U.S. Ambassador Killed Over Anti-Islam Movie - Page 23 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-28-2013, 10:55 PM   #331
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 03:24 AM
Indy, you left your web cam on, brother

__________________

__________________
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2013, 11:47 PM   #332
War Child
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 706
Local Time: 01:24 AM
Republicans want so desperately to find some wrongdoing on the part of the administration here. And it sounds like mistakes were indeed made. But this barely rises to the level of a controversy, let alone the "bigger than watergate" scandal they wanted it to be.
__________________

__________________
LPU2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2013, 02:00 AM   #333
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 02:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
You should have watched 60 Minutes last night.
I watched it. Pretty damning w/r/t to an incompetent reaction.

Is the "scandal" the incompetence or the fact that they covered up the incompetence because of the election? And what can be done about it now?

Just asking the questions. What, in your mind, is the big issue here?
__________________
U2DMfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2013, 12:28 PM   #334
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,238
Local Time: 02:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jive Turkey View Post
Indy, you left your web cam on, brother

Enough with the insults, JT.
__________________
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2013, 09:24 PM   #335
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 02:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2DMfan View Post
I watched it. Pretty damning w/r/t to an incompetent reaction.

Is the "scandal" the incompetence or the fact that they covered up the incompetence because of the election? And what can be done about it now?

Just asking the questions. What, in your mind, is the big issue here?
Both but I certainly realize that no president can anticipate the terrible things that can happen when you have a presence in the shitholes of the world (Blackhawk down for Clinton, Marine base for Reagan, etc).

The scandal is the coverup (video protest), a covert CIA operation AND the president's lack of accountability.
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2013, 11:09 AM   #336
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Standing on the shore, facing east.
Posts: 18,890
Local Time: 03:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
You should have watched 60 Minutes last night.
60 Minutes Benghazi Report Takes A Huge Credibility Hit | Blog | Media Matters for America

Quote:
The Benghazi "witness" featured in a CBS 60 Minutes report that galvanized new discussion of the administration's response to the attack previously said he never got near the diplomatic compound on the night of the attack, according to a report from The Washington Post.
__________________
PhilsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2013, 10:39 AM   #337
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 03:24 AM
time to move on.

Quote:
CBS correspondent Lara Logan apologized to viewers Friday for a disputed "60 Minutes" report on the Benghazi attack and said the program would issue a correction.

"Today the truth is that we made a mistake," Logan said on "CBS This Morning."

At the center of the dispute is Dylan Davies, a British security contractor who under a pseudonym gave "60 Minutes" a heroic account of his involvement in the Sept. 11, 2012 attacks on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya. After the program aired, the Washington Post and the New York Times discovered contradictions between the account Davies gave "60 Minutes" and the descriptions of the attack the contractor gave to his employer and to the FBI.

Those reports raised questions about whether Davies was actually present at the Benghazi compound on the night of the attack, casting doubt onto the contractor's credibility as a source. CBS issued a statement Thursday that said the network had learned of "new information" undercutting Davies' account and was looking into the matter.

Logan told viewers that the program took Davies' vetting "very seriously," but that the contractor "misled" them.

"We were wrong to put him on air," Logan said.

"We will apologize to our viewers and we will correct the record on our broadcast on Sunday night," she added.

CBS Reporter On '60 Minutes' Benghazi Program: 'We Made A Mistake' (VIDEO)
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2013, 01:22 PM   #338
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 03:24 AM
You shouldn't have watched 60 Minutes the other night
__________________
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2013, 10:46 AM   #339
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 03:24 AM
putting this to bed:

Quote:
(CNN) -- A New York Times report on the September 11, 2012, attack that killed four Americans -- including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens -- in Benghazi, Libya, calls into question much of what Republicans accusing the Obama administration of a cover-up have said about the incident.

The three main points of contention have been whether the attack was planned, whether it was sparked by an anti-Muslim video, and whether al Qaeda was involved.

However, the Times says, the administration's version, focusing on outrage over the inflammatory video, and first delivered by then-ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice on Sunday morning talk shows five days later, isn't exactly right, either.

