Forum Thread

Special Forces Nab Benghazi Attack Mastermind in Libya

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 16 - 27 of 27 Prev 1 2
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    johnnycee Wrote: I would be hesitant to take anything for truth with this guy, he first admitted to being at the Consul but only as a would be rescuer, now he claims in this article that it was a partial reason for participating in the attack although he refrained from mentioning it earlier, I hope the long boat trip is not an attempt to couch his answers because that would wreck any chance of a fair trial.
    This is where I have to call you out. You have consistently claimed we were doing nothing to catch the perpetrators of the Benghazi attack. That has proved to be false. You have consistently claimed that the video had nothing to do with the attack. That has also proved to be false. Your response is 'I would be hesitant to take anything for truth'. What does it take for you to accept that you are wrong? I understand you have a distaste for our President, but will you ever accept that your opinion about what happened that night might, in fact, be incorrect? Or will you keep coming up with ways to try to prove that your point of view is correct? Sometimes it's smarter to just accept that you are wrong.
    you can call me out all you want , it doesn't change anything, the UN. Ambassador Susan Rice claimed along with the rest of the Administration that the attack was caused by the video ,no if 's and's or but's. This guy himself says it may have been a (PARTIAL) reason on other occasions he says nothing at all about it being the reason, and we did do nothing about his capture until it was convenient and rather than get him back here ASAP to be held accountable , what does the Administration do, take a slow boat back so they can interrogate him before his lawyers get ahold of him, this administration chose to hold him accountable in a civilian setting but then won't allow him the protection of a civilian criminal defendant , can't have it both ways, what does it take for you to learn and understand the truth that this Administration does not give a damn about Policies and Procedures put in place to protect us from an overreaching Government, and also to not accept their vague answers to questions and to not believe sometimes outright lies. it is not a question of my being right or wrong or that I think I am smarter because I think I am right in my belief, I believe what I see and hear, and once you get caught in a lie or try to pee on my leg and call it rain, well then, you will lose all creditability with me, which this Adm9inistration has done.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    Dutch Wrote:
    johnnycee Wrote: We have not been a Pro-Active country since after the Bush war, citizens no longer believe the hype nor lies the Government spews out on a daily basis, so we end up being a re-active government with so many hands in the pot prior to any decision being made that the final decision almost seems like a after thought . The security of the country is nothing more than a talking point now, it's whatever the party's agenda needs or wants first, "The By the People and for the People" is also just another talking point.
    J.C. you are absolutely right on; sure appreciate your correct analyses. Compliments!! The only thing I hope that this country comes to their senses and start attacking the "cause"
    What do either of you mean? The security of this country is nothing more than a talking point now? Our government spends $618 Billion per year on 'defense'. How do you call that a talking point? And 'By the People, For the People' is still alive and well. We get what we vote for. You want something different? Vote for something different.
    Jared, you must be kidding; I said a million times start at the cause, our actions also the "defence" you mention are always only covering the end result.
    It is our politics and stance in the world which does create more and more terrorists; which I also mentioned a million times.
    Thus stop throwing our "weight" and drones around in the world; stop playing the arrogant policeman; stop selling weapons all over the place; stop bribing countries or their leaders with huge amounts of money. Concentrate on our own country for a change. We've got plenty of overkill to stop any invader so what is the "fear factor " here anyway. I guess you like to continue on our present track; then I got news for you; it will be Napoleon all over again; it will be our Waterloo.

