White House Comes Clean: No Protest Outside Libya Consulate

page: 13
74
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 





Blame the CIA Blame the GOP for not budgeting enough protection


thats what they will try to do, except the fact that they testified that they DID have the resources to do it.......

Where does that leave their argument?

(that was rhetorical, I already know youre thinking what im thinking)




posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by karen61057
reply to post by Destinyone
 


Hillary is retiring at the end of this term. She has no plans on the white house in 2016.

She should try.
I don't like her, so she is a sure bet to win.
I'd take her over Obama in a heartbeat.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Destinyone

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst
reply to post by beezzer
 

Grasping at straws? The CIA sent the memo -- they are the people INFORMING the White House.

I'm not grasping at straws, I'm merely stating what was fact and you are pretending to know something about SECRECY with encrypted emails -- which has nothing to do with anything.

The point is, the White House did make a mistake by trusting the CIA. Now they could be pulling a "Bush" and asking the CIA to lie to them. You are welcome to speculate with your fancy knowledge of this thing called "encryption."


Since you are claiming everything you are posting as *fact*....I can only assume you hold a high position in the White House.....You sound like you've practiced with the same handlers Jay Carney does.

Des


What FACTS are available to anyone? The White House is investigating this as are other groups. MOST of the revelations have come from the press -- yet Republicans blame the confusion on the White House -- which could be true since they didn't make a lot of official statements.

Here's where I get this "insider information;"

LINK
a concurrent CIA memo that was obtained by The Associated Press cited intelligence suggesting the demonstrations in Benghazi "were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo" and "evolved into a direct assault" on the diplomatic posts by "extremists."


Originally, that came from the AP - and I don't know WHO they got it from.

I'm not here to defend Obama -- just put snarky little know-nothings in their place. You've brought ZERO facts to this, merely repeated nonsense and speculation from the "usual suspects."



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 


What's tragic is that Obama was probably hoping to counter the last debate on domestic policy with his foreign policy.

He can't "own" the domestic mess.

He (now) can't own foreign policy.

Of course it's ________________ 's fault.

(I'll let Obama fill in the blank)



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by kman420
 


It was not the killing of Kadaffy Duck that sparked this. Those people wanted him out.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst


Here's where I get this "insider information;"

LINK
a concurrent CIA memo that was obtained by The Associated Press cited intelligence suggesting the demonstrations in Benghazi "were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo" and "evolved into a direct assault" on the diplomatic posts by "extremists."


Originally, that came from the AP - and I don't know WHO they got it from.



So a "concurrent" CIA memo, meaning that along with all the other info, the Obama administration CHOSE to believe this one memo over all other data, just so they could nail some guy who made a Youtube vid slamming Islam.

Oh lordy.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by beezzer
 




Blame the CIA Blame the GOP for not budgeting enough protection


thats what they will try to do, except the fact that they testified that they DID have the resources to do it.......

Where does that leave their argument?

(that was rhetorical, I already know youre thinking what im thinking)


It's pre-ELECTION time, there is about ten words coming from the White House and about 30,000 wild speculations and misinformations coming from every pundit that can be beat out of the woodwork. It's really annoying that the people who feigned moral outrage on numerous occasions, once again get a mic to get furious about the death of 4 Americans they could probably give a rats ass about. Nor do they care what went on while they push rumors and innuendo merely designed to make the situation look worse.

The statement that the "Administration" wanted to reduce security, comes from "some source" telling someone at a newspaper, and that's based on some "prior threat" warning that is as reliable as the original "protest that led to the attack." Remember when we were all sure this was about an anti-Mohammed video on YouTube? I remember that -- and what I said at the time is; "the first story you hear from the middle east is usually a lie." And of course, I was right.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:36 PM
link   

The Toad has spoken .....

And they STILL say the "Video" is in play




TAPPER: President Obama shortly after the attacks told “60 Minutes” that regarding Romney’s response to the attack, specifically in Egypt, the president said that Romney has a tendency to shoot first and aim later. Given the fact that so much was made out of the video that apparently had absolutely nothing to do with the attack on Benghazi, that there wasn’t even a protest outside the Benghazi post, didn’t President Obama shoot first and aim later?

CARNEY: First of all, Jake, I think your assessment about what we know now is not complete. But I would simply say that –

TAPPER: What part are you talking — because I’m just going by what the State Department said yesterday, what –

CARNEY: There is no question that in the region, including in Cairo, there were demonstrations reacting to the –

TAPPER: I’m talking about Benghazi –

CARNEY: — the release of that video. And I will leave it to those who are testifying on the Hill to talk about, as they are –

TAPPER: The State Department said yesterday there was no protests.

