• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

Libya Invades the United States

Started by Zircon, September 12, 2012, 08:49:07 AM

Pragmier

Someone sure seems to have F&%$#@ this up and should be held accountable for the lack of security.

slipstream

I showed in another thread, using logic and reason, that the President, at his Rose Garden address, did not acknowledge that the embassy attack was a planned attack at.  Instead, he tried to put the blame on a YouTube video.  For a fortnight his administration touted the YouTube lie, misleading the American people.  At the second presidential debate the President claimed he had used "act of terror" to describe the attack at the Rose Garden.  The debate was the President's second lie.  Today Reuters released an article in which they show, using administration e-mails, that the President was a aware of the attack at the time it occurred. 



1. The lie about the video (Rose Garden)

2. The lie at the second debate.
3. The lie of omission, the President actually knew all along.



Little molehills make mountains.  This thing is only going to get bigger.

Sardondi

And Americans see it and know it. Finally, slowly, painfully, the carefully constructed layers which have hidden the real Barrack Hussein Obama, and which have been maintained and kept in place by a servile and partisan media, are falling away. And a malignant narcissist emerges for all the world to see.

Quote from: Sardondi on October 26, 2012, 04:14:21 PM
And Americans see it and know it. Finally, slowly, painfully, the carefully constructed layers which have hidden the real Barrack Hussein Obama, and which have been maintained and kept in place by a servile and partisan media, are falling away. And a malignant narcissist emerges for all the world to see.

The sad part is half the country told the other half about this guy before the election last time.  What part of 'Bill Ayres', 'Jeremiah Wright' and 'Corrupt Chicago Machine Politics' didn't they get?

ACE of CLUBS

Quote from: Ben Shockley on September 12, 2012, 02:35:19 PM
I am so glad that you can focus the cause of WHATEVER happened onto me.
See that, folks?
I did it.
Come kill me.   Join Zircon on his convoy.  Shall I provide my name and address to save HAL 3 seconds?


Would 'Obamacare' cover the the electro-shock treatments that you so obviously need?  Medication can be your friend .....

slipstream

I'm watching the Clinton hearing right now.  Not more than five minutes into her testimony she is already misleading the people's representatives. Still waiting to see if any of the senators are going to go after the truth or let the lies live on.

slipstream

Oh yes, the truth slowly starts to come out. 

Quote from: slipstream on May 05, 2013, 08:11:43 PM
Oh yes, the truth slowly starts to come out.

Yes, turns out they lied about it being a spontaneous demonstration - they knew as it happened it was a planned attack.  Which is what some of us said all along when the various comments didn't add up and were contradictory.  In fact at some point after the election didn't they admit they lied - something about not wanting al-Qaeda to know they were pursuing them (as if al-Qaeda didn't already know).  So they lied about why they lied.

But so what, they lied their way past the election, and as a presidential aide proclaimed last week 'that it was 'a long time ago'.  The President and Media have moved on - what are a few needless preventable deaths of an ambassador and a few nobody state department employees compared to a successful Democrat administration anyway.  Heck, when Obama went to Mexico last week and said in a speech that Mexico's gun violence was the fault of the United States, his accomplices in the Media never even mentioned Fast and Furious.

If this were a Republican Administration with the same set of events, lies, and coverups, either Fast and Furious or Benghazi alone would have been enough for Impeachment proceedings.  Or if the Rs held the House and decided to ride out the storm (and it would be quite the Media shitstorm), at least a resignation by the Attorney General (over F & F) and State (Mrs Clinton over Benghazi).  And after the resignation of the Secretary of State, there certainly would be no talk about her running for President next time around, and the Senate would have insisted her successor be a carreerist caretaker type at State and not another political hack like John Kerry. 

But, you know, don't expect the Media to anything but advocates for Obama and the Ds, and by the way - it's Fox news that is biased. 

Pragmier

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/13/world/africa/private-security-hovers-as-issue-after-embassy-attack-in-benghazi-libya.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0


Article is a bit dated but covers some ground on a topic not often discussed - our government's growing reliance on private security and it's politics.


QuoteThe new Libyan government had expressly barred Blackwater-style armed contractors from flooding into the country. That forced the State Department to rely largely on its own diplomatic security arm, which officials have said lacks the resources to provide adequate protection in war zones.

But given the Libyan edict banning the contractors, the Obama administration was eager to reduce the American footprint there. After initially soliciting bids from major security companies for work in Libya, State Department officials never followed through.

