Off-Topic :
Fairfax Underground
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Hillary Fan
()
Date: January 23, 2013 11:53AM
WASHINGTON -- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton got testy on Capitol Hill Wednesday in response to a query from Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), who called into question her department's accounting of the Sept. 11, 2012, attack in Benghazi, Libya.
Facing expected scrutiny from Republicans during her testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Clinton appeared to take exception to Johnson's pointed inquiry into the State Department's initial report that the attack had been mounted spontaneously as a reaction to an anti-Islam YouTube video.
"With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans," Clinton responded, raising her voice at Johnson, who continued to interrupt her. "Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator."
Clinton continued, defending the State Department's efforts in the wake of the assault.
"Honestly, I will do my best to answer your questions about this, but the fact is people were trying their best in real time to get to the best information," she said, before blasting the senator's line of questioning. "Give me a break, Senator Johnson. This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen."
Earlier in the hearing, Clinton spoke about the aftermath of the attack, her voice cracking as she recalled meeting the families of the four Americans killed, including that of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens.
More on Clinton's testimony from the Associated Press:
Her testimony focused not only on the attack but the growing threat from extremists in northern Africa, pointing out that Libya was not an isolated incident.
"The Arab revolutions have scrambled power dynamics and shattered security forces across the region," she said. "And instability in Mali has created an expanding safe haven for terrorists who look to extend their influence and plot further attacks of the kind we saw just last week in Algeria."
She said the Obama administration is pressing for a greater understanding of the hostage-taking and rescue effort there that left three Americans dead.
In a packed hearing room, Clinton parried tough questions from Republicans, offering a detailed timeline of events on Sept. 11 and the Obama administration efforts to aid the Americans in Libya while simultaneously dealing with protests in Cairo and other countries.
She also took House Republicans to task for recently stripping $1 billion in security aid from the hurricane relief bill.
In something of a valedictory, Clinton noted her robust itinerary in four years and her work, nearly 1 million miles and 112 countries.
"My faith in our country and our future is stronger than ever. Every time that blue and white airplane carrying the words 'United States of America' touches down in some far-off capital, I feel again the honor it is to represent the world's indispensable nation. And I am confident that, with your help, we will continue to keep the United States safe, strong, and exceptional."
Clinton is the sole witness at back-to-back hearings before the Senate and House foreign policy panels on the September raid.
Clinton had been scheduled to testify before Congress last month, but an illness, a concussion and a blood clot near her brain forced her to postpone her appearance.
Absent from the hearing was Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., the man tapped to succeed Clinton. His swift Senate confirmation is widely expected. Kerry's confirmation hearing is scheduled for Thursday.
Clinton's testimony was focusing on the Libya attack after more than three months of Republican charges that the Obama administration ignored signs of a deteriorating security situation there and cast an act of terrorism as mere protests over an anti-Muslim video in the heat of a presidential election. Washington officials suspect that militants linked to al-Qaida carried out the attack.
"It's been a cover-up from the beginning," Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the newest member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said Tuesday.
Politics play an outsized role in any appearance by Clinton, who sought the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008 and is the subject of constant speculation about a possible bid in 2016. The former first lady and New York senator -- a polarizing figure dogged by controversy -- is about to end her four-year tenure at the State Department with high favorable ratings.
A poll early last month by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press found 65 percent of Americans held a favorable impression of Clinton, compared with 29 percent unfavorable.
On the panel at the hearing were two possible 2016 Republican presidential candidates -- Florida's Marco Rubio and Kentucky's Rand Paul, also a new member of the committee.
Clinton did little to quiet the presidential chatter earlier this month when she returned to work at the State Department after her illness. On the subject of retirement, she said, "I don't know if that is a word I would use, but certainly stepping off the very fast track for a little while."
With respect to Benghazi, the State Department review singled out the Bureau of Diplomatic Security and the Bureau of Near East Affairs, saying there appeared to be a lack of cooperation and confusion over protection at the mission in Benghazi. The report described a security vacuum in Libya after rebel forces toppled the decades-long regime of strongman Moammar Gadhafi.
The report made 29 recommendations to improve diplomatic security, particularly at high-threat posts.
Asked for the number of State Department employees fired for their handling of Benghazi, State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland said four people were put on administrative leave. They included Eric Boswell, who resigned from the position of assistant secretary of diplomatic security.
But Nuland declined to say if Boswell and the others still are working for the department in some capacity.
Facing expected scrutiny from Republicans during her testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Clinton appeared to take exception to Johnson's pointed inquiry into the State Department's initial report that the attack had been mounted spontaneously as a reaction to an anti-Islam YouTube video.
"With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans," Clinton responded, raising her voice at Johnson, who continued to interrupt her. "Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator."
Clinton continued, defending the State Department's efforts in the wake of the assault.
"Honestly, I will do my best to answer your questions about this, but the fact is people were trying their best in real time to get to the best information," she said, before blasting the senator's line of questioning. "Give me a break, Senator Johnson. This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen."
Earlier in the hearing, Clinton spoke about the aftermath of the attack, her voice cracking as she recalled meeting the families of the four Americans killed, including that of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens.
More on Clinton's testimony from the Associated Press:
Her testimony focused not only on the attack but the growing threat from extremists in northern Africa, pointing out that Libya was not an isolated incident.
"The Arab revolutions have scrambled power dynamics and shattered security forces across the region," she said. "And instability in Mali has created an expanding safe haven for terrorists who look to extend their influence and plot further attacks of the kind we saw just last week in Algeria."
She said the Obama administration is pressing for a greater understanding of the hostage-taking and rescue effort there that left three Americans dead.
In a packed hearing room, Clinton parried tough questions from Republicans, offering a detailed timeline of events on Sept. 11 and the Obama administration efforts to aid the Americans in Libya while simultaneously dealing with protests in Cairo and other countries.
She also took House Republicans to task for recently stripping $1 billion in security aid from the hurricane relief bill.
In something of a valedictory, Clinton noted her robust itinerary in four years and her work, nearly 1 million miles and 112 countries.
"My faith in our country and our future is stronger than ever. Every time that blue and white airplane carrying the words 'United States of America' touches down in some far-off capital, I feel again the honor it is to represent the world's indispensable nation. And I am confident that, with your help, we will continue to keep the United States safe, strong, and exceptional."
Clinton is the sole witness at back-to-back hearings before the Senate and House foreign policy panels on the September raid.
Clinton had been scheduled to testify before Congress last month, but an illness, a concussion and a blood clot near her brain forced her to postpone her appearance.
Absent from the hearing was Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., the man tapped to succeed Clinton. His swift Senate confirmation is widely expected. Kerry's confirmation hearing is scheduled for Thursday.
Clinton's testimony was focusing on the Libya attack after more than three months of Republican charges that the Obama administration ignored signs of a deteriorating security situation there and cast an act of terrorism as mere protests over an anti-Muslim video in the heat of a presidential election. Washington officials suspect that militants linked to al-Qaida carried out the attack.
"It's been a cover-up from the beginning," Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the newest member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said Tuesday.
Politics play an outsized role in any appearance by Clinton, who sought the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008 and is the subject of constant speculation about a possible bid in 2016. The former first lady and New York senator -- a polarizing figure dogged by controversy -- is about to end her four-year tenure at the State Department with high favorable ratings.
A poll early last month by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press found 65 percent of Americans held a favorable impression of Clinton, compared with 29 percent unfavorable.
On the panel at the hearing were two possible 2016 Republican presidential candidates -- Florida's Marco Rubio and Kentucky's Rand Paul, also a new member of the committee.
Clinton did little to quiet the presidential chatter earlier this month when she returned to work at the State Department after her illness. On the subject of retirement, she said, "I don't know if that is a word I would use, but certainly stepping off the very fast track for a little while."
With respect to Benghazi, the State Department review singled out the Bureau of Diplomatic Security and the Bureau of Near East Affairs, saying there appeared to be a lack of cooperation and confusion over protection at the mission in Benghazi. The report described a security vacuum in Libya after rebel forces toppled the decades-long regime of strongman Moammar Gadhafi.
The report made 29 recommendations to improve diplomatic security, particularly at high-threat posts.
Asked for the number of State Department employees fired for their handling of Benghazi, State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland said four people were put on administrative leave. They included Eric Boswell, who resigned from the position of assistant secretary of diplomatic security.
But Nuland declined to say if Boswell and the others still are working for the department in some capacity.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Libbys Silliness
()
Date: January 23, 2013 12:09PM
Sillary shows her liberal tendencies to avoid the truth.
Neither her nor her husband can just answer a question.
Sillary, in order to prevent your mishap again, we need to know how bad you f-ed it up to begin with.
Neither her nor her husband can just answer a question.
