White House calls Benghazi 'phony' scandal, as lawmakers seek answers on probe

[Wehrwolfen]

Try as you guys might, Benghazi is not even close to the scandal that is Iraq. Tens of thousands of Americans dead and maimed and Republicans care about 4 in Libya? Really?

IDIOT alert. Benghazi is ten times worse. The lying left would love the fiasco to go away so they deny it. That is what happened to your brain, you denied you had one long enough it left.

The Progressive Left thinks DE-NIAL is a river in Egypt.

 

[Wehrwolfen]

White House calls Benghazi 'phony' scandal...

Correct, it is a phony ‘scandal’ because there is no evidence of any criminal conduct on the part of any government official.

Republicans and partisan conservatives have sought to contrive a controversy where none exists for purely partisan reasons, particularly with regard to the right’s failed attempts to link the Administration to some sort of ‘cover up.’

It’s pathetic.

And what’s a scandal is the right’s attempt to score political points with a sad and tragic loss of life by Americans in foreign service.

It's not just Benghazi it's the obvious cover ups. Just as it is in Fast and Furious and the IRS scandal.

 

[Claudette]

Its a cover up when you send your minions out to lie about what happened.

State had plenty of warning and did nothing. Nada, zip.

Four good men died because Obama's State Department did nothing. They had plenty of warning and did nothing. Nada, zip. The Brits and the Red Cross moved out because of those same warnings. Our State Department did nothing. Nada, zip.

They did try to blame it on a video. That sounds better than saying, "Hey. We had warnings of an attack but decided to do nothing." "I mean hell. The 9-11 anniversary was coming up but hey. No one will attack us on 9-11." Those warning are bs.

Black mark on the Obama/Hilary State Department and it just to bad that four very good men died because of the incompetence of State.

And of course no one lost they're job. No heads rolled. Just four men died. I'm sure they could care less. The whole lot of em aren't worth the sweat off the balls of those four men.

 

[candycorn]

The IRSGhazi fairy really kicked you nutbags in the teeth, didn't she?

It is funny.

 

[MarcATL]

you don't need criminal conduct to have a scandal

see weiner

What exactly is the scandal Yurt?

the cover up and blaming it on the video maker

We already know that the reports were made based on the information we had at that time.

So what, exactly, was covered up Yurt?

 

[MarcATL]

Its a cover up when you send your minions out to lie about what happened.

State had plenty of warning and did nothing. Nada, zip.

Four good men died because Obama's State Department did nothing. They had plenty of warning and did nothing. Nada, zip. The Brits and the Red Cross moved out because of those same warnings. Our State Department did nothing. Nada, zip.

They did try to blame it on a video. That sounds better than saying, "Hey. We had warnings of an attack but decided to do nothing." "I mean hell. The 9-11 anniversary was coming up but hey. No one will attack us on 9-11." Those warning are bs.

Black mark on the Obama/Hilary State Department and it just to bad that four very good men died because of the incompetence of State.

And of course no one lost they're job. No heads rolled. Just four men died. I'm sure they could care less. The whole lot of em aren't worth the sweat off the balls of those four men.

How many lost their jobs, and how many heads rolled for the 3000+ good men that died on 9/11/2011 Claudette?

 

[Katzndogz]

Are liberals really going to use 911 to justify obama's horrific action in Benghazi?

When 911 happened, Bush got on television and named the persons responsible he said Al Quaeda. After the heat built over Benghazi, obama sent his minions to television to name the persons responsible, they said Christians.

You dishonor the 911 dead by making such a comparison.

 

[rdean]

Try as you guys might, Benghazi is not even close to the scandal that is Iraq. Tens of thousands of Americans dead and maimed and Republicans care about 4 in Libya? Really?

Well if you are mixing apples and oranges then millions are killed by abortion every year and the Democrats don't care, oh wait they don't care about the four men needlessly killed in Benghazi either, bad example.

Maybe you need to review the definition of war, like the war or not, and the definition of an ambassador position. Both those in Iraq and those in Benghazi VOLUNTEERED for their duty, the difference is in Iraq they knew people would be shooting at them.

No one lied to get people to go to Benghazi. They knew it was an unstable government. Worse, I'm guessing half of those tricked into Iraq were black. Like the president.

