New Benghazi E-mails Link White House to Doctoring of Talking Points

[Theowl32]

Right-Wing Troll Notification System Test

Yeah, we got it. You do not care. Thank you for proving me right over and over again.

You actually just proved my post right above you.

Manipulating elections. Lying to the electorate deliberately.

"You can keep your plan"



Go ahead and ignore, move on, saying it makes no difference. That way you can keep proving to me that I am 100% right about you.

 

[Vigilante]

 

[TemplarKormac]

Well it appears this thread won't be closed down. I shall simply let it run it's course.

 

[Care4all]

What is it that you think you are going to find Redfish that was illegal? Is this just political posturing and trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill with tax dollars, so that you can rile the base o the republican party? What is the truth you think has not been told that is worth spending MY TAX DOLLARS on? ( that the do nothing congress is going to waste...like the millions they have wasted on these other dog and pony show hearings, and repeal obama care legislative votes, while not one piece of legislation to help we the people has been negotiated with the Senate on and passed and gone on to the President to sign?) You think people will back this dog and pony show, but 'we are on to you'...we know EXACTLY what you partisans are doing with our tax dollars...we're no fools....

I have no fear what so ever on the hearings, because there is no there, there.....15 hearings and nothing, 2000 posts in this thread and nothing, absolutely nothing has been shown that something illegal has taken place...that means NO PROSECUTIONS when said and done and just a waste AGAIN of tax payer's money, for nothin'....and that WILL bite you in the butt, at least it should.....

it's a shame, a real shame for the republican disregard for our tax dollars....you better be praying and praying and praying they can find "something" that they can prosecute this so called ''trial'' with....

I said it before and I will say it again. It is a matter of checks and balances. Now, here are the facts....

1)The Presidents re-election campaign focused strongly on how his policies have made Americans safer. He touted the dismantling of al-Qaeda and the death of Bin Laden.

2) The administration was well aware within 1 hour that the attack was well orchestrated, pre planned with the likely scenario being that it was a terrorist attack.

3) Regardless of item 2, the administration continually IMPLIED that the likely scenario was a video protest gone wrong....and I say implied because they did cover it by saying that there is still an ongoing investigation.....but when you say it "was, in fact, x but there is still an investigation" as Susan Rice did, it is giving the audience reason to believe that the likely scenario is X.....and that was something the administration knew was not the case at the time.

Now, when you add up all 3, it is easy to believe, (not necessarily fact) that the administration said what they said because it was in the best interest of the campaign....not a crime...but unethical.

However......here is where it gets concerning....

The military was not dispatched to assist DURING the attack. Not at minute one....not 5 hours later....military assistance was deemed not the direction to go....

The reason being, as we all know, because the military confirmed that it would have taken no less than 10 hours to get there and the attack ended much sooner than that.

However.......how did anyone AT THAT TIME know how long the attack would last? How did they know it wouldn't last 24 hours?

SO one possibility is that the administration did not want to use the military regardless of the amount of time it took to get there. So now you must ask....Why would he shy away from the military to assist Americans under a military style attack?

With one possibility being.....if the operation failed, and marines were killed.....his campaign would have to deal with "Americans are NOT safer, and you got marines killed"

Now, if, in fact, this is true.....the American people need to know about.....

Why?

To deter the NEXT president and everyone after them from making critical decisions based on political expediency.

Now, sure....you can call me a conspiracist. I am not. It is one possibility and an investigation is necessary to ensure such was not the case.

And....by the way.....we are all fooling ourselves if we don't think that political decisions are made taking political expediency into consideration.

But critical decisions by the President? We need to know he didn't.

Even democrats should care.

She did not say it with absolute certainty, nor implied certainty Jarhead?

ABC’s “This Week”:
JAKE TAPPER: So, first of all, what is the latest you can tell us on who these attackers were at the embassy or at the consulate in Benghazi? We’re hearing that the Libyans have arrested people. They’re saying that some people involved were from outside the country, that there might have even been Al Qaida ties. What’s the latest information?
MS. RICE: Well, Jake, first of all, it’s important to know that there’s an FBI investigation that has begun and will take some time to be completed. That will tell us with certainty what transpired.


But our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous — not a premeditated — response to what had transpired in Cairo. In Cairo, as you know, a few hours earlier, there was a violent protest that was undertaken in reaction to this very offensive video that was disseminated.