CARNEY: That — that’s not what you said, though. You — there were — there were –

TAPPER: I’m talking about in Benghazi.

CARNEY: Right.

TAPPER: I’m not –

CARNEY: I’m not disputing that there was a protest. But what we said at the time is our intelligence community assessed that the attack began spontaneously following protests earlier that day at our embassy in Cairo. OK?
Again, this is a moving picture, and people who on the night of an attack or the day after claim they know all the facts without making clear that what we know is based on preliminary information aren’t being straight, and they’re in some cases trying to politicize a situation that should not be politicized. I think that’s what the president was getting at. And I think many other people felt the same way.

This president’s focus has been from day one on going after those who killed four Americans, on protecting the thousands of diplomatic personnel we have around the world and those facilities that they work in, and on making sure that a thorough investigation is conducted to find out what happened and look — that looks into our security posture both in Benghazi and elsewhere.

TAPPER: I’d have to go back and read the transcript, but I remember both President Obama and Secretary Clinton talking about the video in the remarks in the ceremony when Ambassador Stevens’ remains were returned to this country. Maybe I have — maybe I’m remembering that wrong, but it seems to me there was a lot of talk about the videos in relation to the tragedy that unfolded.

CARNEY: I don’t have anything new for you about what the assessments are of how the attack came about, what the role of protests and demonstrations in other parts of the region were. I will point you to those who are testifying on Capitol Hill about this very matter as we speak.

White House Ignores State Department Intelligence; Refuses To Rule Out YouTube Video As Cause For Benghazi Attack


"White House Asked Isn't Obama The One Who Shot First, Aimed Later on Libya?"



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy

Originally posted by karen61057
reply to post by Destinyone
 


Hillary is retiring at the end of this term. She has no plans on the white house in 2016.

She should try.
I don't like her, so she is a sure bet to win.
I'd take her over Obama in a heartbeat.


I've always seen her trying for the position of President. She sweats desire for it, always has. The closest she has gotten is through her philandering hubby. She will go for it in 2016, with her hubby's backing. He *owes* her ya know.....She's also the Darling of the Dem Party.

Hence her releasing the State Dept. Report today that has set wild fires through the WH. She is playing it safe...distancing herself from this giant pile-o-poo. Placing it back on Obama's plate, where it belongs.

Des


edit on 10-10-2012 by Destinyone because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 


Did you watch the hearing at all?

Its not SOME source...........

Its direct information , testified to under penalty of PERJURY that this information was given out, this isnt some news source this is coming from, this is coming DIRECTLY from the people that gave them the information........ SPECIFICALLY TO RELEASE TO THE PUBLIC IN A STATEMENT

This isnt about an election year, this is about truth and a cover up and it appears theres more of the later and less of the former.......

They are pulling Rice in to conduct an interview under oath to find out what information she was told and who told it to her, to make damn sure that they did infact tell her this information to release....
edit on 10-10-2012 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho
I've never been a big Kucinich fan but he just railed them in the hearing and continues to rail them

I've always liked him. Didn't always agree with him. But I've always liked him.
Now if you want REAL transparency .. he's probably the best bet for that.



Originally posted by Destinyone
Just saw a vid clip of Romney stating he personally knew one of the Marines murdered at our Embassy in Libya.

I saw that. I literally cried. (and with Sjogrens, it's not easy to produce tears).


Originally posted by RealSpoke
What was the point of lying? So stupid.

The Obama administration .. for some strange reason .. as an aversion to actually admitting when a radical islamic terrorist strike happens. They do it over and over. It's the strangest thing.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


So lets timeline this.

Video comes out.

A few weeks later (9/11) some protests in Cairo occur.

Because of a protest in Egypt, a "spontaneous" planned attack occurs in Libya.

Did I get that right?

Because before the video came out, I ate a BLT in public.

So;
I eat a BLT
Video comes out.
Protests on 9/11 happen in Egypt
(causing)
A planned Al Qeida attack on embassy staff in Libya.

(So if I would have had the turkey on rye, this would have never had happened!)



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst


Here's where I get this "insider information;"

LINK
a concurrent CIA memo that was obtained by The Associated Press cited intelligence suggesting the demonstrations in Benghazi "were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo" and "evolved into a direct assault" on the diplomatic posts by "extremists."


Originally, that came from the AP - and I don't know WHO they got it from.