Sillary, in order to prevent your mishap again, we need to know how bad you f-ed it up to begin with.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Rand Paul
()
Date: January 23, 2013 12:18PM
Uhhhh, not really. And that was the easy hearing run by Bob "I employ illegal alien kid touchers as interns" Menedez. Wait until this afternoon for the harder questions.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Hillary Fan
()
Date: January 23, 2013 12:18PM
She'll be an AWESOME President!
.
Attachments:
.
Attachments:
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Badonk
()
Date: January 23, 2013 12:23PM
Hillary Fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> She'll be an AWESOME President!
>
> .
Ghetto
-------------------------------------------------------
> She'll be an AWESOME President!
>
> .
Ghetto
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
blanche
()
Date: January 23, 2013 12:27PM
Hillary Fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> She'll be an AWESOME President!
>
> .
How OLD is that picture?????
-------------------------------------------------------
> She'll be an AWESOME President!
>
> .
How OLD is that picture?????
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Ralph Pootawn
()
Date: January 23, 2013 01:01PM
"With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night decided to go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make?"
Well, Mrs. Clinton there are four dead Americans because of this because YOU didn't seem to think the Marines needed bullets in their guns.
I sure hope she doesn't expect anymore public offices after that.
Well, Mrs. Clinton there are four dead Americans because of this because YOU didn't seem to think the Marines needed bullets in their guns.
I sure hope she doesn't expect anymore public offices after that.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Sawdust
()
Date: January 23, 2013 01:25PM
Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "With all due respect, the fact is we had four
> dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was
> it because of guys out for a walk one night
> decided to go kill some Americans? What difference
> at this point does it make?"
>
>
> Well, Mrs. Clinton there are four dead Americans
> because of this because YOU didn't seem to think
> the Marines needed bullets in their guns.
>
> I sure hope she doesn't expect anymore public
> offices after that.
I can't wait to see Billary and Joe "Where the Hell am I" Biden duke it out in the next Dem Presidential Primary.
-------------------------------------------------------
> "With all due respect, the fact is we had four
> dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was
> it because of guys out for a walk one night
> decided to go kill some Americans? What difference
> at this point does it make?"
>
>
> Well, Mrs. Clinton there are four dead Americans
> because of this because YOU didn't seem to think
> the Marines needed bullets in their guns.
>
> I sure hope she doesn't expect anymore public
> offices after that.
I can't wait to see Billary and Joe "Where the Hell am I" Biden duke it out in the next Dem Presidential Primary.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie
()
Date: January 23, 2013 01:29PM
Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, Mrs. Clinton there are four dead Americans
> because of this because YOU didn't seem to think
> the Marines needed bullets in their guns.
Bullshit, Ralphie.
Security beyond embassy gates/doors is the responsibility of the host country. No U.S. Marines were guarding the Bengazi consulate at the time of the attack, which is not unusual. The visible presense of Marines can be politically sensitive and/or raise the profile of a US asset and invite unwanted attention or attacks.
It is simply impossible to surround diplomats in an impenetrable bubble of protection at all times.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, Mrs. Clinton there are four dead Americans
> because of this because YOU didn't seem to think
> the Marines needed bullets in their guns.
Bullshit, Ralphie.
Security beyond embassy gates/doors is the responsibility of the host country. No U.S. Marines were guarding the Bengazi consulate at the time of the attack, which is not unusual. The visible presense of Marines can be politically sensitive and/or raise the profile of a US asset and invite unwanted attention or attacks.
It is simply impossible to surround diplomats in an impenetrable bubble of protection at all times.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Talk to the hands
()
Date: January 23, 2013 01:35PM
WTF is up with her and the maniacal hand-talking? Damn that's irritating. I couldn't vote for her just because I'd have to watch that all the time.
I think the blood clot may have done some brain damage. A little is OK but that level just isn't normal. Every-little-word-that-comes-out-of-her-mouth-she's-waving-and-pointing-and-rolling-and-in-and-out-and-over-and-under-and-around-and-around-and-up-and-down-and-side-to-side and... ARRGGGHHH. Christ almighty somebody tie her fucking mitts behind her back. lol
I think the blood clot may have done some brain damage. A little is OK but that level just isn't normal. Every-little-word-that-comes-out-of-her-mouth-she's-waving-and-pointing-and-rolling-and-in-and-out-and-over-and-under-and-around-and-around-and-up-and-down-and-side-to-side and... ARRGGGHHH. Christ almighty somebody tie her fucking mitts behind her back. lol
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Ralph Pootawn
()
Date: January 23, 2013 01:38PM
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Well, Mrs. Clinton there are four dead
> Americans
> > because of this because YOU didn't seem to
> think
> > the Marines needed bullets in their guns.
>
> Bullshit, Ralphie.
>
> Security beyond embassy gates/doors is the
> responsibility of the host country. No U.S.
> Marines were guarding the Bengazi consulate at the
> time of the attack, which is not unusual. The
> visible presense of Marines can be politically
> sensitive and/or raise the profile of a US asset
> and invite unwanted attention or attacks.
>
> It is simply impossible to surround diplomats in
> an impenetrable bubble of protection at all times.
You're dumb as shit. Have you even been following what happened, or just come out of your cave?
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Well, Mrs. Clinton there are four dead
> Americans
> > because of this because YOU didn't seem to
> think
> > the Marines needed bullets in their guns.
>
> Bullshit, Ralphie.
>
> Security beyond embassy gates/doors is the
> responsibility of the host country. No U.S.
> Marines were guarding the Bengazi consulate at the
> time of the attack, which is not unusual. The
> visible presense of Marines can be politically
> sensitive and/or raise the profile of a US asset
> and invite unwanted attention or attacks.
>
> It is simply impossible to surround diplomats in
> an impenetrable bubble of protection at all times.
You're dumb as shit. Have you even been following what happened, or just come out of your cave?
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Libbys Yell
()
Date: January 23, 2013 01:39PM
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Well, Mrs. Clinton there are four dead
> Americans
> > because of this because YOU didn't seem to
> think
> > the Marines needed bullets in their guns.
>
> Bullshit, Ralphie.
>
> Security beyond embassy gates/doors is the
> responsibility of the host country. No U.S.
> Marines were guarding the Bengazi consulate at the
> time of the attack, which is not unusual. The
> visible presense of Marines can be politically
> sensitive and/or raise the profile of a US asset
> and invite unwanted attention or attacks.
>
> It is simply impossible to surround diplomats in
> an impenetrable bubble of protection at all times.
Get this thru your thick skull, it was that damm video!!!
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Well, Mrs. Clinton there are four dead
> Americans
> > because of this because YOU didn't seem to
> think
> > the Marines needed bullets in their guns.
>
> Bullshit, Ralphie.
>
> Security beyond embassy gates/doors is the
> responsibility of the host country. No U.S.
> Marines were guarding the Bengazi consulate at the
> time of the attack, which is not unusual. The
> visible presense of Marines can be politically
> sensitive and/or raise the profile of a US asset
> and invite unwanted attention or attacks.
>
> It is simply impossible to surround diplomats in
> an impenetrable bubble of protection at all times.
Get this thru your thick skull, it was that damm video!!!
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Factico
()
Date: January 23, 2013 01:44PM
Does anybody really care if the attack was first labeled as a protest or a terrorist attack? NOPE
The it took 12 hours figure out who exactly attacked the compound?
It took days to figure that Al Queda attacked the Twin Towers in New York.
The it took 12 hours figure out who exactly attacked the compound?
It took days to figure that Al Queda attacked the Twin Towers in New York.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie
()
Date: January 23, 2013 01:45PM
Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You're dumb as shit. Have you even been following
> what happened, or just come out of your cave?
Your stupid-asses assertion about the Marines tells me you don't know shit about how our foreign service operates.
-------------------------------------------------------
> You're dumb as shit. Have you even been following
> what happened, or just come out of your cave?
Your stupid-asses assertion about the Marines tells me you don't know shit about how our foreign service operates.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Ralph Pootawn
()
Date: January 23, 2013 01:47PM
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You're dumb as shit. Have you even been
> following
> > what happened, or just come out of your cave?
>
> Your stupid-asses assertion about the Marines
> tells me you don't know shit about how our foreign
> service operates.
Okay, keep on living in your fantasy land, lolz can't argue with idiots.
Attachments:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You're dumb as shit. Have you even been
> following
> > what happened, or just come out of your cave?
>
> Your stupid-asses assertion about the Marines
> tells me you don't know shit about how our foreign
> service operates.
Okay, keep on living in your fantasy land, lolz can't argue with idiots.
Attachments:
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie
()
Date: January 23, 2013 01:47PM
Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "With all due respect, the fact is we had four
> dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was
> it because of guys out for a walk one night
> decided to go kill some Americans? What difference
> at this point does it make?"
Damn straight, Mrs. C.
-------------------------------------------------------
> "With all due respect, the fact is we had four
> dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was
> it because of guys out for a walk one night
> decided to go kill some Americans? What difference
> at this point does it make?"
Damn straight, Mrs. C.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie
()
Date: January 23, 2013 01:48PM
Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Nothing.
You're a tool, Ralphie. An ignorant tool. LoLz
-------------------------------------------------------
Nothing.
You're a tool, Ralphie. An ignorant tool. LoLz
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
FOX News
()
Date: January 23, 2013 01:48PM
May if the republican congress would of passed a little money for protection of embassy's we wouldn't be in this mess.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Libbys Attack
()
Date: January 23, 2013 01:49PM
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Well, Mrs. Clinton there are four dead
> Americans
> > because of this because YOU didn't seem to
> think
> > the Marines needed bullets in their guns.
>
> Bullshit, Ralphie.
>
> Security beyond embassy gates/doors is the
> responsibility of the host country. No U.S.
> Marines were guarding the Bengazi consulate at the
> time of the attack, which is not unusual. The
> visible presense of Marines can be politically
> sensitive and/or raise the profile of a US asset
> and invite unwanted attention or attacks.
>
> It is simply impossible to surround diplomats in
> an impenetrable bubble of protection at all times.
"and invite unwanted attention or attacks"
Who invites an attack?
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Well, Mrs. Clinton there are four dead
> Americans
> > because of this because YOU didn't seem to
> think
> > the Marines needed bullets in their guns.
>
> Bullshit, Ralphie.
>
> Security beyond embassy gates/doors is the
> responsibility of the host country. No U.S.
> Marines were guarding the Bengazi consulate at the
> time of the attack, which is not unusual. The
> visible presense of Marines can be politically
> sensitive and/or raise the profile of a US asset
> and invite unwanted attention or attacks.
>
> It is simply impossible to surround diplomats in
> an impenetrable bubble of protection at all times.
"and invite unwanted attention or attacks"
Who invites an attack?
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie
()
Date: January 23, 2013 01:50PM
Libbys Attack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Who invites an attack?
Context, Libby. It is your friend.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Who invites an attack?
Context, Libby. It is your friend.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Econ 101
()
Date: January 23, 2013 02:12PM
We all know that the republican party and US military let the attacks happen because they wanted to get more defense spending money and embarrass Obama on 9/11.
Now republicans are just bitter the plan didn't work out and they digging for any possible way to embarrass Clinton because she might be the democratic candidate for President in 2016.
Now republicans are just bitter the plan didn't work out and they digging for any possible way to embarrass Clinton because she might be the democratic candidate for President in 2016.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Dead Chris
()
Date: January 23, 2013 02:18PM
Factico Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Does anybody really care if the attack was first
> labeled as a protest or a terrorist attack? NOPE
>
> The it took 12 hours figure out who exactly
> attacked the compound?
>
> It took days to figure that Al Queda attacked the
> Twin Towers in New York.
No, it didn't take 12 hours. By their own accounts they knew right away who was behind the attack. Not real hard to tell when trucks with mounted 50 cal machine guns and the Ansar al Sharia logo on the doors and 100+ people carrying AKs and RPGs pile out all at once and start attacking. lol
In fact, they knew in advance who was a very likely threat. And that ignores the whole movie BS as well as why we've done little to nothing as far as any real investigation or pursuit.
This was primarily a CIA outpost. Benghazi wasn't so much of a single, specific attack on us as it was/is a reflection of the overall growth in power of al Qaeda-associated groups across the entire region. Neither of which were convenient facts to highlight during a tough political campaign when you're out claiming that "al Qaeda is on the run."
I know MSNBC/WaPo/NYT hasn't covered it much, but try to keep up.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Does anybody really care if the attack was first
> labeled as a protest or a terrorist attack? NOPE
>
> The it took 12 hours figure out who exactly
> attacked the compound?
>
> It took days to figure that Al Queda attacked the
> Twin Towers in New York.
No, it didn't take 12 hours. By their own accounts they knew right away who was behind the attack. Not real hard to tell when trucks with mounted 50 cal machine guns and the Ansar al Sharia logo on the doors and 100+ people carrying AKs and RPGs pile out all at once and start attacking. lol
In fact, they knew in advance who was a very likely threat. And that ignores the whole movie BS as well as why we've done little to nothing as far as any real investigation or pursuit.
This was primarily a CIA outpost. Benghazi wasn't so much of a single, specific attack on us as it was/is a reflection of the overall growth in power of al Qaeda-associated groups across the entire region. Neither of which were convenient facts to highlight during a tough political campaign when you're out claiming that "al Qaeda is on the run."
I know MSNBC/WaPo/NYT hasn't covered it much, but try to keep up.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Libbys Wise
()
Date: January 23, 2013 02:24PM
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Libbys Attack Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Who invites an attack?
>
> Context, Libby. It is your friend.
Humor doesn't need nor makes friends.
fragmentation of posts = thread funnys
-------------------------------------------------------
> Libbys Attack Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Who invites an attack?
>
> Context, Libby. It is your friend.
Humor doesn't need nor makes friends.
fragmentation of posts = thread funnys
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Hillary Fan
()
Date: January 23, 2013 02:29PM
Factico Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Does anybody really care if the attack was first
> labeled as a protest or a terrorist attack? NOPE
Precisely!
.
Attachments:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Does anybody really care if the attack was first
> labeled as a protest or a terrorist attack? NOPE
Precisely!
.
Attachments:
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Tell me sweet little lies
()
Date: January 23, 2013 03:28PM
Hillary Fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Factico Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Does anybody really care if the attack was
> first
> > labeled as a protest or a terrorist attack?
> NOPE
>
> Precisely!
>
> .
Yes, who cares if the government purposely lies to the public for political purposes.
As long as it's Most Great and Enlightened Leader Obama we are blessed and most gracious to receive his words.
They become our truth.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Factico Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Does anybody really care if the attack was
> first
> > labeled as a protest or a terrorist attack?
> NOPE
>
> Precisely!
>
> .
Yes, who cares if the government purposely lies to the public for political purposes.
As long as it's Most Great and Enlightened Leader Obama we are blessed and most gracious to receive his words.
They become our truth.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Roger Clinton
()
Date: January 23, 2013 03:31PM
Hillary Fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> She'll be an AWESOME President!
>
> .
Maybe if she still looked like that instead of this
Bow-Wow. What a dawg. No wonder Bill hits anything that squats to piss. Who'd blame him after having to look at this up close every day
.
Attachments:
-------------------------------------------------------
> She'll be an AWESOME President!
>
> .
Maybe if she still looked like that instead of this
Bow-Wow. What a dawg. No wonder Bill hits anything that squats to piss. Who'd blame him after having to look at this up close every day
.
Attachments:
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Hillary Fan
()
Date: January 23, 2013 03:50PM
Roger Clinton Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Maybe if she still looked like that instead of
> this
>
> Bow-Wow. What a dawg. No wonder Bill hits
> anything that squats to piss. Who'd blame him
> after having to look at this up close every day
You don't have to Shtup her, but you must obey.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Maybe if she still looked like that instead of
> this
>
> Bow-Wow. What a dawg. No wonder Bill hits
> anything that squats to piss. Who'd blame him
> after having to look at this up close every day
You don't have to Shtup her, but you must obey.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Hillary Fan
()
Date: January 23, 2013 03:53PM
Tell me sweet little lies Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, who cares if the government purposely lies to
> the public for political purposes.
Because I'm not a rabid ideologue, I give our gov't. the benefit of the doubt.
.
Attachments:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, who cares if the government purposely lies to
> the public for political purposes.
Because I'm not a rabid ideologue, I give our gov't. the benefit of the doubt.
.
Attachments:
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
A Home for Mom
()
Date: January 23, 2013 03:53PM
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Roger Clinton
()
Date: January 23, 2013 03:56PM
Hillary Fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Roger Clinton Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Maybe if she still looked like that instead of
> > this
> >
> > Bow-Wow. What a dawg. No wonder Bill hits
> > anything that squats to piss. Who'd blame him
> > after having to look at this up close every day
>
> You don't have to Shtup her, but you must obey.
She's too fat, too ugly and too wrinkely. Sorry dude, ain't gonna happen. Jill Biden maybe. She's still hot for an old lady.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Roger Clinton Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Maybe if she still looked like that instead of
> > this
> >
> > Bow-Wow. What a dawg. No wonder Bill hits
> > anything that squats to piss. Who'd blame him
> > after having to look at this up close every day
>
> You don't have to Shtup her, but you must obey.
She's too fat, too ugly and too wrinkely. Sorry dude, ain't gonna happen. Jill Biden maybe. She's still hot for an old lady.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Muslims Should Pay
()
Date: January 23, 2013 03:59PM
Imagine: a drone leveling each and every mosque in the middle east one by one. It can happen, we have the technology.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Haterz
()
Date: January 23, 2013 04:01PM
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Cankles R Hot
()
Date: January 23, 2013 04:07PM
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Libbys Prez-ent
()
Date: January 23, 2013 04:11PM
4 dead Americans.