We believe that folks in Benghazi, a small number of people came to the embassy to — or to the consulate, rather, to replicate the sort of challenge that was posed in Cairo. And then as that unfolded, it seems to have been hijacked, let us say, by some individual clusters of extremists who came with heavier weapons, weapons that as you know in — in the wake of the revolution in Libya are — are quite common and accessible. And it then evolved from there.

Within a week they came out with more info on it being terrorists Jarhead?

Which was weeks before the election....

Are we not better off with Bin Laden gone Jarhead, or do you think bin Laden didn't matter?

I never felt the President was trying to be some big war hero making our lives safer...I never felt this was his BIG MESSAGE for his running for president....him making us "safer" is NOT something that would drag Democrats out to vote for him and CERTAINLY would not make anyone on the right wing vote for him.... so NO NEED for political posturing for his reelection....as far as putting the USA in good light with spokes people on world wide television, THAT IS WHAT they are suppose to do.

15 hearings jarhead....15.... Why wasn't it addressed and focussed towards finding out what happened that day and why we failed to keep our people alive? Instead we have all these dog and pony shows on what Rice said and when and alll this other plethora of lies like stevens being raped and dragged through the streets and Obama on the golf course while they died, or obama watching the drone while rubbing his hands in glee as watching those 4 being killed?

YOUR right wing side has made this such a circus show, and mudslinging contest....and MADE THIS POLITICAL,

instead of just doing their jobs and finding out where our shortfalls were?

we have so many lies being flung by the Republican politicians it's one hair from toppling Pinocchio from the weight of them...

so you want to prove that Obama and his crew premeditated the murders or were accessories to the murders of those killed by not providing military relief that would have taken 10 hours to get there? WASTE OF tax monies Jarhead, just like their gazillion other hearings since the republicans have had control of Congress....

they are definitely displaying with pride, their "do nothing-ness'' and it ain't pretty....imo.

 

[Redfish]

What is it that you think you are going to find Redfish that was illegal? Is this just political posturing and trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill with tax dollars, so that you can rile the base o the republican party? What is the truth you think has not been told that is worth spending MY TAX DOLLARS on? ( that the do nothing congress is going to waste...like the millions they have wasted on these other dog and pony show hearings, and repeal obama care legislative votes, while not one piece of legislation to help we the people has been negotiated with the Senate on and passed and gone on to the President to sign?) You think people will back this dog and pony show, but 'we are on to you'...we know EXACTLY what you partisans are doing with our tax dollars...we're no fools....

I have no fear what so ever on the hearings, because there is no there, there.....15 hearings and nothing, 2000 posts in this thread and nothing, absolutely nothing has been shown that something illegal has taken place...that means NO PROSECUTIONS when said and done and just a waste AGAIN of tax payer's money, for nothin'....and that WILL bite you in the butt, at least it should.....

it's a shame, a real shame for the republican disregard for our tax dollars....you better be praying and praying and praying they can find "something" that they can prosecute this so called ''trial'' with....

What do they expect to find? The truth. Whether there was criminal activity will depend on knowing the truth about who did what, said what, and when.

Who told Rice to blame the video? why was the decision made? who refused to authorize military assistence to americans under attack? why? Why was there no security at the benghazi complex? who made that call? Where was obama when this was going on? where was HRC? Why was the ambassador in Benghazi instead of Tripoli? Why didn't he have a security detail with him?

Why don't you go read the transcripts of all the other hearings?

And look up Obama's birth certificate while you're at it.

OK, give us a quote from any of the other hearings that answered this question: who made the decision to blame the video and why did you continue to blame the video when you knew it had nothing to do with it?


on the BC, please explain how a poor half breed from hawaii paid tuition at Columbia and Harvard. Explain why his publicist said he was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia. Explain why his Columbia ID card calls him a foreign student. Then explain why those things were done for someone born in Hawaii of american parents.

 

[Jarhead]

What is it that you think you are going to find Redfish that was illegal? Is this just political posturing and trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill with tax dollars, so that you can rile the base o the republican party? What is the truth you think has not been told that is worth spending MY TAX DOLLARS on? ( that the do nothing congress is going to waste...like the millions they have wasted on these other dog and pony show hearings, and repeal obama care legislative votes, while not one piece of legislation to help we the people has been negotiated with the Senate on and passed and gone on to the President to sign?) You think people will back this dog and pony show, but 'we are on to you'...we know EXACTLY what you partisans are doing with our tax dollars...we're no fools....