... the State Department did not include Libya on a list of dangerous postings that are high priority for extra security resources ...


slipstream

Is it me, or is the news media more concerned with Hillary's political future than they are with finding out what happened in Libya?

Quote from: slipstream on May 08, 2013, 07:26:38 AM
Is it me, or is the news media more concerned with Hillary's political future than they are with finding out what happened in Libya?

Had they been honest in the first place, there likely wouldn't have been a second Obama term.  We don't really have a news media anymore, we have advocay groups masquerading as journalists.

Sardondi

Quote from: Paper*Boy on May 08, 2013, 07:31:13 AM
Had they been honest in the first place, there likely wouldn't have been a second Obama term....
The whole reason for the fiasco: Keeping The Regime In Power.

Quote from: slipstream on May 08, 2013, 07:26:38 AM
Is it me, or is the news media more concerned with Hillary's political future than they are with finding out what happened in Libya?

The whole thing about Hillary is weird.  She's the wife of a President who had the very good fortune of having his term during a time of peace and prosperity - the USSR finally collapsed while the advances in computing and communication led the economy.

During that time, both Clintons had any number of scandals and coverups, they lied so oftern about so much it even seemed like they would lie even when it was in neither their immediate nor long term interest.  If they aren't the most dishonest couple in history, I don't know who would be.  The Clinton adminsistration had very little to do with the economy or with the budget deficit reductions despite being given credit for both.  The foreign policy was an absolute disaster - being snoockered multiple times by N Korea, involving us in the Balkan wars and choosing the wrong side, driving a Russia that wanted to be friends away by expanding NATO east and getting involved with elections in former soviet republics, the giveaways to China, the Somalia disaster, failing to address growing jihad, ignoring Latin America - especially Mexico as the Narco-terrorists slowly strangled them.  Madelaine Albreight may well be the worst Secretay of State we've ever had, yet look how the Advocacy Media faums over her.

Sooo, after a few years in office on her own as a fairly lousy Senator, lets have Mrs Clinton be the Secretary of State under a President with no executive and certianly no foreign policy experience?  A person from an Administration with a track record of failure in foreign policy and a President whose assumptions and core beliefs about the US and the world are wrong?

Are we supposed to be surprised much of the Arab world is in ashes and under the Jihadi influence now?  With various al-Qaeda type groups still on offense.  Are we really supposed to be eagerly awaiting a Hilary Clinton regime?  It would be like advocating Laura Bush to be the next President, but only if she had a personal history of incompetence, lies and coverups.

Pragmier

Libya is not going away for Hilary and rightly so. Also, i'm curious what you guys think should be done with Syria. The Israelis have now bombed them, but it remains a puzzle to me how to best play this hand. Seems the big wildcard is who would replace Assad.

999

I have nothing to add except on another site someone described Assad as looking like  a "penis with teeth" and damn if it isn't true


Juan

I don't know that we have a reason to do anything in Syria at this time.  Neither side is a friend of the West.  Maybe, at some point, there will be a point in doing something, but right now, I say just let them kill each other.  It gives them something to do.

Israel, on the other hand, if they are bombing missiles destined for Hezbollah, does have an interest.

Sardondi

Quote from: Paper*Boy on May 08, 2013, 08:00:40 AM
The whole thing about Hillary is weird.  She's the wife of a President who had the very good fortune of having his term during a time of peace and prosperity - the USSR finally collapsed while the advances in computing and communication led the economy.

During that time, both Clintons had any number of scandals and coverups, they lied so oftern about so much it even seemed like they would lie even when it was in neither their immediate nor long term interest.  If they aren't the most dishonest couple in history, I don't know who would be.  The Clinton adminsistration had very little to do with the economy or with the budget deficit reductions despite being given credit for both.  The foreign policy was an absolute disaster - being snoockered multiple times by N Korea, involving us in the Balkan wars and choosing the wrong side, driving a Russia that wanted to be friends away by expanding NATO east and getting involved with elections in former soviet republics, the giveaways to China, the Somalia disaster, failing to address growing jihad, ignoring Latin America - especially Mexico as the Narco-terrorists slowly strangled them.  Madelaine Albreight may well be the worst Secretay of State we've ever had, yet look how the Advocacy Media faums over her.