"The reality in Benghazi was different, and murkier, than either of those story lines suggests. Benghazi was not infiltrated by Al Qaeda, but nonetheless contained grave local threats to American interests. The attack does not appear to have been meticulously planned, but neither was it spontaneous or without warning signs," according to David D. Kirkpatrick's article in the Times.

It's a conclusion that CNN has drawn in its previous reporting.

The attack at the Benghazi diplomatic compound has become a political flashpoint in a long-running battle between the White House and Republicans, who accuse the Obama administration of not bolstering security before the attack, of botching the response to it and of misleading the public for political gain less than two months before the November election.

The GOP suggests the administration removed specific terror references and stuck to the explanation advanced by Rice -- later proved untrue -- that the attack was the result of spontaneous demonstrations over the U.S.-produced film "Innocence of Muslims," which contained scenes some Muslims considered blasphemous.

The White House and its allies in Congress have said any confusion and conflicting information in the early hours and days after the assault stemmed from the "fog of war," not any deliberate effort to mislead the public.

The White House had no comment when CNN requested a response to the Times article.

After reading it, Obama's former national security spokesman Tommy Vietor unleashed a series of tweets, including these, condemning Republicans who've spent more than a year lambasting and investigating the Beghazi incident:

-- "If Rs spent 1/50th as much time as @ddknyt learning what really happened in #Benhazi, we could have avoided months of disgusting demagoguery."

-- "Republicans inflated the role of al Qaeda in #Bengazi to attack Obama's CT record. They were wrong, and handed our enemy a propaganda win."

-- "Credit to @ddknyt but also disconcerting that his #Benghazi article offered more insight into what happened than all Congressional hearings."


The Times' article, which includes interviews with several Libyan militia leaders who helped bring down Col. Moammar Gadhafi's dictatorship in 2012, says no evidence supports speculation about al Qaeda's involvement in the Benghazi attack. To the contrary, the Times reports that the diverse and fractured opposition militias, many of whom were at least somewhat friendly toward U.S. interests, most likely contributed to the attack.

That dovetails with the findings of the State Department investigative panel report on Benghazi.

"The Benghazi attacks also took place in a context in which the global terrorism threat as most often represented by al Qaeda (AQ) is fragmenting and increasingly devolving to local affiliates and other actors who share many of AQ's aims, including violent anti-Americanism, without necessarily being organized or operated under direct AQ command and control," the report said.

The Times report zeroes in on militia leader Abu Khattala as well as the like-minded Islamist militia Ansar al Sharia.

In a recent interview with CNN's Arwa Damon, Khattala acknowledged being at the Benghazi mission after the attack but denied any involvement.

Damon spent two hours interviewing Khattala at a coffee shop at a well-known hotel in Benghazi. He allowed Damon to use an audio recorder to tape the conversation, but refused to appear on camera.

Khattala's narrative of the events that night was sometimes unclear and, at times, seemed to be contradictory, Damon said.

He admitted to being at the compound the night of the attack, but denied any involvement in the violence.

Asked about allegations he may have masterminded the attack, Khattala and two of the men he brought with him to the interview "burst out laughing," Damon said.

Khattala told CNN that he had not been questioned by either Libyan authorities or the FBI.

The militia leader was one of those whom U.S. prosecutors charged in the attacks, as CNN first reported.

Ansar al Sharia is more a label than an organization, one that's been adopted by conservative Salafist groups across the Arab world. The name means, simply, "Partisans of Islamic Law."

In Benghazi, Ansar al Sharia was one of many groups that filled the vacuum of authority following the overthrow of Gadhafi.

The group's central belief is that all authority is derived from the Prophet Mohammed, that democracy is un-Islamic and that other branches of Islam, such as the Sufi, are heretical.

There do not appear to be organizational links between Ansar al Sharia and al Qaeda, but there is solidarity.

Among the group's Benghazi membership is Mohammed al-Zahawi, who fought to overthrow Gadhafi and praised al Qaeda leader Ayman al Zawahiri in a BBC interview. He said al Qaeda's statements "help galvanize the Muslim nation, maintain its dignity and pride."