So a "concurrent" CIA memo, meaning that along with all the other info, the Obama administration CHOSE to believe this one memo over all other data, just so they could nail some guy who made a Youtube vid slamming Islam.

Oh lordy.


I'm not familiar enough with this situation -- are you saying the ADMINISTRATION made this claim, or did you hear this on the TV and just decided they said it?

Their failing here, if anything, seems that they trust Republicans and the CIA too much...

.. but why don't you QUOTE the administration. I kind of got curious myself, so I LOOKED IT UP;
LINK



September 12 -- President Barack Obama:
"The United States condemns in the strongest terms this outrageous and shocking attack. ... No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation."
September 12 -- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton:
"We are working to determine the precise motivations and methods of those who carried out this assault. Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior, along with the protest that took place at our embassy in Cairo yesterday, as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. America's commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear -- there is no justification for this, none."
September 12 -- White House spokesman Jay Carney, in response to questions about whether the attack was planned:
"It's too early for us to make that judgment. I think -- I know that this is being investigated, and we're working with the Libyan government to investigate the incident. So I would not want to speculate on that at this time."
September 13 -- Jay Carney:
"The protests we're seeing around the region are in reaction to this movie. They are not directly in reaction to any policy of the United States or the government of the United States or the people of the United States."



The rest of the statements are NOT from the Administration, but some media outlet saying what "someone told them." Which I find useless and annoying and not worth bothering with.

Note that people are getting confused here between the situation in Libya, and the protests in Cairo -- they aren't the same event. Hillary Clinton states that we object to terrorism and we are investigating. Carney does say that they protests MIGHT have been inspired by the movie (probably not) -- but that's about Cairo -- his statement about Libya is;


"It's too early for us to make that judgment. I think -- I know that this is being investigated, and we're working with the Libyan government to investigate the incident. So I would not want to speculate on that at this time."



So you are misreading or putting words in their mouth. The White House has only stated "it is looking into the matter." Maybe you need to track the source of your opinions better, or you've got ANOTHER source for what the White House said that I haven't seen.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 


Who told Susan Rice to go out and blame the video?

You answer that, you'll find who to blame for the deaths.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


They are adverse to making a claim when they don't KNOW who attacked the Libyan embassy and for what reason. Merely adding to the rant that "Muzlims is bad" solves absolutely nothing. People who had a hard time telling the difference between Obama and muslim extremists have lost their credibility in the "let's listen to this bright idea" department.

We've killed thousands of people since 9/11 with drones, bombs and troops -- maybe THAT has something to do with Americans getting attacked now and then. Before we can chalk this up to "Muzlims is evil and violent" we have to sift out all the normal "blow back" for what our actions precipitate.

If adults stay in charge of our security, we won't be solving this by blowing up everyone with a towel on their head as so many "clear thinking patriots" seem to suggest from their years of experience watching Chuck Norris films.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 


Who told Susan Rice to go out and blame the video?

You answer that, you'll find who to blame for the deaths.


Golf clap, thats exactly what ive been trying to explain......and it was KENNEDY and his people that provided them with the information to release, theyve said as much in the hearing.....

Why people are commenting on this w out familiarizng themselves with what happened in the hearing is beyond me......

A LOT of things came out in that today........and there is more to come



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 

You are wrong...again....sigh....

You are hand picking googled quotes to fit into your daydream.....totally ignoring the fact that Rice, 5, count 'em, five times, stated on video for posterity, this was all because of the video. Not a planned terrorist attack. so did Jay Carney.

Sheesh...your deprogramming will take years....

Des



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:50 PM
link   
and btw, Mormonism is definitely not Christianity.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Destinyone
See what happens when you blow off your daily security briefings to play golf...tsk tsk tsk...

Man .. that is so true. He doesn't show up to the majority of his security briefings and he refuses to say 'muslim terror attack' when they happen. (Fort Hood was supposedly 'workplace violence' according to him). Now ask yourself .. why does he not bother with the majority of his security briefings and why does he not want to call a muslim terrorist attack what it is .... I have a few answers to those questions .... and they aren't PC.


Originally posted by karen61057
Hillary is retiring at the end of this term. She has no plans on the white house in 2016.

That was funny!



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 




Yeah Dennis Kucinich was awesome. Too bad republicans in Ohio redistricted his area to get him out of office and have one less democratic rep for the state.


The Obama administration .. for some strange reason .. as an aversion to actually admitting when a radical islamic terrorist strike happens. They do it over and over.


When did it happen "over and over"?





new topics

top topics



 
74
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join