Sooo, after a few years in office on her own as a fairly lousy Senator, lets have Mrs Clinton be the Secretary of State under a President with no executive and certianly no foreign policy experience?  A person from an Administration with a track record of failure in foreign policy and a President whose assumptions and core beliefs about the US and the world are wrong?

Are we supposed to be surprised much of the Arab world is in ashes and under the Jihadi influence now?  With various al-Qaeda type groups still on offense.  Are we really supposed to be eagerly awaiting a Hilary Clinton regime?  It would be like advocating Laura Bush to be the next President, but only if she had a personal history of incompetence, lies and coverups.

Hilary has confused me ever since she joined Team Obama. While SecState is a plum, she put herself in the position of joining an administration which prizes loyalty to President Neo above all things. Which meant she would have to be a shill. But many SecStates have made or tremendously enhanced their reputations by becoming statesmen in the office, and putting partisanship behind them. Not Hils. She's been a team player, but that's all. She's been ineffective, and that's putting it kindly. She has lashed herself to Obama's mast, while at the same time making herself his whipping boy when and as needed.

But then she resigns just before hearings get going about what very well could the worst of the very, very many potential and real political disasters she's faced in the last 20 years. What.the.hell? What are you doing, woman? Are you insane? How do you protect yourself from the outside?

If she'd stayed in office she could at least have some control over her department and even the whistleblowers. Plus she could demand some support from the White House. But hasn't she made herself the classic patsy (even if she's not the real person before whom the buck actually did and/or should have stopped)? I always thought that Bill and Hil were the ultimate political strategists, particularly Hilary. They reminded me of Francis and Elizabeth Urquhart of House of Cards fame. But here Hil seems to have turned into what they used to call an idiot savant....but without the savant. I would have assumed that Bil and Hil were working together on her defense, but now I wonder if he has totally divorced himself from her, and maybe she wasn't the smart one after all.

Does anyone see any "inside baseball" stuff that I'm missing? Because I am just befuddled by Hil's actions here.

Juan

Quote from: Sardondi on May 08, 2013, 03:02:33 PM
I would have assumed that Bil and Hil were working together on her defense, but now I wonder if he has totally divorced himself from her, and maybe she wasn't the smart one after all.
I've always thought this - that Bill was the political genius and Hil was the hammer.

Sardondi

Quote from: UFO Fill on May 08, 2013, 05:20:17 PM
I've always thought this - that Bill was the political genius and Hil was the hammer.
I can see that: Hilary is the one bleeding from the eyes, jamming jelly donuts in her craw while at the same time breaking lamps, ranting about castrating the motherfuckers and demanding that her female interns be sent to her cabin; while Bill sits quietly in the corner with Dick Morris and James Carville going over next week's media strategy.

slipstream

Romney slips up on Libya during debate


The Telegraph (from the U.K.) mischaracterized this part of last years debate. Ms. Candy Crowley admitted later that she was in fact wrong, but let that not stop the left wing press from perpetuating a lie. Romney was of course accurate it is brief account of how the events unfolded.  Obama even used the video excuse at the United Nations. 

Quote from: slipstream on May 13, 2013, 06:07:05 PM
Romney slips up on Libya during debate


The Telegraph (from the U.K.) mischaracterized this part of last years debate. Ms. Candy Crowley admitted later that she was in fact wrong, but let that not stop the left wing press from perpetuating a lie. Romney was of course accurate it is brief account of how the events unfolded.  Obama even used the video excuse at the United Nations.


There are so many lies and scandals catching up with Obama and coming out of the White House now that they are on course to match the slease of the  Clinton years.

This week it's the IRS targeting Conservative groups, more on Benghazi, the FBI wiretapping of the Associated Press, another failed 'green' company championed and funded by the Administration - with our money ending up in the pockets his cronies and contributors again just like Solyndra.   Now that Obama's fundraising  speech to Planned Parenthood is past, the Media finally decided they can't cover up the Gosnell murders any longer. 

Oh my yes, isn't Obama wonderfull, so cool and relaxed,  the smartest person in the room, the most transparent and open administration ever, bringing us all together, fundamentally transforming our nation...   

ItsOver

Quote from: Paper*Boy on May 13, 2013, 06:34:35 PM

Oh my yes, isn't Obama wonderfull, so cool and relaxed,  the smartest person in the room, the most transparent and open administration ever, bringing us all together, fundamentally transforming our nation...


I feel so warm and fuzzy inside right now.  ;)

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod