Widgets Magazine
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 128
  1. #26

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by Chadanth View Post
    Of course, we learned that the truth is much more nuanced later on...

    A Deadly Mix in Benghazi - The New York Times
    And then there is this. No wonder the CIA was spinning.
    CIA 'running arms smuggling team in Benghazi when consulate was attacked' - Telegraph

  2. #27

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by Jersey Boss View Post
    Yeah, it's far more complex than most will admit. Was there a demonstration related to a video? Possibly, there was one hours before in Egypt that resulted in the Embassy walls being breached and damaged. Were we there, doing things the locals didn't particularly like? It sounds that way. It also seems like the more sustained and successful assaults were conducted by militias, not simple protestors. It also doesn't seem clear whether or not they were just militias, or if they had direct al Qaeda ties.

  3. #28

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by Chadanth View Post
    Why would that be? Libya is littered with weapons.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Benghazi_attack

    Here's what they brought to their "demonstration over a video"
    Rocket-propelled grenades,
    hand grenades,
    assault rifles,
    14.5 mm anti-aircraft machine guns,
    truck mounted artillery,
    diesel canisters,
    mortars

    Sound spontaneous to anyone?

  4. #29

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by stick47 View Post
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Benghazi_attack

    Here's what they brought to their "demonstration over a video"
    Rocket-propelled grenades,
    hand grenades,
    assault rifles,
    14.5 mm anti-aircraft machine guns,
    truck mounted artillery,
    diesel canisters,
    mortars

    Sound spontaneous to anyone?
    Was all of that present at the very beginning? Was a protest for a video, or an anti-CIA gun running rally an opportune moment to conduct the assault that separate elements had planned? Obviously, you were there, or have sources not available to the rest of us, right?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/wo...anted=all&_r=0

  5. #30

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    I don't think anyone knows if the weapons were there at the beginning, Considering the effective use of some of those complex weapons it would make you think they had training in their use which somewhat rules out a spontenanity of the assault. I'll leave you to guess the answer to your sarcastic remark. It's not going to add anything but friction here.

  6. #31

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by stick47 View Post
    I don't think anyone knows if the weapons were there at the beginning, Considering the effective use of some of those complex weapons it would make you think they had training in their use which somewhat rules out a spontenanity of the assault. I'll leave you to guess the answer to your sarcastic remark. It's not going to add anything but friction here.
    I'd just point out that none of the weapons you listed are complex. They're very common in any insurgency, they were common during the war in Libya, they were common in Iraq, they are common in Afghanistan, etc. I'll apologize for my sarcasm, but I don't know what's so hard about saying you don't know. We don't really know the intent or the level of planning that went into the events that night, but no one seems to care. Now the Benghazi committee is investigating an email server, not an insurgent assault on a diplomatic mission and CIA compound. It's politics now, and McCarthy slipped up and accidentally told the truth.

  7. #32

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    ^ Good points all. The irony here is that just like the Bengotcha committe this thread was off tracked by post #2. Not only has McCarthy came clean, but so has the former AF officer(self identified as a Republican) investigating for the committee, as well as GOP Representitve Hanna. Between these gentlemen, the selected leaks of testimony, and it being the longest running investigation in congressional history, it is clear what is going on.

  8. #33

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by Jersey Boss View Post
    ^ Good points all. The irony here is that just like the Bengotcha committe this thread was off tracked by post #2. Not only has McCarthy came clean, but so has the former AF officer(self identified as a Republican) investigating for the committee, as well as GOP Representitve Hanna. Between these gentlemen, the selected leaks of testimony, and it being the longest running investigation in congressional history, it is clear what is going on.
    No doubt the motives of some were to prove Hillary was lying about decisions that directly led to the deaths of 4 government employees under her control. But really, I'm sure you don't think their lives were important enough to investigate. Perhaps the committee might have been a few months further along if Hillary had turned over her email server, as requested, instead of intentionally trying to destroy evidence by erasing everything on it. Why should it take State over a year to turn over an "erased" server? Emails directly related to this incident were turned over only a few weeks ago were requested well over a year ago. Clearly, Hillary is hiding agreat deal, otherwise, she would have immediately turned everything over when the Committee requested it. Chairman Gowdy recently said that "getting" Hillary isn't worth wasting 18 months of his life over. Getting to the truth of why these 4 people died is. The time this investigation has taken is simply another Democrat tactic to stall, hide and deflect the truth. If there was nothing to hide, Hillary and the Dems would have cooperated. Emails, servers and other witnesses would have been delivered immediately and cooperated and this thing would be wrapped up.

  9. #34

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    WASHINGTON -- The top Democrat on the committee investigating the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, called out the committee's chair on Sunday for advancing a claim against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the CIA later proved false.

    Top Dem Slams Benghazi Committee Chair For False Claim Against Hillary Clinton


    This flap came on the heels of another partisan political dispute on Friday, when the Benghazi Committee brought in Huma Abedin, Clinton’s former deputy chief of staff, to testify for no apparent reason. Gowdy didn’t even show up for the hearing, preferring instead to go to Utah for a fundraiser.

    This was followed by another dust-up on “Meet the Press” yesterday, when Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.) tried to repeat a falsehood, only to have Andrea Mitchell fact-check him in real time.
    POMPEO: Well, we have focused on the central failure. We have focused on the security issues. And we will continue, you’ll see lots of questions about that on Thursday. But let me speak to Mr. Blumenthal. Because directly to the security issue, we see now that former Secretary Clinton relied on Mr. Blumenthal for most of her intelligence. That if she wants to rely–

    MITCHELL: That is factually not true.

    POMPEO: No, it is absolutely true.

    MITCHELL: Relied on Mr. Blumenthal for most of her intelligence?

    POMPEO: Ms. Mitchell, take a look at the email trails and you will see–

    MITCHELL: That’s just – I cover the State Department. That is just factually not correct.

    For quite a while, Republicans on the Benghazi Committee were accustomed to making suspect claims and getting away with it. As the GOP’s Benghazi Committee has unraveled, and its credibility has effectively evaporated, the usual falsehoods are facing new scrutiny.

    http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-s...hazi-committee

  10. #35

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    It looks like revealing the Hillary Emails has back fired on the committee.

    Emails reveal Blair's 'deal in blood' with George Bush over Iraq war.

    Blair had given an unqualified pledge to sign up to the conflict a year before the invasion started.

  11. #36

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    wow

  12. #37

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    oops!

  13. #38

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    Is that about Benghazi? I didn't think so. You know FDR really pushed Japan into attacking us at Pearl Harbor.

  14. #39

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by stick47 View Post
    Is that about Benghazi? I didn't think so. You know FDR really pushed Japan into attacking us at Pearl Harbor.
    It came from HRC's emails, apparently, and is interesting.

  15. #40

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by stick47 View Post
    Is that about Benghazi? I didn't think so. You know FDR really pushed Japan into attacking us at Pearl Harbor.
    The only reason this article exists is because of the Benghazi hearings. Colin Powell's emails were still in the email system when Hilary Clinton took over. This is what you call political karma. There are always going to be politicians that witch hunt and end up burning their own party at the stake. This time it was Trey Gowdy who just couldn't let this one go. If the GOP wants to stop the bleeding, I would suggest stopping before you uncover even more war crimes committed by the Bush Administration.

  16. #41

  17. #42

  18. #43

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    Secretary Clinton’s stunning announcement came at 9:00 A.M., followed by the committee chairman Trey Gowdy’s decision to cancel the hearings at 9:04.


    LOL

  19. #44

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    Andy Borowitz writes satire but the point is spot on.

  20. #45

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    I don't see Trey Gowdy as being one of the Repubs out for HRCs blood. He has rarely been seen for months and has openly been critical of the Repubs saying things about committee findings when they have no idea what the committee has found. He said himself that HRC isnt worth wasting 18 months of his life or the crap his family has had to endure. Getting to the bottom of why the 4 died in Benghazi is. DO agree there is smoke/fire and certain Dems are , perhaps, getting nervous and trying to trivialize and attack the commitee before any findings have even come out.

  21. #46

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by mugofbeer View Post
    I don't see Trey Gowdy as being one of the Repubs out for HRCs blood. He has rarely been seen for months and has openly been critical of the Repubs saying things about committee findings when they have no idea what the committee has found. He said himself that HRC isnt worth wasting 18 months of his life or the crap his family has had to endure. Getting to the bottom of why the 4 died in Benghazi is. DO agree there is smoke/fire and certain Dems are , perhaps, getting nervous and trying to trivialize and attack the commitee before any findings have even come out.
    Just what has the committee found? The only time I've seen Gowdy critical of Republicans is when they said the hearings are a scam. Gowdy has leaked info to Politico for some time now.

  22. #47

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by mugofbeer View Post
    I don't see Trey Gowdy as being one of the Repubs out for HRCs blood. He has rarely been seen for months and has openly been critical of the Repubs saying things about committee findings when they have no idea what the committee has found. He said himself that HRC isnt worth wasting 18 months of his life or the crap his family has had to endure. Getting to the bottom of why the 4 died in Benghazi is. DO agree there is smoke/fire and certain Dems are , perhaps, getting nervous and trying to trivialize and attack the commitee before any findings have even come out.
    Oh that's just silly. There have not been similar commissions after similar events. This is all pretty unprecedented.

    This Atlantic Article from way back in April gets it.

    Congress Holds 22 Hearings on the 9/11 Attacks, and 21 on Benghazi - The Atlantic

    At that time, Congress had held 22 hearings on 9-11 and 21 (now more) on Benghazi. For anyone to suggest that this isn't political at this point would take either a heaping dose of intellectual dishonesty or a legendary level of cognitive dissonance.

  23. #48

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by OkieBerto View Post
    It looks like revealing the Hillary Emails has back fired on the committee.

    Emails reveal Blair's 'deal in blood' with George Bush over Iraq war.
    Wait, you meant we worked to build a coalition before the attack? I thought one of the criticisms is that we didn't. Which way do we want it?

  24. #49

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by jerrywall View Post
    Wait, you meant we worked to build a coalition before the attack? I thought one of the criticisms is that we didn't. Which way do we want it?
    No, the fact was they wanted to attack regardless of evidence. In order to strengthen their political gain. Everyone else said no. We broke international law, and we tricked Tony Blair into breaking it as well.

  25. #50

    Default Re: Select Committee on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by OkieBerto View Post
    No, the fact was they wanted to attack regardless of evidence. In order to strengthen their political gain. Everyone else said no. We broke international law, and we tricked Tony Blair into breaking it as well.
    This insinuation you're implying has nothing to do with that memo, which says, literally...

    "Blair will be with us should military actions be necessary".

    Again, shocker.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-25-2013, 05:48 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-20-2009, 10:06 PM
  3. Select 55
    By OKCisOK4me in forum General Food & Drink Topics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-09-2009, 01:29 PM
  4. Newsletter Committee
    By Todd in forum Announcements & Help Desk
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-31-2004, 08:10 AM
  5. Select the sex of your child?
    By Patrick in forum Current Events & Open Topic
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 12-17-2004, 03:33 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO