- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: U.S. captures Benghazi suspect in secret raid
Posted on 6/18/14 at 7:43 am to NHTIGER
Posted on 6/18/14 at 7:43 am to NHTIGER
quote:
The diversion part is for PR purposes at a time when Obama needed it the most. But the real reason for the timing is this: The Benghazi Select Committee is ready to begin its work. This is what you will hear over and over again from witnesses, particularly Kerry and Clinton, as well as numerous other past and current administration senior officials: "I cannot comment on that / respond to that / answer that question because there is an alleged key participant in custody of the FBI and any statement made could compromise that investigation and potential prosecution." I'm telling you, you will hear that in these hearings.
I like your fact-finding mission on Benghazi, but I really think you are in two deep on this one. There have been numerous Benghazi investigations. Not once did the Administration flinch, as if they had something to hide.
What makes you think all of a sudden, this Trey Gowdy guy has stirred the pot? If anything, the arrests were made at his behest. Keep in mind, a criminal complaint had been filed against him a year ago by the AG.
Which brings up this much-maligned theory: why is it so hard to get that their were protesters outside the consulate, as there were in Cairo and Tunisia, protesting the video, and then terrorists used the protest as cover for a real attack?
You guys are quick to believe any Libiyan on the ground that said, "it was a planned terrorist attack." But when another says "we were there because of the video", it's horseshite.
Why could it not have been both?
4
Posted on 6/18/14 at 7:45 am to EthanL
quote:
why is it so hard to get that their were protesters outside the consulate, as there were in Cairo and Tunisia, protesting the video, and then terrorists used the protest as cover for a real attack?
Pretty sure that's been proven false.
Posted on 6/18/14 at 7:49 am to EthanL
quote:
Which brings up this much-maligned theory: why is it so hard to get that their were protesters outside the consulate, as there were in Cairo and Tunisia, protesting the video, and then terrorists used the protest as cover for a real attack?
Because the evidence is that there was no protest in Benghazi over the video - people from the campaign just made that up - because Cairo was in the news - to avoid saying it was a terrorist attack - which it actually was. The campaign still had the WH and POTUS saying it was over the video weeks later - but they knew in real time that it was a terrorist attack.
Want to know how I know? Because the attackers were armed with crew served weapons, including machine guns and mortars and were walking mortar fire onto targets. Find me a group of protesters that can do that and I'll change my voter registration.
ETA: It was on September 11, for Pete's sake.
This post was edited on 6/18/14 at 7:50 am
Posted on 6/18/14 at 11:11 am to EthanL
quote:
There have been numerous Benghazi investigations. Not once did the Administration flinch, as if they had something to hide.
Every single investigation, including the highly-suspect ARB, has come down heavy with blame on the State Dept., which is part of the administration. State even made a mockery of the ARB's findings by returning the four lower-level State Dept. scapegoats identified by the ARB in its classified section to its good graces after everything died down. The most egregious State Dept. figure in terms of irresponsible behavior is Patrick Kennedy, who will receive plenty of attention during the new committee's work. The fact that the ARB "excused" Kennedy while targeting his subordinates and declined to interview many key players, including Hillary Clinton and both of her Deputy Secretaries, shows how singular their purpose was.
Posted on 6/18/14 at 12:51 pm to EthanL
quote:
why is it so hard to get that their were protesters outside the consulate, as there were in Cairo and Tunisia, protesting the video, and then terrorists used the protest as cover for a real attack?
Didn't notice this part previously because I responded to the beginning of your post.
Let's put this to rest once and for all.
As I have posted numerous times, the ONLY anti-video protest on Sept. 11, 2012, was in Cairo (and that was Part 2 of a two-part demonstration, Part 1 being a long-planned 9/11 protest to get the Blind Sheik released from U.S. prison confinement).
Nothing happened in Tunisia on Sept. 11, 2012.
If you have read that anywhere, the source was wrong. Incorrect. In error.
This is important to establish in order to eliminate any notion that there was anti-video activity going on anywhere in the Middle East other than Cairo before and during the Benghazi attack, thus minimizing the likelihood that the Benghazi attackers were motivated by the video.
Once more - nothing happened in Tunisia on Sept. 11, 2012, concerning the video.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News