I have no fear what so ever on the hearings, because there is no there, there.....15 hearings and nothing, 2000 posts in this thread and nothing, absolutely nothing has been shown that something illegal has taken place...that means NO PROSECUTIONS when said and done and just a waste AGAIN of tax payer's money, for nothin'....and that WILL bite you in the butt, at least it should.....

it's a shame, a real shame for the republican disregard for our tax dollars....you better be praying and praying and praying they can find "something" that they can prosecute this so called ''trial'' with....

I said it before and I will say it again. It is a matter of checks and balances. Now, here are the facts....

1)The Presidents re-election campaign focused strongly on how his policies have made Americans safer. He touted the dismantling of al-Qaeda and the death of Bin Laden.

2) The administration was well aware within 1 hour that the attack was well orchestrated, pre planned with the likely scenario being that it was a terrorist attack.

3) Regardless of item 2, the administration continually IMPLIED that the likely scenario was a video protest gone wrong....and I say implied because they did cover it by saying that there is still an ongoing investigation.....but when you say it "was, in fact, x but there is still an investigation" as Susan Rice did, it is giving the audience reason to believe that the likely scenario is X.....and that was something the administration knew was not the case at the time.

Now, when you add up all 3, it is easy to believe, (not necessarily fact) that the administration said what they said because it was in the best interest of the campaign....not a crime...but unethical.

However......here is where it gets concerning....

The military was not dispatched to assist DURING the attack. Not at minute one....not 5 hours later....military assistance was deemed not the direction to go....

The reason being, as we all know, because the military confirmed that it would have taken no less than 10 hours to get there and the attack ended much sooner than that.

However.......how did anyone AT THAT TIME know how long the attack would last? How did they know it wouldn't last 24 hours?

SO one possibility is that the administration did not want to use the military regardless of the amount of time it took to get there. So now you must ask....Why would he shy away from the military to assist Americans under a military style attack?

With one possibility being.....if the operation failed, and marines were killed.....his campaign would have to deal with "Americans are NOT safer, and you got marines killed"

Now, if, in fact, this is true.....the American people need to know about.....

Why?

To deter the NEXT president and everyone after them from making critical decisions based on political expediency.

Now, sure....you can call me a conspiracist. I am not. It is one possibility and an investigation is necessary to ensure such was not the case.

And....by the way.....we are all fooling ourselves if we don't think that political decisions are made taking political expediency into consideration.

But critical decisions by the President? We need to know he didn't.

Even democrats should care.

She did not say it with absolute certainty, nor implied certainty Jarhead?

​

United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice’s comments on the Sunday news shows following the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, have made her a central target for critics of the White House’s handling of the incident, in which four Americans were killed.
At his press conference Wednesday, President Barack Obama defended Ms. Rice, a front-runner for the secretary of state job, in response to fierce Republican attacks.
GOP Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and John McCain of Arizona have suggested Ms. Rice — who appeared on the news programs on Sept. 16 — was part of a political cover up heading into the Nov. 6 presidential election. Mr. Obama has said she was making statements based on intelligence reports she had received.
In the TV interviews, Ms. Rice said the attack resulted from a popular protest against a U.S.-made video, rather than a pre-planned terrorist attack. The administration later said it believed it was a terrorist attack, not a protest that turned violent.
Below are excerpts from the news programs.
ABC’s “This Week”:
JAKE TAPPER: So, first of all, what is the latest you can tell us on who these attackers were at the embassy or at the consulate in Benghazi? We’re hearing that the Libyans have arrested people. They’re saying that some people involved were from outside the country, that there might have even been Al Qaida ties. What’s the latest information?
MS. RICE: Well, Jake, first of all, it’s important to know that there’s an FBI investigation that has begun and will take some time to be completed. That will tell us with certainty what transpired.


But our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous — not a premeditated — response to what had transpired in Cairo. In Cairo, as you know, a few hours earlier, there was a violent protest that was undertaken in reaction to this very offensive video that was disseminated.