"What difference does it make...?"
Shes Presidential.
"What difference does it make...?"
Shes Presidential.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie
()
Date: January 23, 2013 04:30PM
Libbys Prez-ent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Shes Presidential.
Here's the full quote:
"With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans," Clinton responded, raising her voice at Johnson, who continued to interrupt her. "Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator."
Context, Libby. It is your friend.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Shes Presidential.
Here's the full quote:
"With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans," Clinton responded, raising her voice at Johnson, who continued to interrupt her. "Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator."
Context, Libby. It is your friend.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Undefined Parameters
()
Date: January 23, 2013 04:33PM
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Libbys Prez-ent Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Shes Presidential.
>
> Here's the full quote:
>
> "With all due respect, the fact is we had four
> dead Americans," Clinton responded, raising her
> voice at Johnson, who continued to interrupt her.
> "Was it because of a protest or was it because
> of guys out for a walk last night who decided to
> kill some Americans? What difference at this point
> does it make? It is our job to figure out what
> happened and do everything we can to prevent it
> from ever happening again, Senator."
>
> Context, Libby. It is your friend.
How does the context make it any better? I don't see it.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Libbys Prez-ent Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Shes Presidential.
>
> Here's the full quote:
>
> "With all due respect, the fact is we had four
> dead Americans," Clinton responded, raising her
> voice at Johnson, who continued to interrupt her.
> "Was it because of a protest or was it because
> of guys out for a walk last night who decided to
> kill some Americans? What difference at this point
> does it make? It is our job to figure out what
> happened and do everything we can to prevent it
> from ever happening again, Senator."
>
> Context, Libby. It is your friend.
How does the context make it any better? I don't see it.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie
()
Date: January 23, 2013 04:47PM
Undefined Parameters Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How does the context make it any better? I don't
> see it.
I would recommend that you enroll in a reading comprehension course, perhaps through FCPS.
-------------------------------------------------------
> How does the context make it any better? I don't
> see it.
I would recommend that you enroll in a reading comprehension course, perhaps through FCPS.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Undefined Parameters
()
Date: January 23, 2013 04:51PM
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Undefined Parameters Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > How does the context make it any better? I
> don't
> > see it.
>
> I would recommend that you enroll in a reading
> comprehension course, perhaps through FCPS.
Or perhaps you can quite acting like you have a secret and explain how you think the context makes it better. Other than the part about "...who continued to interupt her...", which also is out of context (he kept saying, "yes but" as she refused to answer the question she was asked), I don't see this as exculpatory at all. Enlighten us oh great and wonderful Oz. Lolz
-------------------------------------------------------
> Undefined Parameters Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > How does the context make it any better? I
> don't
> > see it.
>
> I would recommend that you enroll in a reading
> comprehension course, perhaps through FCPS.
Or perhaps you can quite acting like you have a secret and explain how you think the context makes it better. Other than the part about "...who continued to interupt her...", which also is out of context (he kept saying, "yes but" as she refused to answer the question she was asked), I don't see this as exculpatory at all. Enlighten us oh great and wonderful Oz. Lolz
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie
()
Date: January 23, 2013 05:08PM
Undefined Parameters Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Enlighten us oh great and wonderful Oz.
It's 'great and powerful Oz', btw, but since you asked nicely:
Libbys Prez-ent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 4 dead Americans.
>
> "What difference does it make...?"
This implies that Secretary Clinton stated that she was unconcerned about the deaths of four Americans.
What the Secretary actually said was:
"Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to
kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make?
Her meaning is that whether the attack was the result of protests over a video or a planned terrorist attack makes no difference at this point.
Capiche?
-------------------------------------------------------
> Enlighten us oh great and wonderful Oz.
It's 'great and powerful Oz', btw, but since you asked nicely:
Libbys Prez-ent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 4 dead Americans.
>
> "What difference does it make...?"
This implies that Secretary Clinton stated that she was unconcerned about the deaths of four Americans.
What the Secretary actually said was:
"Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to
kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make?
Her meaning is that whether the attack was the result of protests over a video or a planned terrorist attack makes no difference at this point.
Capiche?
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
GH Ralph
()
Date: January 23, 2013 05:17PM
Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "With all due respect, the fact is we had four
> dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was
> it because of guys out for a walk one night
> decided to go kill some Americans? What difference
> at this point does it make?"
>
>
> Well, Mrs. Clinton there are four dead Americans
> because of this because YOU didn't seem to think
> the Marines needed bullets in their guns.
>
> I sure hope she doesn't expect anymore public
> offices after that.
Go back to your gloryhole, Ralphie. There's a line waiting for you to suck.
-------------------------------------------------------
> "With all due respect, the fact is we had four
> dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was
> it because of guys out for a walk one night
> decided to go kill some Americans? What difference
> at this point does it make?"
>
>
> Well, Mrs. Clinton there are four dead Americans
> because of this because YOU didn't seem to think
> the Marines needed bullets in their guns.
>
> I sure hope she doesn't expect anymore public
> offices after that.
Go back to your gloryhole, Ralphie. There's a line waiting for you to suck.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Go Hillary!
()
Date: January 23, 2013 06:18PM
Good for Hillary! Rand Paul is a pitiful excuse for a senator. "Had I been President..." Thank God that will never happen. What an obnoxious pompous ass.
I didn't used to like Hillary, but she has grown over the years. She handled herself well today, and she'll be a strong Presidential contender.
And for you assholes who don't like her because she has aged in 65 years...fuck off.
I didn't used to like Hillary, but she has grown over the years. She handled herself well today, and she'll be a strong Presidential contender.
And for you assholes who don't like her because she has aged in 65 years...fuck off.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Major Malfunction
()
Date: January 23, 2013 06:38PM
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Undefined Parameters Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Enlighten us oh great and wonderful Oz.
>
> It's 'great and powerful Oz', btw, but since you
> asked nicely:
>
> Libbys Prez-ent Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------
> ------
> > 4 dead Americans.
> >
> > "What difference does it make...?"
>
> This implies that Secretary Clinton stated that
> she was unconcerned about the deaths of four
> Americans.
>
> What the Secretary actually said was:
>
> "Was it because of a protest or was it because of
> guys out for a walk last night who decided to
> kill some Americans? What difference at this point
> does it make?
>
> Her meaning is that whether the attack was the
> result of protests over a video or a planned
> terrorist attack makes no difference at this
> point.
>
> Capiche?
That's ridiculous. Makes a lot of difference. The nature of the attack, what groups were specifically responsible for it and what future threats they may pose, future preparedness and risks, etc., etc., all take on completely different flavors between some spontaneous demonstration and a coordinated military-type assault. As well as with respect to how the attack was knowingly misrepresented to the public. The reason that she feigned being upset is that she doesn't have a good answer.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Undefined Parameters Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Enlighten us oh great and wonderful Oz.
>
> It's 'great and powerful Oz', btw, but since you
> asked nicely:
>
> Libbys Prez-ent Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------
> ------
> > 4 dead Americans.
> >
> > "What difference does it make...?"
>
> This implies that Secretary Clinton stated that
> she was unconcerned about the deaths of four
> Americans.
>
> What the Secretary actually said was:
>
> "Was it because of a protest or was it because of
> guys out for a walk last night who decided to
> kill some Americans? What difference at this point
> does it make?
>
> Her meaning is that whether the attack was the
> result of protests over a video or a planned
> terrorist attack makes no difference at this
> point.
>
> Capiche?
That's ridiculous. Makes a lot of difference. The nature of the attack, what groups were specifically responsible for it and what future threats they may pose, future preparedness and risks, etc., etc., all take on completely different flavors between some spontaneous demonstration and a coordinated military-type assault. As well as with respect to how the attack was knowingly misrepresented to the public. The reason that she feigned being upset is that she doesn't have a good answer.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Duck Hunt
()
Date: January 23, 2013 06:43PM
Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "With all due respect, the fact is we had four
> dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was
> it because of guys out for a walk one night
> decided to go kill some Americans? What difference
> at this point does it make?"
>
>
> Well, Mrs. Clinton there are four dead Americans
> because of this because YOU didn't seem to think
> the Marines needed bullets in their guns.
>
> I sure hope she doesn't expect anymore public
> offices after that.
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT!? Puhlease. Republicans were quick to appeas BP when they killed 11 Americans during that disaster in the gulf. ELEVEN DEAD AMERICANS! and the Conservative lapdogs were APOLOGIZING TO BP EXECS!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/23/2013 06:43PM by Duck Hunt.
-------------------------------------------------------
> "With all due respect, the fact is we had four
> dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was
> it because of guys out for a walk one night
> decided to go kill some Americans? What difference
> at this point does it make?"
>
>
> Well, Mrs. Clinton there are four dead Americans
> because of this because YOU didn't seem to think
> the Marines needed bullets in their guns.
>
> I sure hope she doesn't expect anymore public
> offices after that.
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT!? Puhlease. Republicans were quick to appeas BP when they killed 11 Americans during that disaster in the gulf. ELEVEN DEAD AMERICANS! and the Conservative lapdogs were APOLOGIZING TO BP EXECS!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/23/2013 06:43PM by Duck Hunt.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Hillary
()
Date: January 23, 2013 06:49PM
Duck Hunt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > "With all due respect, the fact is we had four
> > dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or
> was
> > it because of guys out for a walk one night
> > decided to go kill some Americans? What
> difference
> > at this point does it make?"
> >
> >
> > Well, Mrs. Clinton there are four dead
> Americans
> > because of this because YOU didn't seem to
> think
> > the Marines needed bullets in their guns.
> >
> > I sure hope she doesn't expect anymore public
> > offices after that.
>
>
> WITH ALL DUE RESPECT!? Puhlease. Republicans
> were quick to appeas BP when they killed 11
> Americans during that disaster in the gulf.
> ELEVEN DEAD AMERICANS! and the Conservative
> lapdogs were APOLOGIZING TO BP EXECS!
With all due respect, the fact is we had 11 dead Americans. Was it because of negligence or was it just an accident? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ralph Pootawn Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > "With all due respect, the fact is we had four
> > dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or
> was
> > it because of guys out for a walk one night
> > decided to go kill some Americans? What
> difference
> > at this point does it make?"
> >
> >
> > Well, Mrs. Clinton there are four dead
> Americans
> > because of this because YOU didn't seem to
> think
> > the Marines needed bullets in their guns.
> >
> > I sure hope she doesn't expect anymore public
> > offices after that.
>
>
> WITH ALL DUE RESPECT!? Puhlease. Republicans
> were quick to appeas BP when they killed 11
> Americans during that disaster in the gulf.
> ELEVEN DEAD AMERICANS! and the Conservative
> lapdogs were APOLOGIZING TO BP EXECS!
With all due respect, the fact is we had 11 dead Americans. Was it because of negligence or was it just an accident? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Garret
()
Date: January 23, 2013 07:37PM
In general, you right wingers are just a bag full of assholes.
That's all I have to say to you.
That's all I have to say to you.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Dane Bramage
()
Date: January 23, 2013 08:27PM
What's it matter now, it's only four dead Americans.
-Hillary
-------------------------------------------------
“We don’t have any rude, unpleasant people here. We’re different!”
-Hillary
-------------------------------------------------
“We don’t have any rude, unpleasant people here. We’re different!”
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Duck Hunt
()
Date: January 23, 2013 08:30PM
Dane Bramage Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What's it matter now, it's only four dead
> Americans.
>
> -Hillary
yes what about all those dead americans that are on their own so we can GUT FEMA? I guess Katrina doesnt matter as an act of God but woe is me 4 dead americans are worth Screaming about? Yeah the republicans have more blood on their hands than anyone. Iraq war was some high times eh?
-------------------------------------------------------
> What's it matter now, it's only four dead
> Americans.
>
> -Hillary
yes what about all those dead americans that are on their own so we can GUT FEMA? I guess Katrina doesnt matter as an act of God but woe is me 4 dead americans are worth Screaming about? Yeah the republicans have more blood on their hands than anyone. Iraq war was some high times eh?
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie
()
Date: January 23, 2013 09:22PM
Major Malfunction Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That's ridiculous.
How so?
> As well as with respect to how the
> attack was knowingly misrepresented to the public.
Yeah. You go ahead and prove THAT!
> The reason that she feigned being upset is that
> she doesn't have a good answer.
Hillary's answers were EXCELLENT: Thorough, clear, honest. You have no idea what your talking about.
-------------------------------------------------------
> That's ridiculous.
How so?
> As well as with respect to how the
> attack was knowingly misrepresented to the public.
Yeah. You go ahead and prove THAT!
> The reason that she feigned being upset is that
> she doesn't have a good answer.
Hillary's answers were EXCELLENT: Thorough, clear, honest. You have no idea what your talking about.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Major Malfunction
()
Date: January 23, 2013 10:24PM
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Major Malfunction Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > That's ridiculous.
>
> How so?
>
> > As well as with respect to how the
> > attack was knowingly misrepresented to the
> public.
>
> Yeah. You go ahead and prove THAT!
>
It's proven on its face. They pushed one story while knowing otherwise. The facts and timelines as produced demonstrate that was the case. Even they now effectively concede the point in their own attempt to backtrack and claim that they kinda sorta did call it terrorism once in passing. Unfortunately, that was incidental to their maintaining emphatically many times and in well documented fashion over the next weeks that it was a demonstration gone bad and the video was the problem.
> > The reason that she feigned being upset is
> that
> > she doesn't have a good answer.
>
> Hillary's answers were EXCELLENT: Thorough, clear,
> honest. You have no idea what your talking about.
Well, you don't have to take it from me. If you look around you'll find commentary along the same lines from the New Yorker, Sharyl Attkisson @ CBS News, Jake Tapper @ CNN, Salon, etc., none of which are partisan Republican hacks. I'd expect more in the next few days.
e.g., from Salon:
"But there’s more going on here than Clinton snapping back at Republican politicking. It takes an extremely generous interpretation to miss a troubling disregard for government transparency and accountability in her comment. “It is our job to figure out what happened and to do everything we can to make sure it never happens again,” she said, and that is true. But she and her department have other jobs as well — among them, giving the public enough information to make informed decisions about certain government actions."
http://www.salon.com/2013/01/23/transparency_what_difference_does_it_make/
-------------------------------------------------------
> Major Malfunction Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > That's ridiculous.
>
> How so?
>
> > As well as with respect to how the
> > attack was knowingly misrepresented to the
> public.
>
> Yeah. You go ahead and prove THAT!
>
It's proven on its face. They pushed one story while knowing otherwise. The facts and timelines as produced demonstrate that was the case. Even they now effectively concede the point in their own attempt to backtrack and claim that they kinda sorta did call it terrorism once in passing. Unfortunately, that was incidental to their maintaining emphatically many times and in well documented fashion over the next weeks that it was a demonstration gone bad and the video was the problem.
> > The reason that she feigned being upset is
> that
> > she doesn't have a good answer.
>
> Hillary's answers were EXCELLENT: Thorough, clear,
> honest. You have no idea what your talking about.
Well, you don't have to take it from me. If you look around you'll find commentary along the same lines from the New Yorker, Sharyl Attkisson @ CBS News, Jake Tapper @ CNN, Salon, etc., none of which are partisan Republican hacks. I'd expect more in the next few days.
e.g., from Salon:
"But there’s more going on here than Clinton snapping back at Republican politicking. It takes an extremely generous interpretation to miss a troubling disregard for government transparency and accountability in her comment. “It is our job to figure out what happened and to do everything we can to make sure it never happens again,” she said, and that is true. But she and her department have other jobs as well — among them, giving the public enough information to make informed decisions about certain government actions."
http://www.salon.com/2013/01/23/transparency_what_difference_does_it_make/
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
South Park Republican
()
Date: January 23, 2013 10:59PM
I am no Hillary fan by any stretch of the imagination, but I give her a lot of props for today. McCain (who I voted for in 2000 and 2008), Rand Paul, and Ron Johnson were absolute jerks. The GOP is completely exploiting this incident and the deaths of these guys. Even for DC this is beyond ridiculous and absolutely shameful.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie
()
Date: January 23, 2013 11:02PM
Major Malfunction Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's proven on its face. They pushed one story
> while knowing otherwise. The facts and timelines
> as produced demonstrate that was the case. Even
> they now effectively concede the point in their
> own attempt to backtrack and claim that they kinda
> sorta did call it terrorism once in passing.
> Unfortunately, that was incidental to their
> maintaining emphatically many times and in well
> documented fashion over the next weeks that it was
> a demonstration gone bad and the video was the
> problem.
That's your interpretation. It is not mine.
> e.g., from Salon:
>
> "But there’s more going on here than Clinton
> snapping back at Republican politicking. It takes
> an extremely generous interpretation to miss a
> troubling disregard for government transparency
> and accountability in her comment. “It is our
> job to figure out what happened and to do
> everything we can to make sure it never happens
> again,” she said, and that is true. But she and
> her department have other jobs as well — among
> them, giving the public enough information to make
> informed decisions about certain government
> actions."
I don't find that troubling at all.
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's proven on its face. They pushed one story
> while knowing otherwise. The facts and timelines
> as produced demonstrate that was the case. Even
> they now effectively concede the point in their
> own attempt to backtrack and claim that they kinda
> sorta did call it terrorism once in passing.
> Unfortunately, that was incidental to their
> maintaining emphatically many times and in well
> documented fashion over the next weeks that it was
> a demonstration gone bad and the video was the
> problem.