    Also read this what I wrote in another thread:

    Just on the news (ABC) an interview with Cheney!! How crazy can we get; this guy should be in jail forever; but instead still has a big mouth and people listen. Unbelievable. Also more and more dumb nutheads pop up who still think the US should rule the world. Even Cheney said, that there are now more terrorists than ever; I fully agree on that one. So lets start at "a", how come? Quite simple, as I said a million times; the more you bomb them, fight them, drone them, the more members they will get to get their revenge one way or another (this picture has not sunk into the militaristic brains here)
    Guess who created the whole Iraq happening; not the Smurfs, I guess. No we are getting the " deksel op onze neus" ( the lid will hit our noses)
    The total ignorance here related to other cultures and the way we "stomp" around on this world will eventually totally backfire. Our attitude is very sick indeed; we think we can "buy" every one, or supply weapons to anyone; which weapons may in turn be used to shoot ourselves in the foot
    Sorry we make ourselves more and more hated around the world; so be not surprised if an other 9/11 is on the horizon; we are asking for that. 9/11 did not happen either out of its own. Think for a change what we are doing worldwide with our drones and attitude etc. WE create these terrorists.
    Also as I said before "religion" is the curse of humanity; the Iraq happening shows that in its ugliest form.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote: Jared, you must be kidding; I said a million times start at the cause, our actions also the "defence" you mention are always only covering the end result.
    It is our politics and stance in the world which does create more and more terrorists; which I also mentioned a million times.
    Thus stop throwing our "weight" and drones around in the world; stop playing the arrogant policeman; stop selling weapons all over the place; stop bribing countries or their leaders with huge amounts of money. Concentrate on our own country for a change. We've got plenty of overkill to stop any invader so what is the "fear factor " here anyway. I guess you like to continue on our present track; then I got news for you; it will be Napoleon all over again; it will be our Waterloo.
    I challenged both of you to prove how our national security is only a talking point. I was not, in any way, suggesting we need to get back into another hot war.

    You both are speaking in sweeping generalities without providing any concrete information to back up your charges. I was not justifying how much money we spend on defense nor have I ever done so. I was also not suggesting we continue on 'our present track' and I have never done so. To suggest that I ever have shows that you are reading what you want to read instead of what I am actually writing.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    johnnycee Wrote: what does it take for you to learn and understand the truth that this Administration does not give a damn about Policies and Procedures put in place to protect us from an overreaching Government, and also to not accept their vague answers to questions and to not believe sometimes outright lies. it is not a question of my being right or wrong or that I think I am smarter because I think I am right in my belief, I believe what I see and hear, and once you get caught in a lie or try to pee on my leg and call it rain, well then, you will lose all creditability with me, which this Adm9inistration has done.
    I have to compliment you again for finding a way to throw out yet another ad hominem attack against our President and his Administration. Whenever one can't debate things based on the merits of a discussion, it's far easier to just start charging that the Administration doesn't give a damn about the law. What better way to back up the way you personally feel than saying we have a lawless President? That way you will always feel justified in going against each and every single thing he and his Administration does and never critically think about more complex nuances of the way our Federal Government functions.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I find it difficult to debate someone who is in lock step in whatever this administration does or says, I find it unreasonable for you to expect people like myself, to believe Susan Rice, Lois Lerner, Eric Holder Et Al, I also find it difficult to hold a conversation with you when you believe all opposing views of mine are somehow linked to Fox news, I also might add that I think you pay much more attention to them than I do giving your knowledge of their various talking points, so go on believing whatever you choose, as for me I know what dog piss smells like.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    For starters--I never once said I am in lock step with the Administration. You may believe I am because I tend to call you out on your long list of logical fallacies you constantly use to try to muddy debates and change the topic whenever anyone challenges you to back up your wild accusations with actual facts. To suggest I'm in lock step with the Administration only proves my point.

    The reason I call you out for using Republican talking points is because you constantly use Republican talking points. Whether they be from Fox News, Rush, or anyone else doesn't matter to me. I will also continue to call you out when you use Republican talking points and challenge you to back up those with some actual facts. I would be happy to provide you a long list of talking points spanning a variety of topics you constantly use that are either incorrect or outright lies if you would like for me to.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    So I have to prove to you by bonifide documents that Susan Rice did not lie, that Lois Lerner was not lying and that Eric Holder is a fair Atty. Gen., you have got to be kidding ,right, you do follow the party line when it comes to this President and his Administration, I always question anybody in authority that I perceive to be doing wrong or at least something being done unfairly, as many in this Administration have done, I also questioned our Iraq mission under Bush. I also don't have to prove anything to you, you are the one that is disbelieving not me, so the onus is on you to prove me wrong which you have not done so far, you quote left /liberal publications as if they are beyond reproach, I could do the same thing with Right / Conservative publications, I noticed also that you threw in the obligatory comment about Rush, as if this radio/TV political pundit has anything to do with national policy, BTW, the party line is to always smear any conservative political pundits as if those who listen to their broadcasts are just dumb and ignorant people. BTW, I can't submit proof that the Left does not like the Conservative point of view, other than of course watching them and listening to their dialogue.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    johnnycee Wrote: you are the one that is disbelieving not me, so the onus is on you to prove me wrong which you have not done so far
    Where should I start?

