is real or accurate.

Only Muslims think it's a crime to show other Muslims for what they really are.

At least in this country... Sharia and its oppression of everyone and everything isn't the law.

I can take a dump on a Koran if I want... and its my legal right to do so.

Then everything Hollywood puts out is a fraud. Because none of it is real or accurate.

Only Muslims think its a crime to show other Muslims for what they really are.

At least in this country...Sharia and its oppression of everyone and everything isn't the law.

I can take a dump on a Koran if I want.....and its my legal right to do so.

Go ahead but don't complain when someone blows up your house that is also a form of comment

The guy is a political prisoner .He is in jail because Evita and Zero were intent on maintaining their lie .

He is in jail because he broke the conditions and got caught anything else is perpheral OK he was a convenient smokescreen for a day andthere was useful disinformation or confusion or whatever

go ahead but don't complain when someone blows up your house that is also a form of comment

For the last millennium and a half that seems to be the Muslims' preferred method of commentary. That and beheading.

Exactly

go ahead but don't complain when someone blows up your house that is also a form of comment

I don't bow to the towelheads nor to I bow to a religon that worships a pedophile.

Nor will I ever.

They aren't going to get one bit more respect from me than they show to the Christions and Jews in their own homelands.

You are really good at skipping pertinent FACTS!

Nope, I said he may be scum but tom is right, he's a political prisoner. Funny how so many lefties will jump to defend a Bradley Manning but not a guy in jail for making a film.

he is in jail becuase he broke the conditions and got caught anything else is perpheral ok he was a convenient smokescreen for a day andthere was useful disinformation or confusion or whatever

BS they would never had bothered looking for an excuse to jail him if it wasn't for the video . He is a political prisoner.. that's the fact .

I don't bow to the towelheads nor to I bow to a religon that worships a pedophile.

Nor will I ever.

They aren't going to get one bit more respect from me than they show to the Christions and Jews in their own homelands.

Very commendable but not very diplomatic. Your President bows to the towelheads at least those with money and oil.

I have solution for you and it might work, kick out all the towelheads send them back and invite the christians and jews to come and live with you, that way you immediately lessen persecution in the muslim world and avoid a future humanitiarin problem

very commendable but not very diplomatic. Your President bows to the towelheads at least those with money and oil.

I have solution for you and it might work, kick out all the towelheads send them back and invite the christians and jews to come and live with you, that way you immediately lessen persecution in the muslim world and avoid a future humanitiarin problem

I'm not a Diplomat... so I can speak my mind.

He's not my president... and he's never convinced me he isn't a Muslim himself, that he was elligible to even run... or that there wasn't enough fraud for him to have stolen the election.

If I was the King... I would throw out all the Muslims and do exactly that... but I'm not the King.

Hello:

I'm a Jew. I don't like Arabs. I dislike racism worse. Henceforth, if the political discussion on this board DEVOLVES into racist comments, I WILL CALL YOU OUT.

Stop it NOW while you're ahead!

excon

You and smoothy sound like racists to be honest Clete, and that's unfortunate and good luck deporting the objects of your hate because I suspect if it isn't one group, you would find fault with another group that's left until you find yourself alone.

But maybe that's what you want.

Yeah alone suits me, my forebares have been here a long time. I would like my country to go back to what it was, a haven in the South Pacific for those Europe didn't want. This was a peaceful place until certain people were allowed to come here

Hello:

I'm a Jew. I don't like Arabs. I dislike racism worse. Henceforth, if the political discussion on this board DEVOLVES into racist comments, I WILL CALL YOU OUT.

Stop it NOW while you're ahead!

excon

If you are jewish you should like the idea of all your people being invited to remove themselves from danger and live in the US but no I expect you want to keep the illusion of Israel going until there is a catclymisic war.. . for your information I was demonstrating to smoothy how ridiculous his ideas are, you can't just pick up a population and move them, otherwise you would have solved that other minority problem long ago

Islam is a religion you choose to believe in... its not a race you are born into which you have no choice about.

You can chage your religion.. you can't change your race.

Disliking Islam is NOT rascism.

I don't believe in Islam, or Christianity personally, nor any other religion because from the outside looking in all you zealots look and sound the same.

Hello again, smoothy:


Disliking Muslims is NOT rascism.You have a serious deficiency when it comes to LANGUAGE. You DON'T seem to understand words.

Here's the deal. Disliking Muslims is NOT racism. Calling them names IS...

IF you don't know what I'm talking about, continue your racist ways, and you SOON will.

Excon

Only one religion makes a practice of Killing or subjugating others... and in fact calls for it as part of their religion in their religious texts. And that's Islam.

Islam is a religion you choose to believe in...its not a race you are born into which you have no choice about.

Disliking Muslims is NOT rascism.

No it's called sectarianism or just plain bigoted but I have found any mention of the word jew sets Ex off even if the comment is favourable. Ex thinks I'm racist but I have other races in my family. I just don't like troublesome people and any minority can reach a population where they become troublesome. In a way I'm fortunate I come from irish stock and I live in what might be an irish enclave, lots of irish pubs around here. Lots of Indian restaurants too

So anyway you and I agree on a partial solution to a particular problem however impracticable, Exporting your troubles somewhereelse is never a solution

Hello again, smoothy:

You have a serious deficiency when it comes to LANGUAGE. You DON'T seem to understand words.

Here's the deal. Disliking Muslims is NOT racism. Calling them names IS...

IF you don't know what I'm talking about, continue your racist ways, and you SOON will.

excon

Seriously? You want to go there..

Look up RACISM in the dictionary... Islam isn't a RACE... calling them names isn't racism.

Calling a particular ETHNIC group names purely because of their ETHNIC background might be rascism depending on WHAT one says... but one ETHNIC group is not imune for criticisms of their behaviour because they are part of that ethnic group.

Or are the common attacks made by the left against the right Rascism as well?

Islamic Troglodytes tried to kill me on 9/11 at the Pentagon over their perverted religion and they damn near succeeded... Hell will freeze over before I bow to them.

Hello again, smoothy:

I'm NOT going to split hairs with you over your noxious words... Say them AGAIN, and I'll be in YOUR FACE like you've NEVER seen me in anybody's face.

Are we CLEAR?

excon

Seriously? you want to go there..

Look up RACISM in the dictionary.............Islam isn't a RACE...calling them names isn't racism.

Calling a particular ETHNIC group names purely because of their ETHNIC background might be rascism depending on WHAT one says....but one ETHNIC group is not imune for critisisms of their behaviour because they are part of that ethnic group.

Or iarethe common attacks made by the left against the right Rascism as well?

OK Ex is the fashion police he doesn't like you referring to their apparel in a derogatory manner

So for the sake of peace let us avoid speaking about those followers of a child molesting desert bandit, total ignore that's the way

Just as Christianity/Judaism evolved from barbarism, cruelty, and exploitation(?), so shall Islam, and that's what all the unrest is really about. Unfortunately you believe what western scholars(?) tells you and have never read and gotten contexts to the passages that are pulled from the Quran.

I find it amusing that Christians having survived centuries of barbarism now degrade others trying to do the same thing. And the lengths you go justifying your own self superiority.

How about all your and everyone else's noxious comments directed at conservatives ending... Or are Muslims some special protected class on this site all of a sudden?

Because if they are... then this site has gone to the dogs...

Just don't close the thread.. a lot of good contribution gets lost when threads are shut down

I don't believe in Islam, or Christianity personally, nor any other religion because from the outside looking in all you zealots look and sound the same.

You think I'm a zealot? Dude, you obviously know little about Christianity.

Just as Christianity/Judaism evolved from barbarism, cruelty, and exploitation(?), so shall Islam, and that's what all the unrest is really about. Unfortunately you believe what western scholars(?) tells you and have never read and gotten contexts to the passages that are pulled from the Quran.