We believe that folks in Benghazi, a small number of people came to the embassy to — or to the consulate, rather, to replicate the sort of challenge that was posed in Cairo. And then as that unfolded, it seems to have been hijacked, let us say, by some individual clusters of extremists who came with heavier weapons, weapons that as you know in — in the wake of the revolution in Libya are — are quite common and accessible. And it then evolved from there.

Within a week they came out with more info on it being terrorists Jarhead?

Which was weeks before the election....

Are we not better off with Bin Laden gone Jarhead, or do you think bin Laden didn't matter?

I never felt the President was trying to be some big war hero making our lives safer...I never felt this was his BIG MESSAGE for his running for president....him making us "safer" is NOT something that would drag Democrats out to vote for him and CERTAINLY would not make anyone on the right wing vote for him.... so NO NEED for political posturing for his reelection....as far as putting the USA in good light with spokes people on world wide television, THAT IS WHAT they are suppose to do.

15 hearings jarhead....15.... Why wasn't it addressed and focussed towards finding out what happened that day and why we failed to keep our people alive? Instead we have all these dog and pony shows on what Rice said and when and alll this other plethora of lies like stevens being raped and dragged through the streets and Obama on the golf course while they died, or obama watching the drone while rubbing his hands in glee as watching those 4 being killed?

YOUR right wing side has made this such a circus show, and mudslinging contest....and MADE THIS POLITICAL,

instead of just doing their jobs and finding out where our shortfalls were?

we have so many lies being flung by the Republican politicians it's one hair from toppling Pinocchio from the weight of them...

so you want to prove that Obama and his crew premeditated the murders or were accessories to the murders of those killed by not providing military relief that would have taken 10 hours to get there? WASTE OF tax monies Jarhead, just like their gazillion other hearings since the republicans have had control of Congress....

they are definitely displaying with pride, their "do nothing-ness'' and it ain't pretty....imo.

When you say...."in fact"....it is implying......enough said there.

The fact that you took my post as me NOT thinking the killing of Bin Laden was a good thing....or even thought to question it as you did....

Tells me you are not worthy of my time in this debate. I do not debate with those that try to spin what I say to make me look foolish, unpatriotic, or stupid.

Kind of unlike you Care4All.....was taken aback by it.

 

[Jarhead]

What do they expect to find? The truth. Whether there was criminal activity will depend on knowing the truth about who did what, said what, and when.

Who told Rice to blame the video? why was the decision made? who refused to authorize military assistence to americans under attack? why? Why was there no security at the benghazi complex? who made that call? Where was obama when this was going on? where was HRC? Why was the ambassador in Benghazi instead of Tripoli? Why didn't he have a security detail with him?

Why don't you go read the transcripts of all the other hearings?

And look up Obama's birth certificate while you're at it.

OK, give us a quote from any of the other hearings that answered this question: who made the decision to blame the video and why did you continue to blame the video when you knew it had nothing to do with it?


on the BC, please explain how a poor half breed from hawaii paid tuition at Columbia and Harvard. Explain why his publicist said he was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia. Explain why his Columbia ID card calls him a foreign student. Then explain why those things were done for someone born in Hawaii of american parents.

Better question....

the military was not dispatched because it would have taken 12 hours to get there.
How did they know the siege would not last at least 12 hours?

The real issue is...."were decisions made on how to handle the situation taking into consideration political expediency"

 

[tinydancer]

I see the liberal trolls are out in full force this morning.

Let's get this straight here. For 18 months the administration has been stonewalling Congress.

This is called "obstruction". It is a serious offense. This is why the Select Committee has been formed. All the latest information that has been made available is only due to Judicial Watch suing the WH et al for information and actually winning in court.

Now you can cheer your Cheeeeeeeeecago on the Potomac punks in the White House, but obstructing a Congressional investigation is according to all I have read a criminal offense.

Much like Lerner. She has been found in criminal contempt of Congress.

 

[tinydancer]

Why don't you go read the transcripts of all the other hearings?

And look up Obama's birth certificate while you're at it.

OK, give us a quote from any of the other hearings that answered this question: who made the decision to blame the video and why did you continue to blame the video when you knew it had nothing to do with it?


on the BC, please explain how a poor half breed from hawaii paid tuition at Columbia and Harvard. Explain why his publicist said he was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia. Explain why his Columbia ID card calls him a foreign student. Then explain why those things were done for someone born in Hawaii of american parents.

