White House Approved 'Video Caused Benghazi Attack' Fraud

a reply to: Pladuim


WMD's you say ! Well Scott Ritter was a inspector in Iraq . "‘We Ain’t Found #’ Scott Ritter explains why Iran shouldn’t accept ‘no notice’ inspections of its nuclear sites My first experience as a weapons inspector was in implementing the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty between the US and the former Soviet Union, and I’m a firm believer that on-site inspections should be part of any arms control agreement. As a United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq, I worked closely with the IAEA to investigate Iraq’s past nuclear weapons programme, and I have confidence in the IAEA’s ability to implement the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. www.informationclearinghouse.info...

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: xuenchen A lot of things could have caused this tragedy. Just like many other attacks on our embassies and outposts worldwide. This one has become just a Republican talking point , though. That is sad.

Actually, it has not. I'm not anywhere near being a Republican, yet the lies and handling of what happened in Benghazi disturbs me greatly.

I'm uncertain if you have ever served in any capacity other than in World of Warcraft, but if you have, you should understand why, to many, the indifference shown by our current administration and Hillary Clinton concerning the murder of our people serving in another country on an anniversary of 9/11 would be a major point of concern and not "just a Republican talking point."

Your assessment of this issue is what's sad. There are many valid concerns surrounding the deceit and lies that form the trail between the White House and Benghazi--your apathy toward this is disheartening, really, when you're posting on a site that is all about denying ignorance.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: xuenchen A lot of things could have caused this tragedy. Just like many other attacks on our embassies and outposts worldwide. This one has become just a Republican talking point , though. That is sad.

A talking point for sure now that the real sequence of events by the President and the Secretary of State has been verified.

The speculation is all over.

You really should consider reading all the interesting material.

originally posted by: stormson
a reply to: sine.nomine

They voted based on the Intel they were given. False Intel cooked up by rummy.

Honesty and politicians don't go together. Like how family values, anti gay politicians always get caught in gay scandels.

Now, 20 cities rioted. 19 over the vid, so its easy to assume that the 20th was over the same thing.

It's already been shown that no wrong doing occurred. So you're angry over the reason given, and not the actual event. That seems superficial at best.

Bush lied and 4000 died.

Hillary lied and...nothing. No one died because of it.

Let's see. A planned attack including some heavy weapons. Intel at the time stating that an attack was a good possibility.Obama absent and playing golf instead of attending those Intel meetings.The refusal to reinforce security forces in Libya even after those Intel reports. The intense need to cover up afterwards and put out what they KNEW was a lie . Want me to go on ?

originally posted by: Pladuim
a reply to: stormson

Your question has been answered, see above.

Pladuim

Wmds were found in Iraq, along with yellow cake which is needed to make nuclear weapons.

In addition, that was not the sole cause of the war and the UN resolution lists many. The real issue is that Iraq violated the armistice agreement from the first gulf war many times and thus resumption of hostilities was both legal and anticipated.

If one wants to look at the reasons for OIF, they need to look at the Gulf War.

originally posted by: sine.nomine
a reply to: stormson

Making assumptions on what I'm angry about (or that I'm angry to begin with) seems superficial. Redirecting every discussion to blame Bush almost a decade after he left office seems superficial. Thinking that I'm a Bush supporter at all is such a knee jerk reaction from Obama supporters. It's so predictable and desperate.

Your right that politicians and honesty don't go together though. So why are you defending any of them? The Democrat liars are your favorite liars?

Those techniques are all from "rules for radicals" by Alinsky

Here he is at the U.N. with the blame set up ....

The movie "the Innocence of Muslim's" was made by Sam Bacile which is a pen name and a play on the word 'embecile'. I noticed when Hillary and Obama explained the United States Government had nothing to do with the video they talk slowly and methodically as if talking to embecils, which makes me think that is their true opinion of the American People.

.... more to read
Obama Blames Youtube Video for Benghazi Terrorist Attack During United Nations Speech

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Pladuim
a reply to: stormson

Your question has been answered, see above.

Pladuim

Wmds were found in Iraq, along with yellow cake which is needed to make nuclear weapons.

In addition, that was not the sole cause of the war and the UN resolution lists many. The real issue is that Iraq violated the armistice agreement from the first gulf war many times and thus resumption of hostilities was both legal and anticipated.

If one wants to look at the reasons for OIF, they need to look at the Gulf War.

The Iraq war was justifiable and trying to compare what happened in Iraq and what happened in Benghazi is apples and oranges. I'm going to try and stick to the main topic now, thanks for input.

Pladuim

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: xuenchen A lot of things could have caused this tragedy. Just like many other attacks on our embassies and outposts worldwide. This one has become just a Republican talking point , though. That is sad.

Really? A lot of things COULD have caused it, sure, but only one thing DID. Illegally running guns to terrorists. Not just a talking point, you (you know what you are).

originally posted by: dr1234

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: xuenchen A lot of things could have caused this tragedy. Just like many other attacks on our embassies and outposts worldwide. This one has become just a Republican talking point , though. That is sad.

Really? A lot of things COULD have caused it, sure, but only one thing DID. Illegally running guns to terrorists. Not just a talking point, you (you know what you are).

If the truth was known...

Those are probably weapons we gave them.

They needed a cover story. The filmmaker is still in jail. The killers are walking around.

originally posted by: stormson

originally posted by: Pladuim

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: xuenchen A lot of things could have caused this tragedy. Just like many other attacks on our embassies and outposts worldwide. This one has become just a Republican talking point , though. That is sad.

No, what's sad is your attempt to excuse Obama and Clintons actions. At this point, what different does it make.....right?

Pladuim

Um...yeah. Please tell me what difference it makes?

It's not like 4000 people got killed over a made up war over made up reasons.

What difference it makes?
OK I'll jump in and try to answer your question.

The difference is the whole 'the videos made them do it' story was put out so that the Obama Administration did not have to admit that AQ was "Decimated" and "no longer poses a threat to Americans". That was Predident Obama's main campaign point, so to keep his a$$ in the president's chair he let people die.
The video story also hid the fact that the 'out building' was being used to move guns and money to the Syrian rebels. Congress did not authorize that so President Obama just 'worked around a do nothing Congress".
So to sum up President Obama and Secretary Clinton let people die and told a tall tale just to cover up a crime and keep his job.

originally posted by: TheSemiSkeptic

originally posted by: stormson

originally posted by: Pladuim

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: xuenchen A lot of things could have caused this tragedy. Just like many other attacks on our embassies and outposts worldwide. This one has become just a Republican talking point , though. That is sad.

No, what's sad is your attempt to excuse Obama and Clintons actions. At this point, what different does it make.....right?

Pladuim

Um...yeah. Please tell me what difference it makes?

It's not like 4000 people got killed over a made up war over made up reasons.

What difference it makes?
OK I'll jump in and try to answer your question.

The difference is the whole 'the videos made them do it' story was put out so that the Obama Administration did not have to admit that AQ was "Decimated" and "no longer poses a threat to Americans". That was Predident Obama's main campaign point, so to keep his a$$ in the president's chair he let people die.
The video story also hid the fact that the 'out building' was being used to move guns and money to the Syrian rebels. Congress did not authorize that so President Obama just 'worked around a do nothing Congress".
So to sum up President Obama and Secretary Clinton let people die and told a tall tale just to cover up a crime and keep his job.

Obama didn't have to worry about re-election. The IRS made damn sure of it.

They systematically eliminated all of Obama"s competition by denying a Tax ID #

You're right, the Election was weeks away. All that work by Lois Lerner.

They needed a fall guy...Insert any idiot dumb enough to post an Anti-Islamic video.

a reply to: stormson

I tend to go back and forth about Iraq. As late as 1998 the democrats wanted a war with Iraq, and we used cruise missiles on them because Clinton didn't want to go to war despite the rest of the dems wanting to...remember that one? Why did they want to? Because there was some decent evidence that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, and he was violating the terms of the previous gulf war that ended with Iraq having a limited military and weapons stockpile. There was evidence of missiles going to other countries, there were weapons inspectors being kicked out or not being let into places left and right.
What was a lie was the size and scope of the WMDs that Iraq was said to have, they were said to have tons of weapons, and mobile chemicals labs, which was untrue. We did find large amounts of yellow cake uranium and sold it to Canada, and we found large stockpiles of older chemical munitions that actually got some of our military sick.

Saddam was a terrible guy, he did terrible things to his people and funded terrorism around the middle east. He needed to be taken out. I think an invading force, and trying to occupy a country that hates us, was certainly not the right way to do it. One of the biggest blunders was thinking that the people would love us and support us, but it turned into Vietnam Jr.

originally posted by: stormson
a reply to: Pladuim

Your right, its not about the war.

I'm showing contrast. I'm showing how cons didn't blink an eye over a made up war, over made up reasons that got 4000 soldiers killed, yet lose their minds over 4 killed in a surprise attack.

I'm showing how cons make mountains over mole hills based on nothing but party.

Hillary asked, you repeat, what difference does it make? I've yet to get an answer.

Some of those killed weren't soldiers. And, they deserved protection. Does anyone think Stevens was stupid enough to take the job if he thought he wouldn't be protected by our government ?

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: xuenchen A lot of things could have caused this tragedy. Just like many other attacks on our embassies and outposts worldwide. This one has become just a Republican talking point , though. That is sad.

What is sad is that the president decided it was more important to lie to the people and make it look like he had control of the Middle East situations...or support the lie stating the same. This lie...now proven...definitely led to further lies to America by Obama, Hillary and others. It may have led to action or inaction that cost the lives of American citizens.

This is beyond corruption, this is the president putting HIMSELF about the people and the country as a whole. His re-election was based upon a lie that he continued to lie to hide, made or had others lie to hide and ultimately abused the power of his, and their offices.

Why have the Reps pursued this for so long? Because it was true. We know they knew that night that this had nothing to do with that video...and now we know they agreed to continue a lie.

originally posted by: stormson
Man, if only you would have spent half this much energy trying to find the true cause of the Iraq war, maybe 4000 soldiers would still be alive.

Bengazi. A surprise attack. 4 dead. Hundreds of millions spent to find no wrong doing, just a cover up.

Iraq. A planned war. 4000 dead. Hundreds of billions, if not trillions spent. Blatent lies to get those 4000 killed. Nothing happens.

One was a dem, so cons want blood.

The other a con, so cons let it pass.

So your response to this lie perpetrated by the president is to whine that your side wasn't diligent enough to prove Bush did something wrong? Sad...very sad.

originally posted by: stormson
a reply to: Pladuim

Your right, its not about the war.

I'm showing contrast. I'm showing how cons didn't blink an eye over a made up war, over made up reasons that got 4000 soldiers killed, yet lose their minds over 4 killed in a surprise attack.

I'm showing how cons make mountains over mole hills based on nothing but party.

Hillary asked, you repeat, what difference does it make? I've yet to get an answer.

What difference does it make? Really??? Ask the family of those who died, maybe because the president didn't want to lose a few points during his re-election. You know...the greater good to keep him president over people's lives? Or maybe...again...the "the end justifies the lies" mentality of this administration.

originally posted by: stormson

originally posted by: abe froman
The fact is, Hillary Clinton invented a lie, sold it to the President, foisted it on the American people, unethically covered it up, and then downplayed the seriousness of her fraud on the American people.

No arguing over the Iraq war, WMDS, Israel,or Bush's policy will change or has anything to do with this fact.

Hillary Clinton is not only a liar but, a liar that has no problem lying to the American people to further her own agenda.

Quite right. But there are bigger fish to fry. The whole bengazi thing is a waste of time and millions of dollars.

Now, if she had lied and got those 4 killed, it would be a different story.

Why is it a waste of time to keep a criminal out of the White House. When she testified...wasn't she under oath?

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: xuenchen A lot of things could have caused this tragedy. Just like many other attacks on our embassies and outposts worldwide. This one has become just a Republican talking point , though. That is sad.

What is sad is that the president decided it was more important to lie to the people and make it look like he had control of the Middle East situations...or support the lie stating the same. This lie...now proven...definitely led to further lies to America by Obama, Hillary and others. It may have led to action or inaction that cost the lives of American citizens.

This is beyond corruption, this is the president putting HIMSELF about the people and the country as a whole. His re-election was based upon a lie that he continued to lie to hide, made or had others lie to hide and ultimately abused the power of his, and their offices.

Why have the Reps pursued this for so long? Because it was true. We know they knew that night that this had nothing to do with that video...and now we know they agreed to continue a lie.

This is the tactics they use....because they work. Lie, cover up, obfuscate the whole issue, add some unrelated element (the video) to conceal the truth, cozy up to the MSM so they only report it the way you want it to be seen, allow time to pass so the American People lose interest, and get them focused on some "Big" issue at home like race relations.

Get that right hand waving frantically, so you won't be watching what the left hand is doing (and has been doing).

originally posted by: whyamIhere

originally posted by: TheSemiSkeptic

originally posted by: stormson

originally posted by: Pladuim

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: xuenchen A lot of things could have caused this tragedy. Just like many other attacks on our embassies and outposts worldwide. This one has become just a Republican talking point , though. That is sad.

No, what's sad is your attempt to excuse Obama and Clintons actions. At this point, what different does it make.....right?

Pladuim

Um...yeah. Please tell me what difference it makes?

It's not like 4000 people got killed over a made up war over made up reasons.

What difference it makes?
OK I'll jump in and try to answer your question.

The difference is the whole 'the videos made them do it' story was put out so that the Obama Administration did not have to admit that AQ was "Decimated" and "no longer poses a threat to Americans". That was Predident Obama's main campaign point, so to keep his a$$ in the president's chair he let people die.
The video story also hid the fact that the 'out building' was being used to move guns and money to the Syrian rebels. Congress did not authorize that so President Obama just 'worked around a do nothing Congress".
So to sum up President Obama and Secretary Clinton let people die and told a tall tale just to cover up a crime and keep his job.

Obama didn't have to worry about re-election. The IRS made damn sure of it.

They systematically eliminated all of Obama"s competition by denying a Tax ID #

You're right, the Election was weeks away. All that work by Lois Lerner.

They needed a fall guy...Insert any idiot dumb enough to post an Anti-Islamic video.

Wasn't he arrested and placed (for a time) in jail? Isn't that false arrest and false imprisonment caused by Obama and Hillary's lie??? It was a planned lie so isn't that corruption? And aren't those in themselves an impeachable offence?