I find it amusing that Christians having survived centuries of barbarism now degrade others trying to do the same thing. And the lengths you go justifying your own self superiority.

I've read and seen enough of the pasages pointed out over the years... It's not just taking someone's word for it.

They are there in writing for everyone to see. Nobody has to take my or anyone else's word on it. See for yourself.

Hello again, smoothy:

If you understood WORDS, we could talk.

excon

Hello again, tom:


just don't close the threadI can only close threads that I started. But, I wouldn't close it anyway.. I think smoothy gets it. Orrrrr, maybe not.

Excon

Disliking Muslims is NOT racism. Calling them names IS...


Hi, ex;

The only namecalling I see on here was one reference to turbans. The pedophilia, the violence, and the paranoia are all taken directly from the Muslim holy books, the Haditha. The paranoia I've noticed in several Israeli and Jewish commentaries, as well. Is this from the Tanakh or do the religions spawned in that area just have long memories?

I find it amusing that Christians having survived centuries of barbarism now degrade others trying to do the same thing. And the lengths you go justifying your own self superiority.

I don't see Islam evolving anytime soon, it is full of reversionists. A lot of the centuries of barbarism Christians survived had a muslim barbarian on the other side of the conflict. It wasn't until Christians got their head around crusades should start at home that they freed Europe and they were still fighting in the twentieth century. Now I'm not discounting christian despotism there was a lot of that too, I expect the message didn't really penetrate or was subverted, another story

Hello Catsmine:


The only namecalling I see on here was one reference to turbans.Isn't that ENOUGH?? And, it wasn't ONE either, as though that makes a difference... Are you DEFENDING his comments??

I don't know what's so difficult about distinguishing between talking ABOUT people, and CALLING them names... Truly..

Excon

Hello again, smoothy:

If you understood WORDS, we could talk.

excon

I understand words very well... and I Understand the roots of words as well. I might not be an English Major but I am a college graduate. And while I am not in the Diplomat Corps and never have been... I've spent a lot of time with Foreign Diplomats and officials over the last 27 years, some of them very high ranking..

I don't subscribe to the Clintonian method of redifining words like "is" or what is actually "sex" to suit the moment..

Hello Catsmine:

Isn't that ENOUGH??? And, it wasn't ONE either, as though that makes a difference... Are you DEFENDING his comments???

I dunno what's so difficult about distinguishing between talking ABOUT people, and CALLING them names... Truly..

excon

Not a big fan of racism myself, but cultural references don't really qualify in my book. Some semites wear towels around their heads, true. Some hindis do too. Some of each don't.

I dunno what's so difficult about distinguishing between talking ABOUT people, and CALLING them names... Truly..

excon

After all these years of conservatives being called racists for daring to criticize Obama's policies or saying the word "golf" you would ask that question?

Hello again, Steve:

So, you can't distinguish between golf and racism either... Figures..

excon

PS> Ok, I've got a minute... Again, this calls for some DISTINCTIONS... Golf is not the issue. Being called LAZY is. Romney spokesperson, Sununu flat out called him LAZY. You may not know that black people have been accused of being shiftless and LAZY for as long as they've been around... To equate black people to laziness is racism personified...

Now, I don't know the particular circumstance you're speaking about, but if I called you a racist, it had NOTHING to do with golf.

I know the difference between real racism and manufactured bullsh*t, which comprises the vast majority of liberal charges of racism AND everything this administration has said on the Benghazi attack. .

Being called LAZY is. Romney spokesperson, Sununu flat out called him LAZY. You may not know that black people have been accused of being shiftless and LAZY for as long as they've been around... To equate black people to laziness is racism personified...


This is the perfect example of liberal racism. Calling an individual on a perceived character flaw is somehow transmogrified into insulting a group simply because the individual is tangentially related to that group. Isn't that the EXACT process used to build stereotypes?

Whether Mr. Obama is lazy or is just enjoying the perks of his office is kind of beside the point, now that pointing out that he takes a lot of time off is called racism.

To bring this discussion home.. . On the night of 9-11-12 ;while American embassies around the ummah were under siege (some ended with flying al Qaeda flags before the day was through) ;and an American ambassador was being assassinated by a jihadist attack ;the situtation room of the White House was unoccupied . WE know for a fact that the President of the United States ;the Commander in Chief ,the Chief Executive of the United States took a total of ONE phone call on the crisis ,and then headed off to bed while the crisis was on-going .
I'll leave it to others to assign motives ;but that was the way it was on the night of 9-11-12 .

And the left went after Bush on 9/11 when he finished what he was doing the next roughly 14 minutes with the children he was with... to not scare them.

He didn't blow it off and go to bed.

Never mind this was before we figured out it wasn't an accident. Unlike Benghazi where they knew immediately... Hell, I knew it had nothing to do with a you-tube video in a land most people don't have running water much less internet access to see it.

Bush did a really good job protecting you didn't he? 3,000 dead americans later... I suspect people may have had an issue with that. Can you blame them?

Bush did a really good job protecting you didn't he? 3,000 dead americans later ... I suspect people may have had an issue with that. Can you blame them?

I see you are still walking and breathing.

Nobody protected me... I am still breathing ONLY because I was tired, hungry and crany that morning and didn't want to hang around like my Customers were asking me to, so their shift relief would know everything I knew.

Of course a cold hearted Lefty like you wouldn't give a damn that both of them died not long after I left...

Their names are engraved on the Memorial at the site along with many others.. I didn't know how many others that were there that night died... I only remembered or knew the names of two of them.

Nothing you wrote has any bearing on what I wrote yet you quoted me. It's like you have an on-going monologue regardless on the topic.

Nothing you wrote has any bearing on what I wrote yet you quoted me. It's like you have an on-going monologue regardless on the topic.

I see very little you EVER write that has any bearing on the topic at hand... other than to push partizan socialist viewpoints and pick trouble.

Isn't Dudley Do-Right knocking on your door?

http://popdoctor.com/files/2011/07/Dudley.jpg

Heh... so very bitter at the world..
Have fun!

Not a fan of Duddley Do Right?. he was Canadian. I watched it as a kid.

And after a not so pretty week for the administration on Benghazi, the most transparent administration EVAH met with the media (http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/05/white-house-holds-offrecord-benghazi-briefing-163704.html). Off the record of course.

P.S. I think Hillary is going under the bus.

http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/ramirez-benghazi-trap.jpg

She is right where John Kerry wants her.
Kerry: State Dept. 'Will Leave No Stone Unturned' On Benghazi - KMBZ (http://www.kmbz.com/Kerry-State-Dept-Will-Leave-No-Stone-Unturned-on-B/16312432)

Part 2 of my rare agreement with Dennis Kucinich (http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/dennis-kucinich-slams-obama-administration-on-benghazi-im-of)...




Progressive former Congressman Dennis Kucinich said Sunday on Fox News that the Obama Administration’s Libyan policy was to blame for the Sept. 11 terrorist attack on the American consulate in Benghazi. The former Congressman argued before leaving Congress after losing the his primary for his newly drawn Congressional district in Ohio that American intervention in Libya was a mistake.

Kucinich argued the Obama Administration initially said it was a protest because of what he called “the failure of the Benghazi policy” as well as the upcoming election last November.

“What the attack on the consulate brings up is the failure of the Benghazi policy from the beginning. That’s why they had to call it a street demonstration instead of an attack. On the eve of an election that brought up a whole new narrative about foreign policy, about dealing with terrorism, and about the consequences that led to four deaths of people who served the United States.”

The former Congressman also slammed the Obama Administration response to the attack saying he was “offended” by the response to the attack and the lack of consulate security leading up to it.

“We went into Benghazi under the assumption that somehow there was going to be a massacre in Benghazi,” he said. “So we went there to protect the Libyan people. We couldn’t go into Benghazi to protect our own Americans who were serving there? I’m offended by this, and there have to be real answers to the questions that are being raised.”


How's that foreign policy guru looking now? Are you lefties seeing a pattern yet? Seems Obama's primary policy objective is image control and nothing more.

Who gives a damn about 4 dead Americans, giving al Qaeda and its Jihadist allies a free zone to operate from in Libya and an otherwise totally incoherent foreign policy, he has an image to protect.

Why was Chris Stevens even in Benghazi at the most dangerous time of the year and when he knew all the security was in Tripoli and his consulate was a target numerous times? He himself complained of the inadequate security, so why did he ignore his own warnings?

Why was Chris Stevens even in Benghazi at the most dangerous time of the year and when he knew all the security was in Tripoli and his consulate was a target numerous times? He himself complained of the inadequate security, so why did he ignore his own warnings?

You should be asking that of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

I gave you the answer to that . Got to get Petraeus under oath. He and Evita ,along with Stevens were coordinating the weapon transfers .The policy of arming the anti-Assad jihadists (and recruiting Libyans for the effort ) was undemined by the drone policy that then Deputy National Security Advisor John Brennan (now CIA chief ) was running out of the White House .
What happened ? A drone strike took out an AQ leader named Abu Yahya al-Libi on June 4, 2012 .His death was later confirmed by the Ayman al-Zawahiri September 2012. He called for revenge attacks against Americans in Libya in particular ,and around the ummah on the anniversary of 9-11-01.
This was the real cause of all the embassy attacks... not some stupid Youtube video that no one saw.

You should be asking that of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

They will never say anything about the judgment of an ambassador even if he was known to ditch his security detail in the past. Nor I doubt they lay blame to him disobeying an order to keep his head down and those would have been my ORDERS to him.

Nor will any one divulge any operation secrets of the CIA. Having said all that the real business of the nations problems gets moved off the priority list.

To Tom,


On September 11, 2012, a series of protests and violent attacks began in response to a YouTube trailer for a film called Innocence of Muslims, considered blasphemous by many Muslims. The reactions began at U.S. diplomatic mission in Cairo, Egypt, and quickly spread across the Muslim world to additional U.S. and other countries' diplomatic missions and other locations, with issues beyond the offense at the movie trailer becoming subjects of protest. In Cairo, Egypt a group scaled the embassy wall and tore down the American flag to replace it with a black Islamic flag.

Protests at diplomatic missions [edit]


Widespread protests followed screening of excerpts of the trailer in Egypt. Many of the protests were focused on United States embassies and consular posts, with some leading to violent confrontations.

Please take note of the Interactive map included on the site. I count 36 protests and attacks. Whether they saw the movie or not, they sure knew about it. The fundamentalists made sure of that.

Go ahead Tal, blame the dead ambassador for his own demise and remain in denial about the rest.

At the time of Benghazigate... that video had all of roughly 600 views. Most of those "Protestors" didn't even have electricity or running water... much less internet access.

The Video from the embassy, and yes they do have video cameras at EVERY Embassy... and those all feed back to the USA real-time... showed no protest in Libya. Obama wasn't interested and went to bed right afterwards... and Hillary was pounding down a few drinks... neither did their jobs.

They will never say anything about the judgment of an ambassador even if he was known to ditch his security detail in the past. Nor I doubt they lay blame to him disobeying an order to keep his head down and those would have been my ORDERS to him.

Nor will any one divulge any operation secrets of the CIA. Having said all that the real business of the nations problems gets moved off the priority list.

To Tom,



Protests at diplomatic missions [edit]



Please take note of the Interactive map included on the site. I count 36 protests and attacks. Whether they saw the movie or not, they sure knew about it. The fundamentalists made sure of that.

It is a flat out lie about the video... Mohammed al Zawahiri, the younger brother of AQ leader Ayman al Zawahiri, admitted to helping organize the protests at the U.S. embassy in Cairo. Mohammed al Zawahiri is a longtime Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) operative .The EIJ is basically AQ in Egypt . Both the EIJ and Gamaa Islamiya (IG), another close ally of AQ , planned to protest outside of the U.S. embassy in Cairo before the video became known.

Again... The day before the embassy protest in Cairo, on September 10,Ayman al Zawahiri called on jihadists to exact revenge for the death of Abu Yahya al Libi. .

42-minute video recorded by Zawahiri, who took over as emir of the group after Osama bin Laden was killed by US Navy Seals last year, announced the death of Abu Yahya al-Libi.

American monitoring groups said the video was posted on Jihadi internet forums on Monday, a day ahead of the eleventh anniversary of 9/11.

It is the first appearance of Zawahiri, who is believed to be hiding in Pakistan's tribal regions, in three months.

"I proudly announce to the Muslim umma and to the Mujahideen ... the news of the martyrdom of the lion of Libya Sheikh Hassan Mohammed Qaed," he said, referring to Libi by his birth name, rather than his nom de guerre.


The death of the group's chief propagandist was interpreted as the biggest in a series of blows to al-Qaeda since the raid that killed Osama bin Laden last year.

9/11 anniversary: Ayman al-Zawahiri confirms June death of Abu Yahya al-Libi - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/september-11-attacks/9534938/911-anniversary-Ayman-al-Zawahiri-confirms-June-death-of-Abu-Yahya-al-Libi.html)

Even given your inability to access a bigger confluence of events, does it make any logical sense for an ambassador to be in Benghazi on 9-11 in the first place?

Even given your inability to access a bigger confluence of events, does it make any logical sense for an ambassador to be in Benghazi on 9-11 in the first place?

Hillary specifically asked for this particular man to go... at her request. Makes you wonder is we don't have another Vince Foster type scandal at play here.

The rumors from the tinfoil hat crowd say that either he was there to arrange shipments of arms to the AQ in Syria via the Turkish Ambassador or that he was to be the star in a kidnapping/hostage rescue that was screwed up when Ty Woods lit the 'kidnappers' up with his laser designator.

Even given your inability to access a bigger confluence of events, does it make any logical sense for an ambassador to be in Benghazi on 9-11 in the first place?

Already told you why he was there . He met with the Turkish ambassador Ali Sait Akin 5 days after a Libyan-flagged vessel Al Entisar, dropped anchor in the Turkish port of Iskenderun... 35 miles from the Syrian border ; on Sept. 6... carrying 400 tons of cargo including RPGs and shoulder-launched surface-to-air missiles (MANPADS) .


Now this tin foil hat found the NY Slimes report that Evita and Petraeus met to discuss vetting and arming Syrian rebel groups .
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03/us/politics/in-behind-scene-blows-and-triumphs-sense-of-clinton-future.html?pagewanted=all
The Slimes said that the White House worried about the risks, and with President Obama in the midst of a re-election bid, they were rebuffed. I don't think that is accurate . I think they ran it from that point in a covert manner.
Why do I think that ? Because the same Slimes in June of last year reported that the CIA was operating in Turkey helping allies decide which Syrian opposition fighters across the border will receive arms to fight the Syrian government.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/21/world/middleeast/cia-said-to-aid-in-steering-arms-to-syrian-rebels.html?pagewanted=all

We already know that Stevens was heavily involved in collecting and securing Libyan weapons after the fall of Q Daffy . We also know that trucks with heavy machine guns mounted on them took up blocking positions around the mission at around 8:00 p.m ,effectively cordoning off the area, over an hour before the attack(9:40 p.m) at roughly the same time that the meeting was concluding... and somehow Ali Sait Akin got out of the area before the attack began.

So why was Stevens in Benghazi that night ? To negotiate with the Turkish ambassador which groups of Syrian rebels could get the weapons transfers.
.