Better question....

the military was not dispatched because it would have taken 12 hours to get there.
How did they know the siege would not last at least 12 hours?

The real issue is...."were decisions made on how to handle the situation taking into consideration political expediency"

My burning question is "who the hell authorized a Libyan militia to provide security for the Benghazi Consulate?"

You know. The militia that never showed up till the morning after. Sheesh. I want that person whoever they are to be wearing orange.

 

[Theowl32]

What do they expect to find? The truth. Whether there was criminal activity will depend on knowing the truth about who did what, said what, and when.

Who told Rice to blame the video? why was the decision made? who refused to authorize military assistence to americans under attack? why? Why was there no security at the benghazi complex? who made that call? Where was obama when this was going on? where was HRC? Why was the ambassador in Benghazi instead of Tripoli? Why didn't he have a security detail with him?

Why don't you go read the transcripts of all the other hearings?

And look up Obama's birth certificate while you're at it.

OK, give us a quote from any of the other hearings that answered this question: who made the decision to blame the video and why did you continue to blame the video when you knew it had nothing to do with it?


on the BC, please explain how a poor half breed from hawaii paid tuition at Columbia and Harvard. Explain why his publicist said he was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia. Explain why his Columbia ID card calls him a foreign student. Then explain why those things were done for someone born in Hawaii of american parents.

I wonder why we know more about Thomas Jefferson's education than Obama's.

Thats right. What difference does it make?

Would have been pretty simple if we had a plethora of classmates that went to school with him when he was a kid go to the media and say....."I went to school with him."

How many did we hear from?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why don't you go read the transcripts of all the other hearings?

And look up Obama's birth certificate while you're at it.

OK, give us a quote from any of the other hearings that answered this question: who made the decision to blame the video and why did you continue to blame the video when you knew it had nothing to do with it?


on the BC, please explain how a poor half breed from hawaii paid tuition at Columbia and Harvard. Explain why his publicist said he was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia. Explain why his Columbia ID card calls him a foreign student. Then explain why those things were done for someone born in Hawaii of american parents.

Better question....

the military was not dispatched because it would have taken 12 hours to get there.
How did they know the siege would not last at least 12 hours?

The real issue is...."were decisions made on how to handle the situation taking into consideration political expediency"

Yeah and while you're at it why wasn't Eisenhower better prepared in the Ardennes in December 1944?

Seriously, do you honestly believe that the Obama administration thought it would serve them better politically if Americans were killed in Libya, instead of being saved?

You people are making arguments that are clinically insane.

 

[rondog690]

What is expected is to find out why the admin. Lied about 4 dead americans. How would you feel if they were a member of your family. Would you want to know?



Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Redfish]

OK, give us a quote from any of the other hearings that answered this question: who made the decision to blame the video and why did you continue to blame the video when you knew it had nothing to do with it?


on the BC, please explain how a poor half breed from hawaii paid tuition at Columbia and Harvard. Explain why his publicist said he was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia. Explain why his Columbia ID card calls him a foreign student. Then explain why those things were done for someone born in Hawaii of american parents.

Better question....

the military was not dispatched because it would have taken 12 hours to get there.
How did they know the siege would not last at least 12 hours?

The real issue is...."were decisions made on how to handle the situation taking into consideration political expediency"

Yeah and while you're at it why wasn't Eisenhower better prepared in the Ardennes in December 1944?

Seriously, do you honestly believe that the Obama administration thought it would serve them better politically if Americans were killed in Libya, instead of being saved?

You people are making arguments that are clinically insane.

it appears that that is exactly what the obama admin thought. let them die, then blame the video, then win the election and forget about it.

 

[tinydancer]

OK, give us a quote from any of the other hearings that answered this question: who made the decision to blame the video and why did you continue to blame the video when you knew it had nothing to do with it?


on the BC, please explain how a poor half breed from hawaii paid tuition at Columbia and Harvard. Explain why his publicist said he was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia. Explain why his Columbia ID card calls him a foreign student. Then explain why those things were done for someone born in Hawaii of american parents.

Better question....

the military was not dispatched because it would have taken 12 hours to get there.
How did they know the siege would not last at least 12 hours?

The real issue is...."were decisions made on how to handle the situation taking into consideration political expediency"

Yeah and while you're at it why wasn't Eisenhower better prepared in the Ardennes in December 1944?