That's your interpretation. It is not mine.
> e.g., from Salon:
>
> "But there’s more going on here than Clinton
> snapping back at Republican politicking. It takes
> an extremely generous interpretation to miss a
> troubling disregard for government transparency
> and accountability in her comment. “It is our
> job to figure out what happened and to do
> everything we can to make sure it never happens
> again,” she said, and that is true. But she and
> her department have other jobs as well — among
> them, giving the public enough information to make
> informed decisions about certain government
> actions."
I don't find that troubling at all.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Major Malfunction
()
Date: January 23, 2013 11:29PM
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Major Malfunction Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It's proven on its face. They pushed one story
> > while knowing otherwise. The facts and
> timelines
> > as produced demonstrate that was the case.
> Even
> > they now effectively concede the point in their
> > own attempt to backtrack and claim that they
> kinda
> > sorta did call it terrorism once in passing.
> > Unfortunately, that was incidental to their
> > maintaining emphatically many times and in well
> > documented fashion over the next weeks that it
> was
> > a demonstration gone bad and the video was the
> > problem.
>
> That's your interpretation. It is not mine.
There is no other interpretation other than one which ignores the facts and events as they happened. If you want to do so, fine by me. Not deluding anyone other than yourself.
>
> > e.g., from Salon:
> >
> > "But there’s more going on here than Clinton
> > snapping back at Republican politicking. It
> takes
> > an extremely generous interpretation to miss a
> > troubling disregard for government transparency
> > and accountability in her comment. “It is our
> > job to figure out what happened and to do
> > everything we can to make sure it never happens
> > again,” she said, and that is true. But she
> and
> > her department have other jobs as well —
> among
> > them, giving the public enough information to
> make
> > informed decisions about certain government
> > actions."
>
> I don't find that troubling at all.
Of course you don't. lol But I don't really care whether you do or not.
Your assertion above was that I had no idea what I was talking about. Apparently, I have quite a bit of good company and not just from the Faux News/Rush/Tea Party or however else you'd like to try to justify dismissing it on a partisan basis. I'll call BS on BS regardless what side it's coming from. Too bad so many others like you can't these days.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Major Malfunction Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It's proven on its face. They pushed one story
> > while knowing otherwise. The facts and
> timelines
> > as produced demonstrate that was the case.
> Even
> > they now effectively concede the point in their
> > own attempt to backtrack and claim that they
> kinda
> > sorta did call it terrorism once in passing.
> > Unfortunately, that was incidental to their
> > maintaining emphatically many times and in well
> > documented fashion over the next weeks that it
> was
> > a demonstration gone bad and the video was the
> > problem.
>
> That's your interpretation. It is not mine.
There is no other interpretation other than one which ignores the facts and events as they happened. If you want to do so, fine by me. Not deluding anyone other than yourself.
>
> > e.g., from Salon:
> >
> > "But there’s more going on here than Clinton
> > snapping back at Republican politicking. It
> takes
> > an extremely generous interpretation to miss a
> > troubling disregard for government transparency
> > and accountability in her comment. “It is our
> > job to figure out what happened and to do
> > everything we can to make sure it never happens
> > again,” she said, and that is true. But she
> and
> > her department have other jobs as well —
> among
> > them, giving the public enough information to
> make
> > informed decisions about certain government
> > actions."
>
> I don't find that troubling at all.
Of course you don't. lol But I don't really care whether you do or not.
Your assertion above was that I had no idea what I was talking about. Apparently, I have quite a bit of good company and not just from the Faux News/Rush/Tea Party or however else you'd like to try to justify dismissing it on a partisan basis. I'll call BS on BS regardless what side it's coming from. Too bad so many others like you can't these days.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie
()
Date: January 24, 2013 11:18AM
Major Malfunction Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There is no other interpretation other than one
> which ignores the facts and events as they
> happened. If you want to do so, fine by me. Not
> deluding anyone other than yourself.
These 'facts' to which you refer are nothing of the sort. They are merely your interpretation of the situation.
-------------------------------------------------------
> There is no other interpretation other than one
> which ignores the facts and events as they
> happened. If you want to do so, fine by me. Not
> deluding anyone other than yourself.
These 'facts' to which you refer are nothing of the sort. They are merely your interpretation of the situation.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
The Voice of Reason
()
Date: January 24, 2013 12:11PM
South Park Republican Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am no Hillary fan by any stretch of the
> imagination, but I give her a lot of props for
> today. McCain (who I voted for in 2000 and 2008),
> Rand Paul, and Ron Johnson were absolute jerks.
> The GOP is completely exploiting this incident and
> the deaths of these guys. Even for DC this is
> beyond ridiculous and absolutely shameful.
Well said and accurate.
The GOP was trying to shut down Hillary's run for president in 2016 because they don't have any females with experience to run against her. Instead what happened was the GOP looked like a bunch of bitter ignorant congressmen on a witch hunt.
Another idiot play by the GOP that will only hurt the GOP in the polls.
Who the fuck is managing the GOP these days???? Some high school kid from his political science class?
Get it together republicans!
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am no Hillary fan by any stretch of the
> imagination, but I give her a lot of props for
> today. McCain (who I voted for in 2000 and 2008),
> Rand Paul, and Ron Johnson were absolute jerks.
> The GOP is completely exploiting this incident and
> the deaths of these guys. Even for DC this is
> beyond ridiculous and absolutely shameful.
Well said and accurate.
The GOP was trying to shut down Hillary's run for president in 2016 because they don't have any females with experience to run against her. Instead what happened was the GOP looked like a bunch of bitter ignorant congressmen on a witch hunt.
Another idiot play by the GOP that will only hurt the GOP in the polls.
Who the fuck is managing the GOP these days???? Some high school kid from his political science class?
Get it together republicans!
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Factico
()
Date: January 24, 2013 12:14PM
When somebody says Benghazi all I think is political republican bullshit again.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Death by numbers?
()
Date: January 24, 2013 01:48PM
Dane Bramage Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What's it matter now, it's only four dead
> Americans.
>
> -Hillary
You are absolutely correct. Only four. What the fuck is the big deal?
Grow up. Everyone dies.
-------------------------------------------------------
> What's it matter now, it's only four dead
> Americans.
>
> -Hillary
You are absolutely correct. Only four. What the fuck is the big deal?
Grow up. Everyone dies.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Undefined Parameters
()
Date: January 24, 2013 02:33PM
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Undefined Parameters Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Enlighten us oh great and wonderful Oz.
>
> It's 'great and powerful Oz', btw, but since you
> asked nicely:
>
> Libbys Prez-ent Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------
> ------
> > 4 dead Americans.
> >
> > "What difference does it make...?"
>
> This implies that Secretary Clinton stated that
> she was unconcerned about the deaths of four
> Americans.
>
> What the Secretary actually said was:
>
> "Was it because of a protest or was it because of
> guys out for a walk last night who decided to
> kill some Americans? What difference at this point
> does it make?
>
> Her meaning is that whether the attack was the
> result of protests over a video or a planned
> terrorist attack makes no difference at this
> point.
>
> Capiche?
I didn't read Ralph's message to mean she was unconcerned about the dead. I read it to mean that the circumstances leading up to their deaths mattered because she and her Dept. were negligent during this whole debacle.
And the question she was supposed to be answering was why did everyone put out a blantant lie about protests, which she never answered btw. So the lie doesn't matter to the 4 dead americans, as they are still dead. But it should matter to those of us still alive as it was not only a lie, but an obvious and purposeful lie. When people start defending blantant lying from their elected leaders, they are no longer concerned citizens and cross the line to useful idiots to be used to circumvent accountability and responsibility.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Undefined Parameters Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Enlighten us oh great and wonderful Oz.
>
> It's 'great and powerful Oz', btw, but since you
> asked nicely:
>
> Libbys Prez-ent Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------
> ------
> > 4 dead Americans.
> >
> > "What difference does it make...?"
>
> This implies that Secretary Clinton stated that
> she was unconcerned about the deaths of four
> Americans.
>
> What the Secretary actually said was:
>
> "Was it because of a protest or was it because of
> guys out for a walk last night who decided to
> kill some Americans? What difference at this point
> does it make?
>
> Her meaning is that whether the attack was the
> result of protests over a video or a planned
> terrorist attack makes no difference at this
> point.
>
> Capiche?
I didn't read Ralph's message to mean she was unconcerned about the dead. I read it to mean that the circumstances leading up to their deaths mattered because she and her Dept. were negligent during this whole debacle.
And the question she was supposed to be answering was why did everyone put out a blantant lie about protests, which she never answered btw. So the lie doesn't matter to the 4 dead americans, as they are still dead. But it should matter to those of us still alive as it was not only a lie, but an obvious and purposeful lie. When people start defending blantant lying from their elected leaders, they are no longer concerned citizens and cross the line to useful idiots to be used to circumvent accountability and responsibility.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie
()
Date: January 24, 2013 02:53PM
Undefined Parameters Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I didn't read Ralph's message to mean she was
> unconcerned about the dead. I read it to mean
> that the circumstances leading up to their deaths
> mattered because she and her Dept. were negligent
> during this whole debacle.