So what would the purpose of congress making a CIA covert operation public?

Pure politics Tal, embarrass the administration

a CIA covert operation public?

It went public when Stevens was killed. Only 6 Ambassadors have been killed in U.S. history. Congress is making the cover-up public, just like Evita got her start by doing to Nixon.

What you are saying is Evita had years to perfect coverup how come this one is so clumbsy

http://westernrifleshooters.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/428691_517667464955410_41359666_n.jpg

what you are saying is Evita had years to perfect coverup how come this one is so clumbsy

Hubris . They count on the press running cover for them .

http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile-ak-prn1/c47.0.300.300/s160x160/22270_279962258939_452507_n.jpg

Stuff that hasn't hit tne press yet... or even FOX which if verified make this far worse and far more serious than we even thought it was.

They Came, They Murdered, They Covered It Up:


When General Hamm received his "stand down" orders from Panetta on behalf of Obama, he defiantly made plans to go ahead with the rescue and was arrested within minutes of contravening the order by his second in command, General Rodriquez.

Out to sea, Admiral Gayouette, the commander of Carrier Strike Group Three, was preparing to provide intelligence and air cover for General Hamm's rescue team in violation of his standing orders and he was promptly relieved of command for allegations of inappropriate leadership judgment.

Both men are being held today in undisclosed locations. As an aside, if there is any kind of a silver lining in these very dark clouds it appears that much of the senior military leadership has had enough of the traitorous Obama and his den of corrupt criminals and some of them are willing to risk career in the name of actually serving the American people.

Mr. Hodges reminds us Hillary Clinton has been connected to a string of suspicious and suspiciously convenient deaths in the past. We also recall former president Bill Clinton is accused by some of handing military secrets to China while in office, and former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta's public involvement with a self declared Marxist organization, and president Obama's alliances with terrorist revolutionaries and malodorous race supremacists.

Mr. Hodges's version of the Benghazi event is volatile stuff. It describes near-treason if not treason itself. If the allegations centering on former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are substantiated, and if principals in the administration are shown to be complicit, they betrayed their oath and their countrymen on behalf of an active belligerent. It's alleged elsewhere untraceable foreign accounts are a substantial source of their political funding, which may speak to the question of embedded duplicity on a more quantitative basis.


What difference at this point does it make?
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

Ms. Clinton needs to understand, deeply and abidingly, "it" makes a difference at this or any other point. The nation should not accept the "mistakes were made" brushoff this time, nor apologies and resignations, nor even outright terminations. We're running out of dirt to draw a line in. If all or most of this is true, it warrants aggressive and decisive legal proceedings to remove co-conspirators from office on an emergency basis, and bulldog prosecution for all involved, top to bottom and side to side.

That is my general understanding of the purge of the senior ranks in the days after Benghazi. Wish one of them would come forth and testify . But they have pensions they are protecting .

Since this is devolving into the "What's new at 1600 Scandal Ave." thread, the hits just keep on coming.

Great news: US has misplaced two former Witness Protection Program participants “known or suspected as terrorists”; Update: Failed to update no-fly lists? « Hot Air (http://hotair.com/archives/2013/05/16/great-news-us-has-misplaced-two-former-witness-protection-program-participants-known-or-suspected-as-terrorists/)

Yep... just heard that one hit the news... just now.

Hello again,


What's new at 1600 Scandal Ave.Enjoy your orgasm while it lasts. But, as Obama said, there's no THERE, there. There's only right wingers running around with their hair on fire.

Excon

Hello again,

Enjoy your orgasm while it lasts. But, as Obama said, there's no THERE, there. There's only right wingers running around with their hair on fire.

excon

Right. Tricky D!ckie wasn't a crook, either.

The speech you will hear by the summer :

" It can now be revealed that my wife Michelle conceived and led the Benghazi cover-up ;the AP wiretapping ,and the IRS assault on the right wing. I am deeply disappointed ;and let me be clear ;I will not tolerate this behavior ............uuuuhhh ....I of course had nothing to do with it".

http://www.investors.com/image/RAMclr-051713-FNLFNLjpg.jpg.cms

Very humourous Tom and right on the money. It's called plausible deniability, of course he didn't know right at the moment it happened but he knew when someone told him.

Only truly incompetent leaders don't know what the people under them are up to at all times...

And its just as true with Politicians as it is a Manager for a McDonalds

Only truly incompetent leaders don't know what the people under them are up to at all times....

And its just as true with Politicians as it is a Manager for a McDonalds

He obviously needs more informants then

he obviously needs more informants then

I don't believe he is that clueless... I believe he knows everything that was going on...

I think he's has ZERO leadership skills... but I don't believe he's that clueless about what his people are doing.

Well the witch hunt will inevietably find answers but the witch has flown

I don't believe he is that clueless........I believe he knows everything that was going on.

On this point I disagree. I do believe he put his favorite ideologues in authority and thought he could take credit for what they did. Witness his preening over the Osama raid.

Now that his ideologues have screwed up and gotten caught, he's going to try to rename them all "Bush."

On this point I disagree. I do believe he put his favorite ideologues in authority and thought he could take credit for what they did. Witness his preening over the Osama raid.

Now that his ideologues have screwed up and gotten caught, he's going to try to rename them all "Bush."

Yes . Then he has time for golf and hosting celebrity concerts in the White House.(oops ,I said golf.. how very racist of me ).

The latest defense from the White House on Benghazi, they aren't liars, just idiots. No, really (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57584921/officials-on-benghazi-we-made-mistakes-but-without-malice/?tag=socsh).


"We're portrayed by Republicans as either being lying or idiots," said one Obama administration official who was part of the Benghazi response. "It's actually closer to us being idiots."

I have more confidence than ever in this administration!

The latest defense from the White House on Benghazi, they aren't liars, just idiots. No, really (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57584921/officials-on-benghazi-we-made-mistakes-but-without-malice/?tag=socsh).



I have more confidence than ever in this administration!

excon and tal will argue they never said that... just wait... its coming.

I have no clue who said what you said, no names where mentioned but the article does substantiate the fact that no one was close enough to help. Had he been in Tripoli, we wouldn't be here would we?

All those geniuses couldn't take cover for the one day of the year that stuff get hairy, and did all over the place?

Oh I get it . It's Stevens fault he got killed .

oh I get it . It's Stevens fault he got killed .

He's been implying that all week.

If I were his boss and given the lack of security and Steven's propensity to ditch his security entourage I would have ordered him to Tripoli and had the marines sit on him for a week. That's my outrage over the matter.

Maybe they thought 30 CIA, and a few local types were enough, I do NOT! Nor do I think he would have been safe in Benghazi after 9/11, today, or any other day.

Oh we know Benghazi was not safe enough for a State Dept outpost . What does that tell you about what was really going on there ?

I have no clue who said what you said, no names where mentioned but the article does substantiate the fact that no one was close enough to help. Had he been in Tripoli, we wouldn't be here would we?

All those geniuses couldn't take cover for the one day of the year that stuff get hairy, and did all over the place?

Since you're the one that keeps wanting to know why Stevens was there, amongst the other speculations we know this much from Hicks testimony...


Benghazi witness points finger at Clinton on lapses in consulate security

The star witness in the Benghazi investigation said former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton personally ordered Ambassador Chris Stevens to set up a permanent post in the restive city and should have known about deteriorating security.

The revelations from the second-ranking U.S. diplomat in Libya at the time come as the audit that cleared the former secretary of State of any wrongdoing has come under fire for not interviewing Clinton or her top lieutenants.

...

Gregory Hicks, who briefly took over as head of mission when Stevens and three other Americans were killed, testified on May 8 that Clinton personally ordered the ambassador to turn Benghazi into a full consular post, and that she planned to announce the upgrade during a visit in December.

Hicks’s attorney has been drawing attention to that section of his testimony, which was overshadowed by revelations that no one at the U.S. embassy in Libya believed the terrorist attack was preceded by a peaceful protest, and that the Pentagon told a special operations team to stand down.

“According to Stevens, Secretary Clinton wanted Benghazi converted into a permanent constituent post,” Hicks testified.

“Timing for this decision [to visit the region on Sept. 11] was important. Chris needed to report before Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year, on the … political and security environment in Benghazi.”

He said Pickering appeared “surprised.”

“I did tell the Accountability Review Board that Secretary Clinton wanted the post made permanent,” Hicks testified.

“Ambassador Pickering looked surprised. He looked both ways … to the members of the board, saying, ‘Does the seventh floor [the secretary of State’s office] know about this?’ ”

The ARB appears to have ignored Hicks’s statement in its public report. Instead, the board appeared to place responsibility on Stevens.

Read more: Benghazi witness points finger at Clinton on lapses in consulate security - The Hill's Global Affairs (http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/middle-east-north-africa/300879-benghazi-witness-points-finger-at-clinton-on-lapses-in-security#ixzz2TwYLb38m)

There you have it, Stevens was there because Hillary needed his report before the end of the fiscal year for her little project, which according to hearsay from some other potential whistleblowers was cleaning up her mess (http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2013/05/21/pjm-exclusive-ex-diplomats-report-new-benghazi-whistleblowers-with-info-devastating-to-clinton-and-obama/) from wanting to “overthrow Gaddafi on the cheap.”

Not looking pretty for Hillary right now...

Beat me to it . I was going to post Hicks testimony today. But Evita's desire for a permanent Benghazi consulate only partly explains why he was there . There is still that meeting with the Turkish diplomat an hour before the attack.

Hello again, Steve:

Not looking pretty for Hillary right now... I wonder if the realization that Hillary is going to run for president has anything to do with your SWITCHEROO from demonizing Obama to demonizing Clinton...

Nahhhh... Republicans would NEVER do that..

Excon

Hello again, Steve:
I wonder if the realization that Hillary is going to run for president has anything to do with your SWITCHEROO from demonizing Obama to demonizing Clinton...

Nahhhh... Republicans would NEVER do that..

excon

It would've been the crowning achievement of her otherwise miserable term as Sec State. Me ? I never miss a chance to take on Evita and her record.

Hello again, Steve:
I wonder if the realization that Hillary is going to run for president has anything to do with your SWITCHEROO from demonizing Obama to demonizing Clinton...

Nahhhh... Republicans would NEVER do that..

excon

Dude, you never take advantage of opportunities? Yeah, you do, the difference between us is I don't make sh*t up, I follow the facts where they take me and right now they're not looking good for Hillary are they?

I am sure your facts will fit your spin regardless. Mine do! :)

Dude, you never take advantage of opportunities? Yeah, you do, the difference between us is I don't make sh*t up, I follow the facts where they take me and right now they're not looking good for Hillary are they?

Ex they weren't loking good for Hillary right from the start, this is surely why she retired from the position, didn't want it to ruin her chances later

Hello again, clete:

Ex they weren't loking good for Hillary right from the startIn right wing fantasy land, that's true.. But, there's not a Democrat who can touch her, and Republicans will NEVER win a national election again, unless they fix what's wrong.

And, they're NOT fixing it. They're making it worse... Bwa, ha ha ha.

Excon

As if dems have fixed anything? Bwa ha ha!

Hello again, Steve:

As if dems have fixed anythingUhh, whatdawe need to fix? The American people voted FOR the Democrats by a LOT. Where were you?

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Excon

It ain't broke?

Hello again, Steve:


It ain't broke?Couple things.

That government workers screw up ISN'T a Democrat problem. It's not even an Obama problem unless and until it's PROVEN that he ordered the IRS to target his enemy's..

Now you guys THINK it's true, but you're the only ones...

That four men were killed in an attack ISN'T a Democrat problem, and it's not even an Obama problem. It's NEVER going to be an Obama or Clinton problem..

Now, you guys THINK it is, but you're the only ones who do.

That the Government is targeting whistleblowers at the AP, is something somebody who thinks Julian Assange is a scumbag would LOVE. You're one of those, aren't you?

That you don't is kind of funny, doncha think? You HATE Obama, but you HATE whistleblowers... Poor right winger.. You can't decide WHICH side to hate more.

Bwa, ha ha ha.

The progressive ideas that garnered MORE votes than your side did are alive and well. Now, you guys THINK they're not, but you're the only ones.

Excon

Hello again, clete:
In right wing fantasy land, that's true.. But, there's not a Democrat who can touch her, and Republicans will NEVER win a national election again, unless they fix what's wrong.

And, they're NOT fixing it. They're making it worse... Bwa, ha ha ha.

excon

Ex I agree there is a great big show going on in Washington and all it needs to make it a three ring circus is the tent, however if you are pinning your hopes on Hilary, I suspect that she has acquired some unfortunate baggage, she would have done far better to have been vice president if she holds aspirations, less opportunity to have shlt stick

Ex, if nothing else your fairy tales are entertaining

Couple things.

That government workers screw up ISN'T a Democrat problem. It's not even an Obama problem unless and until it's PROVEN that he ordered the IRS to target his enemy's..

Now you guys THINK it's true, but you're the only ones...

That four men were killed in an attack ISN'T a Democrat problem, and it's not even an Obama problem. It's NEVER going to be an Obama or Clinton problem..

Now, you guys THINK it is, but you're the only ones who do.

That the Government is targeting whistleblowers at the AP, is something somebody who thinks Julian Assange is a scumbag would LOVE. You're one of those, aren't you?

That you don't is kind of funny, doncha think? You HATE Obama, but you HATE whistleblowers... Poor right winger.. You can't decide WHICH side to hate more.

Bwa, ha ha ha.

The progressive ideas that garnered MORE votes than your side did are alive and well. Now, you guys THINK they're not, but you're the only ones.

Excon

Lois Lerner will plea the 5th today... which is a more honest response than the outright lies of Steven Miller and Douglas Shulman . She will resemble one of Jimmy Hoffa's criminal associates while questioned by Bobby Kennedy . Except she is allegedly not a member of a criminal organization .
You will recall that we did not know how high up the food chain the Watergate scandal went with the 1st revelations.
Combined ,all these scandals makes one believe that we have an Executive Dept out of control .
Take for example the under reported scandal about the mafioso strong arm tactics being employed by HHS director Kathlene Sebilius to pay for ObamaCare propaganda to pressure people to enroll in the health exchanges.
Now combine them together because I have no doubt that the same uneven criteria will be employed for evaluating tax returns under the IRS role in Obamacare that the IRS used in evaluating applications for exemptions and what we have is an Executive branch that has no problem employing criminal tactics in its enforcement of the law . We know that shake down by Sebilius is coming from the cabinet level at the White House . Why shouldn't we believe that the IRS scandal did not come from the inner sanctum?

The spying on the news agencies goes beyond AP and James Rosen too. We now know that
Sharyl Attkisson, a CBS News investigative reporter who has been reporting extensively on Benghazi , says that her personal and work computers have been compromised . She hasn't gone into details except to say that it is similar to the Rosen situation.Jonathan Karl of ABC followed up the reporting of the Weekly Standard's Stephen Hayes on the Benghazi emails,and has been the target of a relentless assault by the Obama apologists in the liberal blogsphere. They mock Mitch McConnell's assertion that the Emperor and his staff have instilled “a culture of intimidation” .But what other conclusion can one draw ? The only difference between the IRS of the Nixon era and the IRS today is that the IRS resisted Nixon's attempt to use it as a political tool.

