The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read





Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-02-2014, 08:18 PM   #601
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 40,635
Default

If the cover up was to protect arms to Syria at least it was over something big. The way it is now it's like our security so weak some stupid protest can overrun our embassay, a spontaneous attack? Hell I would like to think it takes considerable planning and resources to kill 1 of our ambassadors.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2014, 09:54 PM   #602
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 27,429

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ghwk View Post
So if the WH lied what should the punishment be?

As for what should happen to BO, and this is JMHO, the reality is by the time any possible congressional investigation of the whitehouse is over, BO will be pretty much out of office anyway. So even if his administration is guilty of obstruction and a coverup, congress won't be able to do much about it. If the Republicans seek impeachment, that will pretty much eat up the rest of BO's presidency. I seriously doubt BO will be impeached before he exits the office due to his and his administrations very crafty ways of blame shifting, manufacturing side shows, and in general just stiff arming congress. Also, the media will still tacitly support him and the NBC's of the world won't dare go after him like they would if he was a conservative Republican. There won't be any "outrage" by the mainstream media, and that will buy BO more time.

I just want the mainstream media to at least "give a schit", that is, start looking into other issues with this administration like what happened at the IRS and what the hell has Eric Holder been doing since he refuses to answer any questions from congress. I just want the AP (or ABC or CBS or NBC or CNN) to investigate the BO administration and it's cronies as hard as they would a Republican administration. If there's nothing there then fine, but at least DIG A LITTLE. Yah know, do your job.
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2014, 09:59 PM   #603
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 27,429

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ant1999e View Post
http://www.businessinsider.com/us-sy...adists-2012-10

The official position is that the U.S. has refused to allow heavy weapons into Syria.
But there's growing evidence that U.S. agents — particularly murdered ambassador Chris Stevens — were at least aware of heavy weapons moving from Libya to jihadist Syrian rebels.
In March 2011 Stevens became the official U.S. liaison to the al-Qaeda-linked Libyan opposition, working directly with Abdelhakim Belhadj of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group — a group that has now disbanded, with some fighters reportedly participating in the attack that took Stevens' life.
In November 2011 The Telegraph reported that Belhadj, acting as head of the Tripoli Military Council, "met with Free Syrian Army [FSA] leaders in Istanbul and on the border with Turkey" in an effort by the new Libyan government to provide money and weapons to the growing insurgency in Syria.
Last month The Times of London reported that a Libyan ship "carrying the largest consignment of weapons for Syria … has docked in Turkey." The shipment reportedly weighed 400 tons and included SA-7 surface-to-air anti-craft missiles and rocket-propelled grenades.
Those heavy weapons are most likely from Muammar Gaddafi's stock of about 20,000 portable heat-seeking missiles—the bulk of them SA-7s—that the Libyan leader obtained from the former Eastern bloc. Reuters reports that Syrian rebels have been using those heavy weapons to shoot down Syrian helicopters and fighter jets.
The ship's captain was "a Libyan from Benghazi and the head of an organization called the Libyan National Council for Relief and Support," which was presumably established by the new government.
That means that Ambassador Stevens had only one person—Belhadj—between him and the Benghazi man who brought heavy weapons to Syria.
Furthermore, we know that jihadists are the best fighters in the Syrian opposition, but where did they come from?
Last week The Telegraph reported that an FSA commander called them "Libyans" when he explained that the FSA doesn't "want these extremist people here."
And if the new Libyan government was sending seasoned Islamic fighters and 400 tons of heavy weapons to Syria through a port in southern Turkey—a deal brokered by Stevens' primary Libyan contact during the Libyan revolution—then the governments of Turkey and the U.S. surely knew about it.
Furthermore there was a CIA post in Benghazi, located 1.2 miles from the U.S. consulate, used as "a base for, among other things, collecting information on the proliferation of weaponry looted from Libyan government arsenals, including surface-to-air missiles" ... and that its security features "were more advanced than those at [the] rented villa where Stevens died."
And we know that the CIA has been funneling weapons to the rebels in southern Turkey. The question is whether the CIA has been involved in handing out the heavy weapons from Libya.
In any case, the connection between Benghazi and Syrian rebels is stronger than has been officially acknowledged.
ouch
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2014, 10:04 PM   #604
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 27,429

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by baja View Post
Why the White House is Desperate to Bury Benghazi
The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Infowars.com Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store
Cover-up is about shielding details of arms smuggling to terrorists in Syria
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
May 2, 2014
Amidst new revelations concerning emails that show the Obama administration conspired to create a phony narrative around the Benghazi attacks, the true purpose behind the cover-up is being obfuscated – the fact that an annex near the U.S. embassy was being used by the CIA to transfer surface to air missiles to terrorists in Syria.

