Ulysses G. Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 (edited) Bin Ladin did not hang out in cafes drinking strawberry frappes with Western journalists. Edited June 18, 2014 by Ulysses G. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 And look at how long it took to get Bin Laden. It's not like the guy was sitting at a Star Buck's in D.C. with an ID. You are correct in the details. It was not Starbucks nor was it in DC. From my post number 206 shown above: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Last August, CNN’s Arwa Dawson interviewed Abu Khattala for two hours “in public at a coffee shop of a well-known hotel” in Benghazi, she explained during the segment. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinot Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 The right wing lemmings always have something else in their conspiracy bags. You can't use logic when discussing anything because they use Fox facts and Fox facts are irrefutable. BENGHAZI!!!! The anticipated Hillary interview didn't go well for Fox. The conservatives are all a twitter that that the Fox hosts lobbed soft ball questions at her (they didn't). I loved when she told them to go download the report and read it if you want to know what happened. Clinton will be the next President of the US. The republicans have no one to run against her and a shrinking base. That's why sticking Hillary with Benghazi was so important. Fox wasn't able to score a single point, even though they relentlessly tried. She came across as knowledgeable and Presidential. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Bin Ladin did not hang out in cafes drinking strawberry frappes with Western journalists. And I'm guessing the bloke in question did not just wander to Starbucks for an interview without a large troop of armed security personnel. More to the point, you would have been one of the first screaming blue murder if one US soldier was killed trying to capture him. No casualties and job done. You should be applauding their efforts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses G. Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 (edited) Please don't tell me what I think or would do about anything or what I should be applauding. You don't have the slightest idea, so please stop pretending that you do. Edited June 18, 2014 by Ulysses G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Please don't tell me what I think or would do about anything or what I should be applauding. You don't have the slightest idea, so please stop pretending that you do. Based on your previous postings here, I have an excellent idea. Unless you've just been BSing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses G. Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Based on your previous postings here, I have an excellent idea. No you don't. You just proved it above. Keep your opinions about other posters to yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 (edited) It would seem some of them could have been saved after all. This was released on 11 June and could be considered breaking news to some. I am fully aware it is Fox News. My suggestion is if somebody has an alternative source that refutes what is said...post the link. Major Stahl, along with Secretary Clinton, was NOT interviewed by the Accountability Review Board. Edited June 18, 2014 by chuckd 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinot Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 It would seem like it according to a special report on Fox News. You guys have got to get up and change the channel occasionally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I have over 6,600 posts. My guess is not more than 10 of them have ever referenced Fox News. Sometimes there is no choice but to use Fox News sources. It is the only network that has the intestinal fortitude to go up against the political machine that is currently in the White House. The other networks are running away from bad news for the White House as fast as their little legs will carry them. As I suggested, rather than criticize my source, find a better one and post it. PS: I haven't received Fox News in nearly six years. I get my news from the internet with the occasional hint of something worthwhile on CNN. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Sometimes Fox News report accurately. If they don't it's soon spotted. They were one of the ones that broke the Benghazi arrest story. Of course they then went and queered it by claiming that it was probably timed to coincide with Hillary's appearance on their channel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Based on your previous postings here, I have an excellent idea. No you don't. You just proved it above. Keep your opinions about other posters to yourself. Suggest you use the report button if you think my comments are over the top. I don't think they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snarky66 Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Why didn't obama send a rescue mission? Because it was inconvenient. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Why didn't obama send a rescue mission? Because it was inconvenient. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Have you been living in a cave? Or have all those investigations been a waste of time? In a new report released on Tuesday, the House Armed Services Committee concludes that there was no way for the U.S. military to have responded in time to the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya to save the four Americans killed that night. In doing so, the report debunks entirely a right-wing myth that says the White House ordered the military not to intervene. http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/02/11/3276171/gop-benghazi-military-hasc/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Why didn't obama send a rescue mission? Because it was inconvenient. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Have you been living in a cave? Or have all those investigations been a waste of time? In a new report released on Tuesday, the House Armed Services Committee concludes that there was no way for the U.S. military to have responded in time to the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya to save the four Americans killed that night. In doing so, the report debunks entirely a right-wing myth that says the White House ordered the military not to intervene. http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/02/11/3276171/gop-benghazi-military-hasc/ Your link is dated 11 February 2014. They had not discovered Major Eric Stahl, the US Army pilot stationed in Benghazi, who stated in the YouTube video posted above, that they could have been in Benghazi in a little over four hours, had they been given the order to proceed with a rescue mission. He was discovered just a few days ago, which makes your link somewhat outdated. He was never interviewed by the Accountability Review Board. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was not interviewed for the ARB report either. Great job by the Review Board, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 (edited) "He was discovered"? What, on a mantelpiece? They actually sent a rescue team to Sigonella, one hour away, but they arrived too late, primarily because the information coming out of Benghazi was confusing.All of this has already been investigated by both parties. So the question is, what does Major Stahl have to offer that isn't already known? You don't need to be a spy to know how long it takes to fly from Ramstein to Benghazi. Still, it will be interesting to see if Mr. Gowdy can spin this into some kind of 'revelation'. When is the witchhunt/circus due to talk to Stahl? The stuff about them hearing State dept. phones being used also raises the possibility that they could track the people they were talking to. Perhaps this information is/was classified? (Well it isn't now, if it's true). Edited June 18, 2014 by Chicog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Another discovery. On the day of the attack, Islamists in Cairo had staged a demonstration outside the United States Embassy there to protest an American-made online video mocking Islam, and the protest culminated in a breach of the embassy’s walls — images that flashed through news coverage around the Arab world. As the attack in Benghazi was unfolding a few hours later, Mr. Abu Khattala told fellow Islamist fighters and others that the assault was retaliation for the same insulting video, according to people who heard him. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/world/middleeast/apprehension-of-ahmed-abu-khattala-may-begin-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?hp&_r=1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinot Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Remember the New York Times did an in depth article a few months back about Benghazi and said it was the video? McCain and Graham immediately came out claiming it was just hack journalism. Yet here we are with the confirmation right out of the mouth of the suspect. Wait for them to claim this confirmation is proof positive that Obama just conveniently timed his capture: in three...two...one.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 What a shame they can't get him in front of Gowdy's Kangaroo Court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snarky66 Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 You're kidding right? "We couldn't get there in time"? The battle raged for 8 hours. The fact is that someone in the white house aborted any rescue attempt. There was an election to win right? When we talk about treasonous acts this is exactly the type of case we are talking about. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 "He was discovered"? What, on a mantelpiece? They actually sent a rescue team to Sigonella, one hour away, but they arrived too late, primarily because the information coming out of Benghazi was confusing. All of this has already been investigated by both parties. So the question is, what does Major Stahl have to offer that isn't already known? You don't need to be a spy to know how long it takes to fly from Ramstein to Benghazi. Still, it will be interesting to see if Mr. Gowdy can spin this into some kind of 'revelation'. When is the witchhunt/circus due to talk to Stahl? The stuff about them hearing State dept. phones being used also raises the possibility that they could track the people they were talking to. Perhaps this information is/was classified? (Well it isn't now, if it's true). Putting your"mantelpiece" aside, as I said in my earlier post...he was hiding in plain sight. Put on your investigator's cap for a moment and ask yourself who you should interrogate if you are a member of the Accountability Review Board. High ranking State Department personnel in Washington? Certainly. Middle managers in the State Department working on the Middle East desks? Certainly. High ranking Military personnel involved with the decision making process? Certainly. Senior State Department personnel based in Tripoli? Certainly. All survivors from Benghazi"? Certainly. All Tripoli based Embassy personnel? Certainly. High ranking CIA decision makers? Certainly. Now let's look at who they could have interviewed but chose not to. President Barack Obama then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Clinton's aides ALL of the survivors from Benghazi Major Eric Stahl, the pilot who flew his aircraft to Benghazi the following morning to retrieve the survivors and the bodies of the four murdered Americans and was prepared to fly a rescue mission the night before, but the orders never came. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I assume this part of your post was addressed at Major Stahl? You don't need to be a spy to know how long it takes to fly from Ramstein to Benghazi. If so, please be advised Stahl was based in Tripoli and was not at Ramstein..until the following day, with the bodies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Another discovery. On the day of the attack, Islamists in Cairo had staged a demonstration outside the United States Embassy there to protest an American-made online video mocking Islam, and the protest culminated in a breach of the embassy’s walls — images that flashed through news coverage around the Arab world. As the attack in Benghazi was unfolding a few hours later, Mr. Abu Khattala told fellow Islamist fighters and others that the assault was retaliation for the same insulting video, according to people who heard him. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/world/middleeast/apprehension-of-ahmed-abu-khattala-may-begin-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?hp&_r=1 I hope you are not pinning your hopes on Abu Khattala for definitive answers to the mystery that is Benghazi. From your own NY Times linked article. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Even by the standards of Benghazi jihadists — and even among many of his friends — Mr. Abu Khattala stands out as both erratic and extremist. “Even in prison, he was always alone,” said Sheikh Mohamed Abu Sidra, an Islamist member of Parliament from Benghazi who spent several years in prison with Mr. Abu Khattala. “He is sincere, but he is very ignorant, and I don’t think he is 100 percent mentally fit,” Mr. Abu Sidra said. “I always ask myself, how did he become a leader?” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 You're kidding right? "We couldn't get there in time"? The battle raged for 8 hours. The fact is that someone in the white house aborted any rescue attempt. There was an election to win right? When we talk about treasonous acts this is exactly the type of case we are talking about. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Clearly you have read all the investigation reports so far and have a astonishing grasp of the known facts. The only problem is, even the GOP don't agree with you. When "you" talk about treasonous acts, it's soundbites off the Drudge report, isn't it? Who by the way apparently decided the almost daily tirades about Benghazi should stop once the arrest was made, their front page news for the day was that Chicken prices were rising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I assume this part of your post was addressed at Major Stahl? You don't need to be a spy to know how long it takes to fly from Ramstein to Benghazi. If so, please be advised Stahl was based in Tripoli and was not at Ramstein..until the following day, with the bodies. If he was in Tripoli, you'd think he could have got a bus there. I was basing it on this, but to be honest Incirlik is closer. The same issues were in play. Stahl also contended that given his crew’s alert status and location, they could have reached Benghazi in time to have played a role in rescuing the victims of the assault, and ferrying them to safety in Germany, had they been asked to do so. “We were on a 45-day deployment to Ramstein air base,” he told Fox News. “And we were there basically to pick up priority missions, last-minute missions that needed to be accomplished.” “You would’ve thought that we would have had a little bit more of an alert posture on 9/11,” Stahl added. “A hurried-up timeline probably would take us [an] hour-and-a-half to get off the ground and three hours and fifteen minutes to get down there. So we could’ve gone down there and gotten them easily.” Read more at http://conservativetribune.com/benghazi-pilot/#C8OfsvLTpZckD9Wj.99 But having read everything he's said, it really isn't a bombshell at all. it's just another Fox News soundbite. There is nothing new in there that I can see, apart from the bit about the phone calls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post CMNightRider Posted June 22, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted June 22, 2014 There's no way this is comparable to Watergate. Nixon personally approved the break in and burglary of the Democratic campaign office for the purpose of stealing documents about their campaign strategy to manipulate the election so he could be reelected. This was the administration's opinion of why an attack on en embassy occured, after the fact. Other embassies were attacked in the past, other people died and the reason was that sometimes crazy people attack U.S. assets in retaliation for for what the U.S. has done to their (usually muslim) countries. The U.S. recently killed Bin Laden and I'm sure that peeved a few people off. This is nothing but hyper-partisanship and a lame excuse to get rid of a black president who wants to make life better for the majority of the citizens, not just the rich 1% the republicans are beholding to. You are right when you say "this is not comparable to Watergate." Benghazi is much more serous than Watergate, and has nothing to do with the president being "black." Obama is incompetent because of his lack of experience and leadership skills, not because of the color of his skin (he's half white). I would like to know why Obama didn't send help to these people, and then sent Susan Rice out in front of the news media with a made up story (lie). Anyone who thinks Obama "wants life better for the majority of citizens" probably still believes in the tooth fairy and waits for Santa on Christmas eve. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snarky66 Posted June 22, 2014 Share Posted June 22, 2014 The video story has always been a ruse. Razzledazzle. But quite a few of the obama cheerleading team on here vocally support the myth. It's the only hope they have of shielding the dear leader. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrico Posted June 22, 2014 Share Posted June 22, 2014 The west should have never dabbled in Libya. Ok The Big G was a nut case but unfortunately now because of intervention the whole country is a basket case. And developing democracy my cheeks Sent from my GT-I9505 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinot Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 (edited) 1. They had plenty of time for a rescue mission, no rescue is an impeachable offense 2. The video was never an issue 3. Everyone is shielding Obama (he's Black, you know) 4. Abu Khattala is an unreliable source, you can't believe him when he says it was the video 5. We took to long to get an easy target You can't have an a discussion about anything with the lemmings because they change the argument and throw in Fox Facts when they don't like what they're hearing. It's like OBamacare. The fact that it is succeeding beyond most people's wildest dreams is irrelevant. It still places a small tax on the richest Americans so it's morally wrong. The problem for the Repubs is that they have so much invested in this Benghazi fantasy they can't let go of it now, even though the overwhelming majority of Americans already have dismissed it as BS. This thread should be closed. They're just repeating the same nonsense they've been spewing since page 1. "Prejudices are what fools use for reason." For the right wing, prejudice is the cornerstone of all their beliefs. Edited June 23, 2014 by Scott Offensive term edited Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 A new book is soon coming out about Hillary Clinton and her relations with the Obama's. Parts of it are filtering out now and I have found them interesting, to say the least. Following is part of the take on the Benghazi scandal. Makes one wonder how she would operate in the White House? WARNING. Reading this could cause distress among Hillary apologists and Obama stalwarts. Caution should be exercised. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Clinton bristled at Benghazi deception By Edward Klein June 22, 2014 | 2:32am By 10 p.m. on Sept. 11, 2012, when Hillary Clinton received a call from President Obama, she was one of the most thoroughly briefed officials in Washington on the unfolding disaster in Benghazi, Libya. She knew that Ambassador Christopher Stevens and a communications operator were dead, and that the attackers had launched a well-coordinated mortar assault on the CIA annex, which would cost the lives of two more Americans. She had no doubt that a terrorist attack had been launched against America on the anniversary of 9/11. However, when Hillary picked up the phone and heard Obama’s voice, she learned the president had other ideas in mind. With less than two months before Election Day, he was still boasting that he had al Qaeda on the run. If the truth about Benghazi became known, it would blow that argument out of the water. Entire article here: http://nypost.com/2014/06/22/clinton-bristled-at-benghazi-deception-book/ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses G. Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 (edited) You can't have an a discussion about anything with the lemmings because they change the argument and throw in Fox Facts when they don't like what they're hearing. Ithe cornerstone of all their beliefs. Thanks for supplying the actual "facts" from such an obviously unbiased source. I'm sure that you have changed a lot of minds with your contribution. Edited June 23, 2014 by Ulysses G. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now