Secretary Clinton was negligent? She failed to exercise the care expected of a reasonably prudent person in like circumstances? How so?
> So the lie doesn't matter to the 4 dead americans,
> as they are still dead. But it should matter to
> those of us still alive as it was not only a lie,
> but an obvious and purposeful lie.
I don't see this 'lie' you're talking about. What was this 'lie'? What was its purpose? What was gained by whom through this 'lie'?
-------------------------------------------------------
> I didn't read Ralph's message to mean she was
> unconcerned about the dead. I read it to mean
> that the circumstances leading up to their deaths
> mattered because she and her Dept. were negligent
> during this whole debacle.
Secretary Clinton was negligent? She failed to exercise the care expected of a reasonably prudent person in like circumstances? How so?
> So the lie doesn't matter to the 4 dead americans,
> as they are still dead. But it should matter to
> those of us still alive as it was not only a lie,
> but an obvious and purposeful lie.
I don't see this 'lie' you're talking about. What was this 'lie'? What was its purpose? What was gained by whom through this 'lie'?
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Libbys Memory
()
Date: January 24, 2013 02:57PM
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Undefined Parameters Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I didn't read Ralph's message to mean she was
> > unconcerned about the dead. I read it to mean
> > that the circumstances leading up to their
> deaths
> > mattered because she and her Dept. were
> negligent
> > during this whole debacle.
>
> Secretary Clinton was negligent? She failed to
> exercise the care expected of a reasonably prudent
> person in like circumstances? How so?
>
> > So the lie doesn't matter to the 4 dead
> americans,
> > as they are still dead. But it should matter
> to
> > those of us still alive as it was not only a
> lie,
> > but an obvious and purposeful lie.
>
> I don't see this 'lie' you're talking about. What
> was this 'lie'? What was its purpose? What was
> gained by whom through this 'lie'?
It was a video.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Undefined Parameters Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I didn't read Ralph's message to mean she was
> > unconcerned about the dead. I read it to mean
> > that the circumstances leading up to their
> deaths
> > mattered because she and her Dept. were
> negligent
> > during this whole debacle.
>
> Secretary Clinton was negligent? She failed to
> exercise the care expected of a reasonably prudent
> person in like circumstances? How so?
>
> > So the lie doesn't matter to the 4 dead
> americans,
> > as they are still dead. But it should matter
> to
> > those of us still alive as it was not only a
> lie,
> > but an obvious and purposeful lie.
>
> I don't see this 'lie' you're talking about. What
> was this 'lie'? What was its purpose? What was
> gained by whom through this 'lie'?
It was a video.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie
()
Date: January 24, 2013 03:42PM
Libbys Memory Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It was a video.
Yes, by all indications, the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, Libya was in response to the ‘Innocence of Muslims’ video.
-------------------------------------------------------
> It was a video.
Yes, by all indications, the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, Libya was in response to the ‘Innocence of Muslims’ video.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Undefined Parameters
()
Date: January 24, 2013 03:53PM
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Undefined Parameters Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I didn't read Ralph's message to mean she was
> > unconcerned about the dead. I read it to mean
> > that the circumstances leading up to their
> deaths
> > mattered because she and her Dept. were
> negligent
> > during this whole debacle.
>
> Secretary Clinton was negligent? She failed to
> exercise the care expected of a reasonably prudent
> person in like circumstances? How so?
>
> > So the lie doesn't matter to the 4 dead
> americans,
> > as they are still dead. But it should matter
> to
> > those of us still alive as it was not only a
> lie,
> > but an obvious and purposeful lie.
>
> I don't see this 'lie' you're talking about. What
> was this 'lie'? What was its purpose? What was
> gained by whom through this 'lie'?
There were no protests. This was a planned and coordinated attack by terrorists. The administration put out the story for over a week that the attack was a result of a spontaneous protest gone bad over a lame Internet video of Mohammed. That was a lie. The question that Hillary was asked was who told whom this lie and why. She didn't answer that question. But is was a lie.
The Secretary of State could be considered negligent if she wasn't aware that additional security had been requested by Stevens and rejected. She could be considered negligent if her direct reports pulled the adequate security that Stevens did have just before the 911 anniversary and leave him unprotected. She could be considered negligent for ordering Stevens into Bengahzi. She could be considered negligent if she didn't know her own State Dept was lying to the public (or complicit if she did). But, since she wouldn't answer the questions, we don't know what she knew or didn't know before, during or after this incident. But we do know that this complete screw up occured on her watch in the Department she runs.
Again, someone screwed up. But we'll never know who since this administration is completely protected by the press. Remember that stupid episode about Valerie Plame? This makes the Plame affair look like the Sunday comics, but no one asks questions and those who do are pilloried in the press. Only partisan sheep could condone the complete lack of accountability that Hillary or anyone in this administration is held to by the press.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Undefined Parameters Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I didn't read Ralph's message to mean she was
> > unconcerned about the dead. I read it to mean
> > that the circumstances leading up to their
> deaths
> > mattered because she and her Dept. were
> negligent
> > during this whole debacle.
>
> Secretary Clinton was negligent? She failed to
> exercise the care expected of a reasonably prudent
> person in like circumstances? How so?
>
> > So the lie doesn't matter to the 4 dead
> americans,
> > as they are still dead. But it should matter
> to
> > those of us still alive as it was not only a
> lie,
> > but an obvious and purposeful lie.
>
> I don't see this 'lie' you're talking about. What
> was this 'lie'? What was its purpose? What was
> gained by whom through this 'lie'?
There were no protests. This was a planned and coordinated attack by terrorists. The administration put out the story for over a week that the attack was a result of a spontaneous protest gone bad over a lame Internet video of Mohammed. That was a lie. The question that Hillary was asked was who told whom this lie and why. She didn't answer that question. But is was a lie.
The Secretary of State could be considered negligent if she wasn't aware that additional security had been requested by Stevens and rejected. She could be considered negligent if her direct reports pulled the adequate security that Stevens did have just before the 911 anniversary and leave him unprotected. She could be considered negligent for ordering Stevens into Bengahzi. She could be considered negligent if she didn't know her own State Dept was lying to the public (or complicit if she did). But, since she wouldn't answer the questions, we don't know what she knew or didn't know before, during or after this incident. But we do know that this complete screw up occured on her watch in the Department she runs.
Again, someone screwed up. But we'll never know who since this administration is completely protected by the press. Remember that stupid episode about Valerie Plame? This makes the Plame affair look like the Sunday comics, but no one asks questions and those who do are pilloried in the press. Only partisan sheep could condone the complete lack of accountability that Hillary or anyone in this administration is held to by the press.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Undefined Parameters
()
Date: January 24, 2013 03:56PM
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Libbys Memory Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It was a video.
>
> Yes, by all indications, the attack on the US
> consulate in Benghazi, Libya was in response to
> the ‘Innocence of Muslims’ video.
You're obviously drinking the koolaid as even white house spokesman Jay Carney admitted there was no protests and the video didn't have anything to do with it. You're blinded by partisanship. Best to ignore you at this point since you're either pathetically uninformed or a propagandist.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Libbys Memory Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It was a video.
>
> Yes, by all indications, the attack on the US
> consulate in Benghazi, Libya was in response to
> the ‘Innocence of Muslims’ video.
You're obviously drinking the koolaid as even white house spokesman Jay Carney admitted there was no protests and the video didn't have anything to do with it. You're blinded by partisanship. Best to ignore you at this point since you're either pathetically uninformed or a propagandist.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie
()
Date: January 24, 2013 04:07PM
Undefined Parameters Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You're obviously drinking the koolaid as even
> white house spokesman Jay Carney admitted there
> was no protests and the video didn't have anything
> to do with it.
September 13: White House Press Secretary Jay Carney says during a press briefing and a later press gaggle that the protests around the world were due to reaction to the video. In the gaggle, Carney made clear he didn’t want to speculate in light of the ongoing investigation.
September 16: United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice goes on all five major Sunday news shows to explain current administration thinking on the Benghazi attack. During her statements, Rice says that the attacks were in part a response to the anti-Islam video that had spurred protests across the region. But, contrary to the popular narrative, Rice did not give a definitive answer as to what exactly took place in Benghazi
September 19: National Counterterrorism Center Director Matthew Olsen calls the assault in Benghazi an “opportunistic attack” in testimony before the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee. “I would say yes, they were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy,” he said.
September 28: The Office of the Director of National Intelligence takes responsibility for the intelligence community’s claim, repeated by Rice, that the Benghazi attack was launched in response to the protests against the anti-Muslim video in Cairo.
October 16: News reports begin to indicate that while the Benghazi attacks may not have grown out of a protest against an anti-Muslim film as Rice said in her Sept. 16 remarks, the assault may have been both an act of terrorism and carried out in response to the video.
October 19: Fox News’ Geraldo Rivera and Peter Doocy both report that the ‘Innocence of Muslims’ video may have had something to do with the Benghazi assault. Their statements are the first on Fox News to veer from the narrative attacking the administration’s early statements.
October 20: The LA Times and Washington Post both publish articles critical of a simplified narrative surrounding Benghazi. In the former, intelligence officials are quoted as saying that the Sept. 11 assault was spontaneous, was not ordered by al Qaeda, and was in response to the video. In the latter, columnist David Ignatius confirms that the CIA provided the talking points for the administration and Congress on their initial beliefs regarding causes of the Benghazi attack, including that it stemmed from a protest.
-------------------------------------------------------
> You're obviously drinking the koolaid as even
> white house spokesman Jay Carney admitted there
> was no protests and the video didn't have anything
> to do with it.
September 13: White House Press Secretary Jay Carney says during a press briefing and a later press gaggle that the protests around the world were due to reaction to the video. In the gaggle, Carney made clear he didn’t want to speculate in light of the ongoing investigation.
September 16: United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice goes on all five major Sunday news shows to explain current administration thinking on the Benghazi attack. During her statements, Rice says that the attacks were in part a response to the anti-Islam video that had spurred protests across the region. But, contrary to the popular narrative, Rice did not give a definitive answer as to what exactly took place in Benghazi
September 19: National Counterterrorism Center Director Matthew Olsen calls the assault in Benghazi an “opportunistic attack” in testimony before the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee. “I would say yes, they were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy,” he said.
September 28: The Office of the Director of National Intelligence takes responsibility for the intelligence community’s claim, repeated by Rice, that the Benghazi attack was launched in response to the protests against the anti-Muslim video in Cairo.
October 16: News reports begin to indicate that while the Benghazi attacks may not have grown out of a protest against an anti-Muslim film as Rice said in her Sept. 16 remarks, the assault may have been both an act of terrorism and carried out in response to the video.
October 19: Fox News’ Geraldo Rivera and Peter Doocy both report that the ‘Innocence of Muslims’ video may have had something to do with the Benghazi assault. Their statements are the first on Fox News to veer from the narrative attacking the administration’s early statements.
October 20: The LA Times and Washington Post both publish articles critical of a simplified narrative surrounding Benghazi. In the former, intelligence officials are quoted as saying that the Sept. 11 assault was spontaneous, was not ordered by al Qaeda, and was in response to the video. In the latter, columnist David Ignatius confirms that the CIA provided the talking points for the administration and Congress on their initial beliefs regarding causes of the Benghazi attack, including that it stemmed from a protest.
Re: Hillary Tears Sen. Ron Johnson fourth, fifth, and sixth assholes
Posted by:
You're a lost cause
()
Date: January 24, 2013 07:08PM
Dumb Fuck = Ralphie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> September 13: White House Press Secretary Jay
> Carney says during a press briefing and a later
> press gaggle that the protests around the world
> were due to reaction to the video. In the gaggle,
> Carney made clear he didn’t want to speculate in
> light of the ongoing investigation.
> ...
Wow, you really are delusional. You actually think that because you selectively list (or copy someone else's list of) various random poor reporting you think that somehow supports your case? And Geraldo and Doocy? Seriously? lol
NOBODY now disputes that there was no protest. Even the administration admits that's the case. Did you completely miss Rice's own admission:
"In the course of the meeting, we explained that the talking points provided by the intelligence community, and the initial assessment upon which they were based, were incorrect in a key respect: there was no protest or demonstration in Benghazi," Rice said.
Or the CIA's own statements and timeline noting that they knew within a very short period of time that it was a military-type attack?
All of which very clearly was known to the administration at the time. Because some of the political appointees edited the talking points to make them appear more politically palatable doesn't change the underlying facts. And certainly doesn't justify coming up with a completely contrived story blaming the video after facts to the contrary were known.
For fucksake, the protest in Egypt wasn't even about the video. Nobody serious who is knowledgeable regarding the region believes that to be the case. It was part of a larger, on-going radical Islamist/anti-US movement and, in particular, around the imprisonment of the "Blind Sheik." There had been an on-going protest at the US Embassy re his release for months before. This was simply a scale-up to coincide with 9/11.
From a USA Today article from the time re the Egyptian protests:
"The protest was planned by Salafists well before news circulated of an objectionable video ridiculing Islam's prophet, Mohammed, said Eric Trager, an expert at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
The protest outside the U.S. Embassy in Cairo was announced Aug. 30 by Jamaa Islamiya, a State Department-designated terrorist group, to protest the ongoing imprisonment of its spiritual leader, Sheikh Omar abdel Rahman. He is serving a life sentence in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.
At best the video represented about the equivalent of a political ad (that nobody saw) and an excuse used by those organizing the protest:
"When the video started circulating, Nader Bakkar, the spokesman for the Egyptian Salafist Noor party, which holds about 25% of the seats in parliament, called on people to go to the embassy. He also called on non-Islamist soccer hooligans, known as Ultras, to join the protest.
On Monday, the brother of al-Qaeda leader Ayman al Zawahiri, Mohamed al
Zawahiri, tweeted that people should go to the embassy and "defend the prophet," Trager said."
DHS had even issued a specific warning in advance of the planned protests before the video came to light.
All of this relates to the same basic movement/issues in the same way that various other attacks and protests in the past have been related, as the same was related to the Algerian attack. All part of a larger movement by ideologically affiliated groups in the region. None of this is any big secret or conspiracy, rather all fairly well-known and I'm sure very well understood by the intelligence community here whether the average American understands it or not.
You're either in denial or being intentionally ignorant. As well as operating at a kindergarten level of understanding. But then you're got plenty of company in that regard.
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> September 13: White House Press Secretary Jay
> Carney says during a press briefing and a later
> press gaggle that the protests around the world
> were due to reaction to the video. In the gaggle,
> Carney made clear he didn’t want to speculate in
> light of the ongoing investigation.
> ...
Wow, you really are delusional. You actually think that because you selectively list (or copy someone else's list of) various random poor reporting you think that somehow supports your case? And Geraldo and Doocy? Seriously? lol
NOBODY now disputes that there was no protest. Even the administration admits that's the case. Did you completely miss Rice's own admission:
"In the course of the meeting, we explained that the talking points provided by the intelligence community, and the initial assessment upon which they were based, were incorrect in a key respect: there was no protest or demonstration in Benghazi," Rice said.
Or the CIA's own statements and timeline noting that they knew within a very short period of time that it was a military-type attack?
All of which very clearly was known to the administration at the time. Because some of the political appointees edited the talking points to make them appear more politically palatable doesn't change the underlying facts. And certainly doesn't justify coming up with a completely contrived story blaming the video after facts to the contrary were known.
For fucksake, the protest in Egypt wasn't even about the video. Nobody serious who is knowledgeable regarding the region believes that to be the case. It was part of a larger, on-going radical Islamist/anti-US movement and, in particular, around the imprisonment of the "Blind Sheik." There had been an on-going protest at the US Embassy re his release for months before. This was simply a scale-up to coincide with 9/11.
From a USA Today article from the time re the Egyptian protests:
"The protest was planned by Salafists well before news circulated of an objectionable video ridiculing Islam's prophet, Mohammed, said Eric Trager, an expert at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
The protest outside the U.S. Embassy in Cairo was announced Aug. 30 by Jamaa Islamiya, a State Department-designated terrorist group, to protest the ongoing imprisonment of its spiritual leader, Sheikh Omar abdel Rahman. He is serving a life sentence in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.
At best the video represented about the equivalent of a political ad (that nobody saw) and an excuse used by those organizing the protest:
"When the video started circulating, Nader Bakkar, the spokesman for the Egyptian Salafist Noor party, which holds about 25% of the seats in parliament, called on people to go to the embassy. He also called on non-Islamist soccer hooligans, known as Ultras, to join the protest.
On Monday, the brother of al-Qaeda leader Ayman al Zawahiri, Mohamed al
Zawahiri, tweeted that people should go to the embassy and "defend the prophet," Trager said."
DHS had even issued a specific warning in advance of the planned protests before the video came to light.
All of this relates to the same basic movement/issues in the same way that various other attacks and protests in the past have been related, as the same was related to the Algerian attack. All part of a larger movement by ideologically affiliated groups in the region. None of this is any big secret or conspiracy, rather all fairly well-known and I'm sure very well understood by the intelligence community here whether the average American understands it or not.
You're either in denial or being intentionally ignorant. As well as operating at a kindergarten level of understanding. But then you're got plenty of company in that regard.