Seriously, do you honestly believe that the Obama administration thought it would serve them better politically if Americans were killed in Libya, instead of being saved?

You people are making arguments that are clinically insane.

How was it insane to ask Panetta why no help was sent immediately? He answered "it would have taken too long".

This is his testimony on the record.

So how is it insane to then to follow up and ask Panetta how he could have concluded that "it would have taken too long"?

When one doesn't know in advance how long the terrorist attack would last.

 

[mudwhistle]

Why don't you go read the transcripts of all the other hearings?

And look up Obama's birth certificate while you're at it.

OK, give us a quote from any of the other hearings that answered this question: who made the decision to blame the video and why did you continue to blame the video when you knew it had nothing to do with it?


on the BC, please explain how a poor half breed from hawaii paid tuition at Columbia and Harvard. Explain why his publicist said he was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia. Explain why his Columbia ID card calls him a foreign student. Then explain why those things were done for someone born in Hawaii of american parents.

Better question....

the military was not dispatched because it would have taken 12 hours to get there.
How did they know the siege would not last at least 12 hours?

The real issue is...."were decisions made on how to handle the situation taking into consideration political expediency"

Not even sending them was a gutless move, but if you can't protect them why risk having them there?

 

[rondog690]

It was a decision based on what would benefit obamas reelection because he had just got done saying alquida is on the run


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Jarhead]

OK, give us a quote from any of the other hearings that answered this question: who made the decision to blame the video and why did you continue to blame the video when you knew it had nothing to do with it?


on the BC, please explain how a poor half breed from hawaii paid tuition at Columbia and Harvard. Explain why his publicist said he was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia. Explain why his Columbia ID card calls him a foreign student. Then explain why those things were done for someone born in Hawaii of american parents.

Better question....

the military was not dispatched because it would have taken 12 hours to get there.
How did they know the siege would not last at least 12 hours?

The real issue is...."were decisions made on how to handle the situation taking into consideration political expediency"

Yeah and while you're at it why wasn't Eisenhower better prepared in the Ardennes in December 1944?

Seriously, do you honestly believe that the Obama administration thought it would serve them better politically if Americans were killed in Libya, instead of being saved?

You people are making arguments that are clinically insane.

Comparing Eisenhower in the Ardennes is childish for nowhere did I say anything about not being prepared.

I questioned how the administration knew the siege would last less time than it would take to get the military there.

As for this line....

Seriously, do you honestly believe that the Obama administration thought it would serve them better politically if Americans were killed in Libya, instead of being saved?

I believe it is possible that he weighed the affects of the following scenarios on his campaign...

1) What if I send in Marines and they are killed...I will lose some of my supporters
2) If I send the military into a sovereign nation, how will that look to my base

You see...here is the difference between you and I on this subject...

I believe when there is conflicting information and contradictions as it pertains to the executive branch, congress needs to look into it. Seeing as emails were not offered up and this was found out, congress has the responsibility to find out "why".....regardless of the party of the President.

You believe Democrats NEVER do things unethically...NEVER make mistakes....NEVER lie.

 

[mudwhistle]

OK, give us a quote from any of the other hearings that answered this question: who made the decision to blame the video and why did you continue to blame the video when you knew it had nothing to do with it?


on the BC, please explain how a poor half breed from hawaii paid tuition at Columbia and Harvard. Explain why his publicist said he was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia. Explain why his Columbia ID card calls him a foreign student. Then explain why those things were done for someone born in Hawaii of american parents.

Better question....

the military was not dispatched because it would have taken 12 hours to get there.
How did they know the siege would not last at least 12 hours?

The real issue is...."were decisions made on how to handle the situation taking into consideration political expediency"

Yeah and while you're at it why wasn't Eisenhower better prepared in the Ardennes in December 1944?

Seriously, do you honestly believe that the Obama administration thought it would serve them better politically if Americans were killed in Libya, instead of being saved?

You people are making arguments that are clinically insane.

This illustrates that Obama is unprepared, gutless, and could care less about those he puts in harm's way.

 

[plant]

It was a decision based on what would benefit obamas reelection because he had just got done saying alquida is on the run


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Bullshit ! Pick a better candidate next time .

 

[rondog690]

Thats easy. Anyone else


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com