And why were there deadly riots going on all over the world at the same time as the attack in Benghazi. How come right wingers won't even acknowledge that?

 

[rdean]

Are liberals really going to use 911 to justify obama's horrific action in Benghazi?

When 911 happened, Bush got on television and named the persons responsible he said Al Quaeda. After the heat built over Benghazi, obama sent his minions to television to name the persons responsible, they said Christians.

You dishonor the 911 dead by making such a comparison.

And then he let Bin Laden go and attacked Iraq which had nothing to do with 9/11. So we aren't supposed to talk about that either. It "dishonors" the memory of 9/11. Got it!

 

[jknowgood]

Try as you guys might, Benghazi is not even close to the scandal that is Iraq. Tens of thousands of Americans dead and maimed and Republicans care about 4 in Libya? Really?

Well if you are mixing apples and oranges then millions are killed by abortion every year and the Democrats don't care, oh wait they don't care about the four men needlessly killed in Benghazi either, bad example.

Maybe you need to review the definition of war, like the war or not, and the definition of an ambassador position. Both those in Iraq and those in Benghazi VOLUNTEERED for their duty, the difference is in Iraq they knew people would be shooting at them.

No one lied to get people to go to Benghazi. They knew it was an unstable government. Worse, I'm guessing half of those tricked into Iraq were black. Like the president.

And why were there deadly riots going on all over the world at the same time as the attack in Benghazi. How come right wingers won't even acknowledge that?

If i remember democrats were saying the same about iraq, and even voted to go to war. Facts aren't your friend.

 

[Claudette]

Its a cover up when you send your minions out to lie about what happened.

State had plenty of warning and did nothing. Nada, zip.

Four good men died because Obama's State Department did nothing. They had plenty of warning and did nothing. Nada, zip. The Brits and the Red Cross moved out because of those same warnings. Our State Department did nothing. Nada, zip.

They did try to blame it on a video. That sounds better than saying, "Hey. We had warnings of an attack but decided to do nothing." "I mean hell. The 9-11 anniversary was coming up but hey. No one will attack us on 9-11." Those warning are bs.

Black mark on the Obama/Hilary State Department and it just to bad that four very good men died because of the incompetence of State.

And of course no one lost they're job. No heads rolled. Just four men died. I'm sure they could care less. The whole lot of em aren't worth the sweat off the balls of those four men.

How many lost their jobs, and how many heads rolled for the 3000+ good men that died on 9/11/2011 Claudette?

Well if the Clinton FBI had been doing the job we might have had a heads up for NYC. They had warning just not where, when or how. Apparantly AQ didn't let them know.

Do we shut down LA, Boston, Chicago, Detroit? Just what do we shut down there Marc?

John O'Neil an agent for the FBI under Clinton was trying to get the dumb ***** to listen to him. They thought he was nuts. He was forced out. He ended up as head of security for the TT. He died on 9-11 in the Tower doing his job. I wonder if they even passed those warning on to Bush's administration since they though O'Neil was nuts. One hopes they did. Again. Vague warnings.

http://rense.com/general25/tall.htm

Nothing vague about Benghazi. They had plenty of warning and a location and did nothing.

Oh nice deflection BTW.

 

[Caroljo]

Are liberals really going to use 911 to justify obama's horrific action in Benghazi?

When 911 happened, Bush got on television and named the persons responsible he said Al Quaeda. After the heat built over Benghazi, obama sent his minions to television to name the persons responsible, they said Christians.

You dishonor the 911 dead by making such a comparison.

And then he let Bin Laden go and attacked Iraq which had nothing to do with 9/11. So we aren't supposed to talk about that either. It "dishonors" the memory of 9/11. Got it!

Bush didn't attack Iraq because of 9/11 dummy.....it was a completely separate issue. We went into Iraq because Bush was told by the CIA and others that they had WMD....that they weren't supposed to have. Saddam kept stalling and not letting the inspectors do their jobs. THAT is was Iraq was about.

He didn't let Bin Laden go (Clinton did that twice), he had soldiers in Afghganistan hunting him down. TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT WARS.

 

[Claudette]

I think they had UBL at Tora Bora but the US wasn't running that show.

They got a truce and UBL escaped.

 

[BlindBoo]

Are liberals really going to use 911 to justify obama's horrific action in Benghazi?