A government that can't be trusted to handle the processing of tax exemption applications without using political criteria that conform with the president's political philosophy... that uses extortion to get it's way... that spies on journalists with impunity... cannot be trusted to rule over ,and manage our health care system ;and frankly cannot be trusted to govern .

Do you recall Atkisson telling Laura Ingraham how the White House treated her for digging on Benghazi?


I’m certainly not the one to make the case for DOJ and White House about what I’m doing wrong. They will tell you that I’m the only reporter–as they told me–that is not reasonable. They say the Washington Post is reasonable, the LA Times is reasonable, the New York Times is reasonable, I’m the only one who thinks this is a story, and they think I’m unfair and biased by pursuing it.

And do you remember when during the push for Obamacare that Obama called for snitches in the run-up to Obamacare, setting up an "AttackWatch (http://www.redstate.com/jeff_emanuel/2009/08/04/call-for-informants-if-you-oppose-obamacare-the-white-house-wants-to-know-about-it/)" website? How he set up his Truth Team (http://www.examiner.com/article/move-over-attackwatch-obama-wants-you-for-his-truth-team) during the election?

Lots of dots getting connected these last two weeks, this administration is nothing but a bunch of thugs that will stop at nothing, no tactic too outrageous, no law or constitutional right too burdensome, no ethics whatsoever if you ask me and it comes from the top.

Hello again, tom:


if you ask me and it comes from the top.If I were you, I'd think so too. After all, I still believe that Bush LIED.

I'm willing, however, to let the evidence lead us.

Excon

Hello again, Steve:

Do you recall Atkisson telling Laura Ingraham how the White House treated her for digging on Benghazi?I've mentioned several times about your previous disdain for whistleblowers when national security was involved. Now that it's FOX and/or CNN, and/or AP instead of Wikkileaks, or some hapless soldier, what's the difference?

I'm willing to embrace your outrage as long as it's NOT selective outrage.

Excon

Hello again, Steve:
I've mentioned several times about your previous disdain for whistleblowers when national security was involved. Now that it's FOX and/or CNN, and/or AP instead of Wikkileaks, or some hapless soldier, what's the difference?

I'm willing to embrace your outrage as long as it's NOT selective outrage.

excon

Are you willing to acknowledge there's a difference between a government employee trying to right a wrong and a hacker stealing information and setting himself up as a self-appointed watchdog? One's a whistleblower, the other a crook and enemy of the state.

It works the other way too, it's all in the wording:

there's a difference between a government employee setting himself up as a self-appointed watchdog and a website receiving information and trying to right a wrong? One's a whistleblower, the other a crook and enemy of the state.

Hello again, Steve:
I've mentioned several times about your previous disdain for whistleblowers when national security was involved. Now that it's FOX and/or CNN, and/or AP instead of Wikkileaks, or some hapless soldier, what's the difference?

I'm willing to embrace your outrage as long as it's NOT selective outrage.

excon

You are mistaking whistle blowers with the press that reports what the whistle blowers give them. I wanted the weight of the government to come down hard on Bradley Manning as he was the leaker... Wikileaks I consider an annoyance,but they were NOT the leaker . I defended the rights of Judith Miller when she was unconstitutionally thrown into jail for not disclosing her source in the Plame investigation.
This thing against Rosen takes it a step further and coincides with the Emperor's very public war against FOX .They also knowingly lied in court to get access to his cell phone and private email . They made the absurd claim that he was part of a criminal conspiracy . That was ground breaking chutzpah that you should find chiiling .If they did that to one reporter ,and to a whole news organization then why should we believe it ended there ? Well now we know that a CBS award winning investigative journalist was also targeted .
Again... this is Hugo Chavez purge the press stuff . But still you defend it.

Hello again, tom:


But still you defend it.No, I haven't. I don't know the story yet. All I've done is ask why YOU think this incursion into the press is different than ANY incursion into the press... You DECRY one, and support the other.

Personally, I'm a staunch defender of the free press.. In this digital age, the "press" IS, is no longer what the press WAS. What I want is information about my government, and if the conventional press doesn't give it to me, and the digital press does, then they're the PRESS.

I support ALL of them.. I want ALL the information I can get about my government... You folks, on the other hand, seem to put your head in the sand when information comes at you from places you don't like.

Excon

Hello again, tom:

No, I haven't. I don't know the story yet. All I've done is ask why YOU think this incursion into the press is different than ANY incursion into the press... You DECRY one, and support the other.

Personally, I'm a staunch defender of the free press.. In this digital age, the "press" IS, is no longer what the press WAS. What I want is information about my government, and if the conventional press doesn't give it to me, and the digital press does, then they're the PRESS.

I support ALL of them.. I want ALL the information I can get about my government... You folks, on the other hand, seem to put your head in the sand when information comes at you from places you don't like.

excon
What incursion into the press did I defend ? Read above again. My going after Bradley Manning is not going after the press. I don't recall you complaining about Judith Miller going to jail for 85 days for protecting her source from Inspector Javert Fitzpatrick .

It works the other way too, it's all in the wording:

No, it doesn't, it's all in the FACTS. Don't you have some other forum to ruin?

It absolutely works the other way. All you have to do is substitute the wikileaks with a conservative "think tank" or blog.
It's always personal with you isn't it.

Hello again, Steve:


Are you willing to acknowledge there's a difference between a government employee trying to right a wrong and a hacker stealing information and setting himself up as a self-appointed watchdog? One's a whistleblower, the other a crook and enemy of the state.No.

They're two sides of the same coin. I care about the information, not the messenger.

Excon

It absolutely works the other way. All you have to do is substitute the wikileaks with a conservative "think tank" or blog.

Well geez, you can substitute a lot of things and come up with imitations, but it isn't the same thing. I was very specific, stick to the facts. Better yet, let ex answer the questions I ask specifically of him.


It's always personal with you isn't it.

No, you're just as about as welcome as a tick on one's genitals.

as welcome as a tick on one's genitals.What a class act. LOL

Anyway yes, I agree with ex, it's the information not the messenger which is what I was alluding to. A concept that is totally foreign to you.

Hello again, Steve:

No.

They're two sides of the same coin. I care about the information, not the messenger.

excon

Sorry, but I look at motive and circumstances. Assange is a self-righteous hacker digging for sh*t he has no right to and doesn't give a rat's a$$ how many innocent people he may harm in the process. He DESERVES prison.

Contrast that with say, the Fast and Furious whistleblower - a government agent with firsthand knowledge, who was trying tell the truth about the US government letting guns walk, which led to the murder of a Border Patrol agent and untold violence in Mexico. He deserves protection.

The Obama administration goes after BOTH (http://www.examiner.com/article/grassley-charges-u-s-attorney-undermined-fast-and-furious-whistleblower).

One is honorable, one is not, and that does matter to me.

What a class act. LOL

Hey, if the shoe fits I see no reason for me to pull punches.


Anyway yes, I agree with ex, it's the information not the messenger which is what I was alluding to. A concept that is totally foreign to you.

Just as honor and integrity are foreign concepts to you.

If nothing else your fairy tales are entertaining.

If nothing else your fairy tales are entertaining.

I'm OK with letting the facts speak for themselves. Now don't you have some other forum to troll or you just obsessed with me still?

I'm OK with letting the facts speak for themselves.That's exactly what ex and I are saying. We all agree.

Didn't somebody say they weren't worried about Barak Hussein Obama as much as they were worried about Barak Capone Obama several years ago? Welcome to Chicagoland, pay up and shut up.

You'd think this was FreeRepublic LOL.

That's exactly what ex and I are saying. We all agree.

No, you and I are not saying the same thing, we don't agree and ex can speak for himself. Funny how you have this need to answer for people I'm addressing specifically.