    Susan Rice: What exactly did she lie about? She was telling the nation what was widely accepted by numerous national security personnel and experts alike. You may have a hard time accepting the video might have played a role, but that doesn't mean that you are correct. We all have short memories of what was going on in the Middle East during the time of the attack, but the entire region was up in flames about that video. Do you not remember this or has it been too long for you to recall what was going on back then? To suggest she purposely lied to the American people just shows that you are following one of the tried and true Republican talking points. What exactly would she have to gain by lying? Our embassies and consulates have been attacked countless times throughout our nations history. What makes you think this one is a massive left wing conspiracy? Can you possibly admit that maybe, just maybe, your point of view is based off of what right wing pundits have been spewing out since 2012?

    Lois Lerner: Your partisan bent is showing here yet again. You hear what you want to hear, the facts be damned. J. Russell George, the IRS inspector general, said under questioning by the House Oversight Committee that he completely bungled the investigation and 'overlooked' the fact progressive groups were being targeted as well. You would rather make this a partisan issue and not think about the bigger picture of what constitutes a 501(c)(4). What are your thoughts about an agency with a limited budget being tasked with parsing through the Supreme Court's insane Citizens United ruling and evaluating what organizations should qualify for tax-exempt status because they are a social welfare agency and what organizations shouldn't because they are blatantly political in nature? Can you possibly accept that it's not nearly as simple or conspiratorial as you so wish it is? You like to think of things in black and white and not take the time to critically think about the bigger issues at hand with this so called scandal.

    Eric Holder: What exactly do you mean by Eric Holder not being a 'fair' Attorney General? You're just pulling things out of a hat now. You may have a hard time believing it, but I actually have numerous criticisms about his tenure. I don't think he's done nearly enough to address our exploding prison population, marijuana decriminalization, civil and human rights cases, and a host of other issues. In the same breath, I think the phony scandals the right cooks up on a daily basis are outlandish and childish. You love clinging on to every so called scandal he is supposedly involved in as proof that he is destroying America. I look at these phony scandals and see them for exactly what they are: partisan witch hunts. I can actually separate my distaste for someone without believing they are part of a massive conspiracy to bring our country down.

    I can go on and on about how your views mirror talking points Republicans put out on a consistent basis. From Obamacare to Immigration you consistently quote, sometimes verbatim, talking points put out by the right. That's your right, but I'm going to do a better job of informing our readers when you do so and will provide documentation for them to look for themselves moving forward.


    johnnycee Wrote: you quote left /liberal publications as if they are beyond reproach, I could do the same thing with Right / Conservative publications,
    Can you please inform me of any left/liberal publications I have ever quoted as a legitimate source? This is exactly what I'm saying here. You can often do nothing better than level Ad Hominem personal attacks against people who challenge you and resort to calling them party line loyalist who can't think for themselves. That's easy to do, but it's rather childish if you ask me. You can challenge me over my views, but don't ever accuse me of plagiarism unless you are able to back it up.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    johnnycee Wrote: you are the one that is disbelieving not me, so the onus is on you to prove me wrong which you have not done so far
    Where should I start?

    Susan Rice: What exactly did she lie about? She was telling the nation what was widely accepted by numerous national security personnel and experts alike. You may have a hard time accepting the video might have played a role, but that doesn't mean that you are correct. We all have short memories of what was going on in the Middle East during the time of the attack, but the entire region was up in flames about that video. Do you not remember this or has it been too long for you to recall what was going on back then? To suggest she purposely lied to the American people just shows that you are following one of the tried and true Republican talking points. What exactly would she have to gain by lying? Our embassies and consulates have been attacked countless times throughout our nations history. What makes you think this one is a massive left wing conspiracy? Can you possibly admit that maybe, just maybe, your point of view is based off of what right wing pundits have been spewing out since 2012?

    Lois Lerner: Your partisan bent is showing here yet again. You hear what you want to hear, the facts be damned. J. Russell George, the IRS inspector general, said under questioning by the House Oversight Committee that he completely bungled the investigation and 'overlooked' the fact progressive groups were being targeted as well. You would rather make this a partisan issue and not think about the bigger picture of what constitutes a 501(c)(4). What are your thoughts about an agency with a limited budget being tasked with parsing through the Supreme Court's insane Citizens United ruling and evaluating what organizations should qualify for tax-exempt status because they are a social welfare agency and what organizations shouldn't because they are blatantly political in nature? Can you possibly accept that it's not nearly as simple or conspiratorial as you so wish it is? You like to think of things in black and white and not take the time to critically think about the bigger issues at hand with this so called scandal.

    Eric Holder: What exactly do you mean by Eric Holder not being a 'fair' Attorney General? You're just pulling things out of a hat now. You may have a hard time believing it, but I actually have numerous criticisms about his tenure. I don't think he's done nearly enough to address our exploding prison population, marijuana decriminalization, civil and human rights cases, and a host of other issues. In the same breath, I think the phony scandals the right cooks up on a daily basis are outlandish and childish. You love clinging on to every so called scandal he is supposedly involved in as proof that he is destroying America. I look at these phony scandals and see them for exactly what they are: partisan witch hunts. I can actually separate my distaste for someone without believing they are part of a massive conspiracy to bring our country down.

    I can go on and on about how your views mirror talking points Republicans put out on a consistent basis. From Obamacare to Immigration you consistently quote, sometimes verbatim, talking points put out by the right. That's your right, but I'm going to do a better job of informing our readers when you do so and will provide documentation for them to look for themselves moving forward.


    johnnycee Wrote: you quote left /liberal publications as if they are beyond reproach, I could do the same thing with Right / Conservative publications,
    Can you please inform me of any left/liberal publications I have ever quoted as a legitimate source? This is exactly what I'm saying here. You can often do nothing better than level Ad Hominem personal attacks against people who challenge you and resort to calling them party line loyalist who can't think for themselves. That's easy to do, but it's rather childish if you ask me. You can challenge me over my views, but don't ever accuse me of plagiarism unless you are able to back it up.
    Let's start with Eric Holder, in the 2008 elections Black Panthers are standing outside of a polling place in somewhat military attire holding batons openly, Eric Holder makes ruling that they are not being intimidating , patently unfair, if skinheads were standing outside of a polling place with batons on election day, would the ruling have the same?

    Lois Lerner, who invoked her 5th Amendment Rights when there was no reason for it at a civil hearing , you invoke that Right when you feel that your testimony would incriminate you, this was a hearing about allegations concerning her Agency about unauthorized use of the Agency for political gain, now it seems the charade continues with the "crashing of her hard drive " with the E-mails from the dates needed for the investigation having now been deleted, and we are supposed to believe this nonsense, when if you used the same excuse in any audit that you may encounter would be met with laughter from the very same Agency.

    Susan Rice flat out lied, she was told to lie, so being a party person ,she did as instructed, she lied. no further comment needed.


    Quoting a article is not considered plagiarism, unless you are adopting the article or quote as your own, so no plagiarism.
















  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    johnnycee Wrote: Let's start with Eric Holder, in the 2008 elections Black Panthers are standing outside of a polling place in somewhat military attire holding batons openly, Eric Holder makes ruling that they are not being intimidating , patently unfair, if skinheads were standing outside of a polling place with batons on election day, would the ruling have the same?
    I love the reverse racism charge. Very classy. White people have had it so hard in this country for so long, huh?

    Have you read up on this case at all or are you going off of what you have heard? Are you aware that it wasn't Attorney General Holder, but Christopher Coates, who dismissed the charges against one of the two members and led to lesser charges against the other? Are you also aware that this was conducted by two individuals at one polling station in a country of 300 plus million people? Last, but not least, this case was completely blown out of proportion by the right wing media, but it doesn't surprise me that you are clinging on to it as proof that we have an out of control Attorney General who hates white people.

    johnnycee Wrote: Lois Lerner, who invoked her 5th Amendment Rights when there was no reason for it at a civil hearing , you invoke that Right when you feel that your testimony would incriminate you, this was a hearing about allegations concerning her Agency about unauthorized use of the Agency for political gain, now it seems the charade continues with the "crashing of her hard drive " with the E-mails from the dates needed for the investigation having now been deleted, and we are supposed to believe this nonsense, when if you used the same excuse in any audit that you may encounter would be met with laughter from the very same Agency.
    Is it against the law to invoke one's 5th Amendment right? The onus is on the House of Representatives to prove she did something illegal. They have obviously failed. And you obviously have only watched right wing news regarding her hard drive. This happened years BEFORE the supposed scandal, back in 2011. Nice try though.

    johnnycee Wrote: Susan Rice flat out lied, she was told to lie, so being a party person ,she did as instructed, she lied. no further comment needed.
    Yet another Ad Hominem attack. I should start keeping a list of these.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    johnnycee Wrote: Let's start with Eric Holder, in the 2008 elections Black Panthers are standing outside of a polling place in somewhat military attire holding batons openly, Eric Holder makes ruling that they are not being intimidating , patently unfair, if skinheads were standing outside of a polling place with batons on election day, would the ruling have the same?
    I love the reverse racism charge. Very classy. White people have had it so hard in this country for so long, huh?

    Have you read up on this case at all or are you going off of what you have heard? Are you aware that it wasn't Attorney General Holder, but Christopher Coates, who dismissed the charges against one of the two members and led to lesser charges against the other? Are you also aware that this was conducted by two individuals at one polling station in a country of 300 plus million people? Last, but not least, this case was completely blown out of proportion by the right wing media, but it doesn't surprise me that you are clinging on to it as proof that we have an out of control Attorney General who hates white people.

    johnnycee Wrote: Lois Lerner, who invoked her 5th Amendment Rights when there was no reason for it at a civil hearing , you invoke that Right when you feel that your testimony would incriminate you, this was a hearing about allegations concerning her Agency about unauthorized use of the Agency for political gain, now it seems the charade continues with the "crashing of her hard drive " with the E-mails from the dates needed for the investigation having now been deleted, and we are supposed to believe this nonsense, when if you used the same excuse in any audit that you may encounter would be met with laughter from the very same Agency.
    Is it against the law to invoke one's 5th Amendment right? The onus is on the House of Representatives to prove she did something illegal. They have obviously failed. And you obviously have only watched right wing news regarding her hard drive. This happened years BEFORE the supposed scandal, back in 2011. Nice try though.

    johnnycee Wrote: Susan Rice flat out lied, she was told to lie, so being a party person ,she did as instructed, she lied. no further comment needed.
    Yet another Ad Hominem attack. I should start keeping a list of these.
    left,right. left right, it's called lock stepped
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    The Committee was formed to ask questions about alleged unauthorized use of the Agencies resources, she was the supervisor of that particular unit, by needlessly invoking her fifth amendment during a ordinary course of questioning brought more suspicion upon her Agency, now about the hard drives, yes a hard drive crash did happened back in" 11" but was it THE hard drive, this crash was never mentioned in any subsequent interviews until a certain E-mails were now being questioned, it seems that now they were the ones contained on the hard drive , and given past behaviors as it relates to transparency is somewhat questionable , invoking one's 5th Amendment Rights at that time cast more suspicion on the Agency then was probably needed.