A different Ansar al Sharia is affiliated with al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula in Yemen, and budding franchises are said to exist in Tunisia, Morocco and Egypt.

New York Times report casts doubt on al Qaeda involvement in Benghazi - CNN.com

my takeaway: we have no idea what really goes on in these very complex societies, and we should think very carefully about messing with them.

and there is no low to which the GOP will not sink to smear this particular president.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2014, 01:00 PM   #340
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 02:24 AM
Down the Times’ Bengahzi Rabbit Hole | National Review Online
Quote:
As for the Times’ exculpation of al-Qaeda, it doesn’t even comport with the Grey Lady’s own prior reporting. It is, more to the point, a continuation of what we’ve been arguing in this space for over a decade now: What knits together the global jihad is Islamic-supremacist ideology — mainstream Middle Eastern Islam, directly traceable to Koranic scripture. The organizational niceties and shifting loyalties of jihadist groups are a sideshow — including what it has become fashionable to call “core al-Qaeda” and its expanding array of franchises, tentacles, and wannabes.

So why do I say, “Mission Accomplished”? Because the objective of Kirkpatrick’s novella is not to persuade; it is to shrink the parameters of newsworthy inquiry to a punctilious debate over nonsense: The cockamamie trailer and the dizzying jihadist org chart.
We still don't know what the president was doing the night of the attacks do we?
We still haven't heard from survivors have we?
We still don't know what the CIA and the ambassador were even doing in Benghazi do we?
The only person "brought to justice" one year plus is the boneheaded producer of that video.

It's amazing to me what lengths the apologists will go to protect this particular president.
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2014, 11:07 PM   #341
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,238
Local Time: 02:24 AM
The problem with the cries of "CONSPIRACY!!!!" is that, no matter what evidence is shown to refute the claims, it is always, always dismissed. Every tree that's been barked up has proven fruitless.

Much as with the birther movement, there's just no there there.

__________________
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2014, 05:31 PM   #342
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
the iron horse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: in a glass of CheerWine
Posts: 3,251
Local Time: 03:24 AM
It's amazing to me what lengths the apologists will go to protect this particular president. ~INDY500

Not only the president, but now I think they are now trying
to patch their story for Hillary's run.
__________________
the iron horse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2014, 08:39 PM   #343
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 02:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the iron horse View Post
It's amazing to me what lengths the apologists will go to protect this particular president. ~INDY500

Not only the president, but now I think they are now trying
to patch their story for Hillary's run.
Exactly right, imagine a comprehensive 7,500 word story on the murder of an ambassador and attack on a U.S. embassy in Benghazi that mentions Sec of State Hillary Clinton exactly... zero times.
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2014, 10:09 PM   #344
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 03:24 AM
U.S. Ambassador Killed Over Anti-Islam Movie

Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
Exactly right, imagine a comprehensive 7,500 word story on the murder of an ambassador and attack on a U.S. embassy in Benghazi that mentions Sec of State Hillary Clinton exactly... zero times.


This non-story would have been dropped months ago ... If not for Hillary and the GOP's need to try to damage her for 2016.

It didn't work against O (and was quite embarrassing for Mittens) and it won't work against HRC. If she runs.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2014, 11:36 AM   #345
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 02:24 AM
No comment on the Senate report? Not surprising since it isn't new to anyone other than NY Times readers.
http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/b...4/benghazi.pdf

The House report did provide this revelation:
Quote:
Minutes after the American consulate in Benghazi came under assault on Sept. 11, 2012, the nation's top civilian and uniformed defense officials -- headed for a previouslyscheduled Oval Office session with President Obama -- were informed that the event was a "terrorist attack," declassified documents show. The new evidence raises the question of why the top military men, one of whom was a member of the president's Cabinet, allowed him and other senior Obama administration officials to press a false narrative of the Benghazi attacks for two weeks afterward.
So Obama knew 90 minutes after the attack but he and Hillary pushed the video narrative for weeks.
__________________

__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com