It's not honorable to steal and risk the lives and safety of innocent people to make a political statement for selfish purposes. Assange is a scumbag. If you want to align with scumbags that's your business, but I don't and refuse to say the bad things he does are good.

Funny how you have this need to answer for people I'm addressing specifically.This is a public internet forum, you're confusing it with one of your private chat rooms.

This is a public internet forum, you're confusing it with one of your private chat rooms.

Don't patronize me with your peurile assumptions. Second of all, it's a matter of courtesy and respect, something which also appears to be foreign to you. It was obviously a PERSONAL question that wasn't directed at you. I couldn't care less what you think, I respect ex.

"a personal question" - hehehe

What a class act. I'm literally stunned that AMHD tolerates your bullsh*t, really guys?

Take your meds. In case you never noticed it everyone is free to comment on any post on a public forum. Let me know if you've read otherwise.
Feel free to start your own private forum with invited guests only - if seems to be what you're looking for.

It's a public forum, duh. Like I said it was a matter of courtesy and respect. You obviously have none and stalking me contributes to nothing but your obviously overinflated ego. Don't you have anyone else to troll? Do you get some sadistic thrill from stalking me and making a mockery of this site?

You keep replying and digging yourself deeper. Bullies like you don't bother me, no matter how much you hurl insults. I simply use the same tactics that you use in your "discussions" and that seems to offend you.

Whatever dude, keep deluding yourself. I'm done trying to convince AMHD of the disreputable image you bring to their site. Have a nice life.

Whatever can we get back to the op now

Unlike some I'd be glad to, what's on your mind?

Is this just a political exercise with no hope of achieving anything?

No.

Well after six months or more what do you think it has achieved?

You forget, the first 7 months they had media cover. The families and the country deserve to know the truth and we need to ensure it doesn't happen again for starters.

The left makes it sound unusual that hearings are conducted after a failure of policy . I don't know why . They were masters of it during the Bush years .

And now we see that Bonehead really is in the Administration's pocket.

GOP leadership still against special Benghazi committee | The Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/23/despite-momentum-gop-leadership-still-against-special-benghazi-committee/)

Say what you will about Pelosi, she stuck to her guns and dragged the House with her. A Republican leader of that caliber would be refreshing.

http://cfp.canadafreepress.com/boehner-cowardlylion051513.jpg

And now we see that Bonehead really is in the Administration's pocket.

.

Perhaps bonehead has decided that even this witchhunt is ad nausium after all they identified the witch

So the White House thought it could get away with selectively releasing emails, eh? Not so fast, Issa has subpoenaed (http://thehill.com/homenews/house/302153-issa-subpoenas-state-dept-documents?utm_source=buffer&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Buffer&utm_content=bufferb8967#ixzz2UckCvX6m) the talking points documents the most transparent administration ever continues to withhold.


House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) has subpoenaed State Department documents related to the Benghazi talking points, according to a letter sent to Secretary of State John Kerry obtained by The Hill.

In the letter, Issa states that the department's release of 100 emails earlier this month was "incomplete." Issa demands that Kerry produce "relevant documents through subpoena. The enclosed subpoena covers documents and the communications related to talking points prepared for members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and used by Ambassador Susan Rice during her September 16th, 2012, appearances on CBS, NBC, ABC, Fox, and CNN."

Issa said that the documents released on May 20 did not answer "critical" questions posed by the committee as it investigates what happened during the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and the aftermath of that terror attack that killed former U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stephens and three other Americans.

More than one week after the attack, Rice took to the airwaves to blame the attack on a protest over an anti-Islam video, denying that it had anything to do with terrorism, despite the CIA's belief that the attack was caused by terrorists.

Issa wants details of emails between key State Department officials, including then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, Deputy Secretary of State William Burns, Deputy Assistant Secretary Philippe Reines and then-State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland, among others.

The subpoena compels the State Department to produce the documents by June 7.

Lurch, aka John Kerry, vowed to run “an accountable and open State Department” - let's see how quickly that promise expires.

White House officials refused to comment Friday on a Los Angeles Times report that CIA operatives and U.S. special operations troops have been secretly training Syrian rebels with anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons since late last year, saying only that the U.S. had increased its assistance to the rebellion.
The covert U.S. training at bases in Jordan and Turkey began months before President Obama approved plans to begin directly arming the opposition to Syrian President Bashar Assad, according to U.S. officials and rebel commanders.

Update: U.S. training Syrian rebels; White House 'stepped up assistance' - latimes.com (http://www.latimes.com/news/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-cia-syria-20130621,0,6346686.story)
Hmm... late last year.. Would that be about the same time they were covertly supplying the rebel forces with arms from the former Q~Daffy army ? I think so. The report says official training began in November ,2 months after 9-11-12 ,and probably immediately after the US elections. No doubt ,the preparations ,including obtaining the weapons began before the start of the training.

The two-week courses include training with Russian-designed 14.5-millimeter anti-tank rifles, anti-tank missiles, as well as 23-millimeter anti-aircraft weapons,
Nice ,just what we want to see... anti-aircraft weapons in the hands of jihadists.

From the NY Slimes dated June 21 .


Evidence gathered in Syria, along with flight-control data and interviews with militia members, smugglers, rebels, analysts and officials in several countries, offers a profile of a complex and active multinational effort, financed largely by Qatar, to transport arms from Libya to Syria’s opposition fighters. Libya’s own former fighters, who sympathize with Syria’s rebels, have been eager collaborators.
“It is just the enthusiasm of the Libyan people helping the Syrians,” said Fawzi Bukatef, the former leader of an alliance of Libyan brigades who was recently named ambassador to Uganda, in an interview in Tripoli.

As the United States and its Western allies move toward providing lethal aid to Syrian rebels, these secretive transfers give insight into an unregistered arms pipeline that is difficult to monitor or control. And while the system appears to succeed in moving arms across multiple borders and to select rebel groups, once inside Syria the flow branches out. Extremist fighters, some of them aligned with Al Qaeda, have the money to buy the newly arrived stock, and many rebels are willing to sell.


"The right of AQ to keep and bear 51 caliber machine guns and surface to air missiles shall not be infringed".


Those weapons, which slipped from state custody as Colonel Qaddafi’s people rose against him in 2011, are sent on ships or Qatar Emiri Air Force flights to a network of intelligence agencies and Syrian opposition leaders in Turkey. From there, Syrians distribute the arms according to their own formulas and preferences to particular fighting groups, which in turn issue them to their fighters on the ground, rebels and activists said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/22/world/africa/in-a-turnabout-syria-rebels-get-libyan-weapons.html?_r=0

Wow the Slimes is beginning to connect the dots !

Jake Tapper of CNN has been reporting on Benghazi the cover-up . So FINALLY the compliant press is beginning to do their job.
Tapper has mostly concentrated on the extreme pressure that has been put to bear on the survivors of the attack (including monthly polygraph tests ). More than 30 American ops were working out of the CIA annex . We now know that besides the 4 dead ,there were a number of wounded that have been kept from the American people.

Tapper also briefly hinted at what to me is the biggest story from the attack. What were we doing in Benghazi ? It should be clear by now that the State Dept "mission" was there for cover for a CIA black -op.
And what was that op ?

Damien McElroy of The Telegraph sheds more light.

The circumstances of the attack are a subject of deep division in the US with some Congressional leaders pressing for a wide-ranging investigation into suspicions that the government has withheld details of its activities in the Libyan city.

The television network said that a CIA team was working in an annex near the consulate on a project to supply missiles from Libyan armouries to Syrian rebels. Sources said that more Americans were hurt in the assault spearheaded by suspected Islamic radicals than had been previously reported. CIA chiefs were actively working to ensure the real nature of its operations in the city did not get out.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/10218288/CIA-running-arms-smuggling-team-in-Benghazi-when-consulate-was-attacked.html

As you recall ,Evita dismissed questions by Rand PAul about gun running in her testimony to the Senate when she asked :what difference does it make ?
Perhaps she didn't know what Ambassador Stevens and the CIA annex was doing there. But I kind of doubt it.

Why do you guys get involved ion other people's politics? It's been going on for decades.

And the CIA agents involved are getting the star treatment.
(http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/01/exclusive-dozens-of-cia-operatives-on-the-ground-during-benghazi-attack/)

Sources now tell CNN dozens of people working for the CIA were on the ground that night, and that the agency is going to great lengths to make sure whatever it was doing, remains a secret.

CNN has learned the CIA is involved in what one source calls an unprecedented attempt to keep the spy agency's Benghazi secrets from ever leaking out.

Since January, some CIA operatives involved in the agency’s missions in Libya, have been subjected to frequent, even monthly polygraph examinations, according to a source with deep inside knowledge of the agency’s workings…

It is being described as pure intimidation, with the threat that any unauthorized CIA employee who leaks information could face the end of his or her career…

Another [insider] says, “You have no idea the amount of pressure being brought to bear on anyone with knowledge of this operation.”…

Among the many secrets still yet to be told about the Benghazi mission, is just how many Americans were there the night of the attack.

A source now tells CNN that number was 35, with as many as seven wounded, some seriously.

While it is still not known how many of them were CIA, a source tells CNN that 21 Americans were working in the building known as the annex, believed to be run by the agency.

But it's all just a phony scandal.

So there are no such things as state secrets? Why are they pursuing Snowden then?

Look, another shiny thing!

Exactly!

Why do you guys get involved ion other people's politics? It's been going on for decades.

It's always about money. Be it oil, cheap labor, or getting a competitive edge on extracting profit. Wars, civil or otherwise is profitable.


But it's all just a phony scandal.

All the right wing scandals are phony ones. Trumped up for ideological talking points and hyper partisan spin for fear of a changing world and holding on desperately to power, and influence.

To be expected from those that see a leaf fluttering from a tree and holler the sky is falling.

You must have missed the Bush years.

I have thrived and survived every president since Nixon, and the congresses too!! Life goes on despite the noise, and the sky has yet to fall.

As I recall the lefty's were all "yawn " isn't nothing there """ during Iran Contra.

as I recall the lefty's were all "yawn " isn't nothing there """ during Iran Contra.How did that event impact you?

And when 'Bush lied' about Iraq they were all like chillin', dude.

Iran Contra ? I was appalled and upset that my government was giving the thugs in Iran TOW and Stingers that could be used against Americans... It did not bother me so much that we were helping the freedom fighters in Nicaragua except for the fact that it did violate the law at the time. It's a really cynical attitude to brush off these various misdeeds by the government as 'no big thing' . I opposed Nixon for his antics in Watergate... I opposed Reagan's adm handling of Iran Contra. I opposed Clintoon's selling state secrets to the Chinese for campaign cash.

And when 'Bush lied' about Iraq they were all like chillin', dude.I remember hearing about a lot of americans deaths in Iraq.

Sarcasm is still totally lost on you.

I guess the death of you fellow citizens is funny to you.

I guess the death of you fellow citizens is funny to you.

That would be the Tal, the administration and Hillary "what difference does it make" Clinton who calling the deaths of Americans a "phony" scandal. Try and keep up.

Nope they weren't but nice try in misrepresenting their positions. Another example of non-existent honest discussions here.

Hello again, Steve:

If four dead is a scandal, what do you call 4,000 dead in a phony war? By the way, it's the war we LOST!!

excon

Republican scandals don't count. And liberals are all scandalous. It's the TParty vs RINO"s. Enjoy the show.

Nope they weren't but nice try in misrepresenting their positions. Another example of non-existent honest discussions here.

LOL, do you really think I'm that stupid? Generally if I say it I can back it up, unlike you who just spews bullsh!t.

"All the right wing scandals are phony ones (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/3520295-post470.html)" -Talaniman

Hillary on Libya: 'What Difference Does It Make?' (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/23/Hillary-What-Difference-Does-it-make)

White House outrages Benghazi attack victim's mother as Obama continues to call the deadly assault a 'phony scandal' (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2382335/Benghazi-attack-victims-mother-outraged-Obama-continues-assault-phony-scandal.html)

Like I said, that would be the Tal, the administration and Hillary "what difference does it make" Clinton who calling the deaths of Americans a "phony" scandal.

LOL, do you really think I'm that stupid?Well, yes. Since I was referring to you misrepresenting the posters that you mentioned in the post I quoted.

Hello again, Steve:

If four dead is a scandal, what do you call 4,000 dead in a phony war? By the way, it's the war we LOST!!!!

excon

Um, Obama is the one that snatched defeat from the jaws of victory and my comment was about the very selective liberal outrage, not the deaths of Americans.

Well, yes. Since I was referring to you misrepresenting the posters that you mentioned in the post I quoted.

I backed it up with the quotes, so bite me.

You dismiss 4000 dead Americans and holler about 4, and say liberals are the ones with selective outrage??

Those 4000 dead Americans had mama's too you know!!

More of them died on Obamas watch than on Bushes. And Obama still has almost 3.5 years to go on his second term.

iCasualties: Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom Casualties (http://icasualties.org/)

Year US
2001 12
2002 49
2003 48
2004 52
2005 99
2006 98
2007 117
2008 155
2009 317
2010 499
2011 418
2012 310
2013 85
Total 2259


Yeah.. every year under Obama the numbers were WAY higher than under bush... and this year its well on its way with 5 months to go as well

And we were on our way out of Iraq while Bush was still in Office.

I like how you completely overlook the Iraq war stats. Pretty typical of the righty mentality."If it doesn't fit the narrative..."

I like how you completely overlook the Iraq war stats. Pretty typical of the righty mentality."If it doesn't fit the narrative..."
I know you are a bit slow... But that would be comparing apples to Oranges since we were on our way out before Bush left office... Unlike Afghanistan.

we were on our way out before Bush left officeAnd that makes a difference to the statistics how?

And that makes a difference to the statistics how?

Think about it a little... it should come to you.

So now there are revelations of large scale CIA activity in the middle east and this is a surprise to someone? What were a large number of CIA operatives doing in Benghazi? Why didn't they rescue the ambassador? This sounds like boots on the ground to me

so now there are revelations of large scale CIA activity in the middle east and this is a surprise to someone? What were a large number of CIA operatives doing in Benghazi? Why didn't they rescue the ambassador? This sounds like boots on the ground to me

They HAD boots on the ground in the way of Rapid Reaction force at the Airport in Libya. (those were NOT CIA)... they were ordered to stand down.

Yeah we all want to hear the real explanation for this... and they are stonewalling and obstructing to keep from doing it...

Well if we don't know the answers after a year... interesting that as soon as this fresh information is revealed we have a smoke screen.. sorry what was I thinking.. alert, an attack somewhere, sometime, no one is safe, is this Al Qaeda talking or their new PR agency

It won't be a year for another 5 weeks... but such is the power of an executive dept cover up.

Hello again,

Look.. I want to know if my president is a coward and a liar... I want to know if he left his men on the battlefield. If he did, I want his a$$.

But, what we've got here is a terrorist attack and four of our men died including the ambassador. Nobody could have saved them. Nobody is saying they could. Obama was slow to call it a terrorist attack. Big Deal. You have some problem with the talking points given to Susan Rice. Big Deal. If the station was a CIA black ops office, big deal.

I'm waiting to hear what was covered up, and who should be hung for it. Yawwwwwwn...

excon