When 911 happened, Bush got on television and named the persons responsible he said Al Quaeda. After the heat built over Benghazi, obama sent his minions to television to name the persons responsible, they said Christians.

You dishonor the 911 dead by making such a comparison.

And then he let Bin Laden go and attacked Iraq which had nothing to do with 9/11. So we aren't supposed to talk about that either. It "dishonors" the memory of 9/11. Got it!

Bush didn't attack Iraq because of 9/11 dummy.....it was a completely separate issue. We went into Iraq because Bush was told by the CIA and others that they had WMD....that they weren't supposed to have. Saddam kept stalling and not letting the inspectors do their jobs. THAT is was Iraq was about.

He didn't let Bin Laden go (Clinton did that twice), he had soldiers in Afghganistan hunting him down. TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT WARS.

In your dreams. President Bush and the compliant media used the emotions we all felt after 9-11 and morphed that into support for the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

"On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam’s inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again.

Nor was the intelligence included in the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002, which stated categorically that Iraq possessed WMD. No one in Congress was aware of the secret intelligence that Saddam had no WMD as the House of Representatives and the Senate voted, a week after the submission of the NIE, on the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq. The information, moreover, was not circulated within the CIA among those agents involved in operations to prove whether Saddam had WMD. "

Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction - Salon.com

 

[Claudette]

Salon?? Really? Laughing may ass off.

 

[Yurt]

What exactly is the scandal Yurt?

the cover up and blaming it on the video maker

And where’s the evidence of this ‘cover up’? There are no links in your post.

Who authorized the ‘cover up’?

Absent evidence of a ‘cover up’ and the name or names of those in the Administration who authorized the ‘cover up,’ there is no ‘scandal,’ hence the ‘scandal’ being phony, a partisan contrivance of the right.

he asked a question, which you claim has not been answered, not for cites, which i've given in the past

so calm down

 

[BlindBoo]

Salon?? Really? Laughing may ass off.

On April 23, 2006, CBS’s “60 Minutes” interviewed Tyler Drumheller, the former CIA chief of clandestine operations for Europe, who disclosed that the agency had received documentary intelligence from Naji Sabri, Saddam’s foreign minister, that Saddam did not have WMD. “We continued to validate him the whole way through,” said Drumheller. “The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming, and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy, to justify the policy.”

Now two former senior CIA officers have confirmed Drumheller’s account to me and provided the background to the story of how the information that might have stopped the invasion of Iraq was twisted in order to justify it.......

 

[Claudette]

Well how bout the fact that every intelligence agency in the world thought he had WMD's.

He did, in fact, gas and kill 5,000 Kurds. He sure as shit didn't do that with bad breath.

 

[BlindBoo]

Well how bout the fact that every intelligence agency in the world thought he had WMD's.

He did, in fact, gas and kill 5,000 Kurds. He sure as shit didn't do that with bad breath.

Another lie that has been thoroughly debunked.

He use chemical Weapons on not only the Kurdish rebels but on the Iranian soldiers and it was known at the time. This happened during the time Ronnie Raygun was supporting Saddam. What did Ronnie do? Nothing Kept supplying him with spare parts and mega bucks.

 

[Caroljo]

And then he let Bin Laden go and attacked Iraq which had nothing to do with 9/11. So we aren't supposed to talk about that either. It "dishonors" the memory of 9/11. Got it!

Bush didn't attack Iraq because of 9/11 dummy.....it was a completely separate issue. We went into Iraq because Bush was told by the CIA and others that they had WMD....that they weren't supposed to have. Saddam kept stalling and not letting the inspectors do their jobs. THAT is was Iraq was about.

He didn't let Bin Laden go (Clinton did that twice), he had soldiers in Afghganistan hunting him down. TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT WARS.

In your dreams. President Bush and the compliant media used the emotions we all felt after 9-11 and morphed that into support for the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

"On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam’s inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again.

Nor was the intelligence included in the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002, which stated categorically that Iraq possessed WMD. No one in Congress was aware of the secret intelligence that Saddam had no WMD as the House of Representatives and the Senate voted, a week after the submission of the NIE, on the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq. The information, moreover, was not circulated within the CIA among those agents involved in operations to prove whether Saddam had WMD. "

Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction - Salon.com

Because SALON says so.....