Image: Barack Obama (Wiki Commons).
House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa today issued a subpoena for Secretary of State John Kerry to testify before the committee on May 21 about Benghazi following the release of emails by Judicial Watch which show that the White House crafted a deceptive policy to falsely frame the attack as a spontaneous protest sparked by a YouTube video in order to protect Barack Obama’s image. Lost in the haze of claims and counter claims is the real reason why the White House is desperate to prevent the attack from coming under any further scrutiny – because it would likely reveal an arms smuggling scandal that could rival Iran-Contra. In May last year, Senator Rand Paul was one of the first to speculate that the truth behind Benghazi was linked to an illicit arms smuggling program that saw weapons being trafficked to terrorists in Syria as part of the United States’ proxy war against the Assad regime. “I’ve actually always suspected that, although I have no evidence, that maybe we were facilitating arms leaving Libya going through Turkey into Syria,” Paul told CNN, adding that he “never….quite understood the cover-up — if it was intentional or incompetence”. At the same time it emerged that the U.S. State Department had hired an Al-Qaeda offshoot organization, the February 17th Martyrs Brigade, to “defend” the Benghazi Mission months before the attack. Senator Paul was vindicated less than three months later when it emerged that the CIA had been subjecting its operatives to monthly polygraph tests in an effort to keep a lid on details of the arms smuggling operation being leaked. On August 1, CNN reported that dozens of CIA agents were on the ground in Benghazi during the attack and that the polygraph tests were mandated in order to prevent operatives from talking to Congress or the media about a program that revolved around “secretly helping to move surface-to-air missiles out of Libya, through Turkey, and into the hands of Syrian rebels.” Although the Obama administration is now openly arming the Syrian rebels, it has been keen to stress that such weaponry has been restricted to so-called “moderate” fighters, despite the fact that it is now widely acknowledged that Al-Qaeda is by far the most potent fighting force in Syria and indeed commands all the other militant groups. The real truth behind Benghazi is likely to reveal that the Obama administration knowingly and deliberately provided surface to air missiles and other weapons to the most bloodthirsty Al-Qaeda jihadists in Syria who are now busy crucifying Christians while promising to bring their reign of terror to the west. If a proper investigation into the Benghazi attacks uncovered concrete evidence of this arms smuggling scandal, Obama would face impeachment and many members of his administration would be facing long stretches in prison. That’s the real reason why the White House is desperate to bury Benghazi.
this makes some sense, is any of it true? I'd like someone from CNN to try and find out.
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2014, 10:19 PM   #605
baja
Headmaster
 
baja's Avatar
 
"Win from now on" - Elway

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the present moment
Posts: 69,057

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Leo-TailGateNut
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ View Post
this makes some sense, is any of it true? I'd like someone from CNN to try and find out.
You're joking right? CNN as an investigative journalist, that's like expecting twinkies to win a French pastry bake off contest.

Last edited by baja; 05-02-2014 at 10:50 PM..
baja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2014, 10:33 PM   #606
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 40,635
Default

Reporters are unics nowdays. The problem is the govt harshly punishes whistleblowers and leakers so it is very hard for them to get scoops or even off the record hints.

My cousin worked for homeland security up to about a yr or so ago when he retired to montana. He basically told me all govt employees assume emails and phones are being listened to.

Hard to get anyone to talk. Then at the same time if reporters used eavesdropping or hacking they would get arrested.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2014, 10:37 PM   #607
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 40,635
Default

Jane Fonda got a hold of Ted Turner and turned CNN to MSNBC part duex.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2014, 10:59 PM   #608
barryr
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 14,959

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

There's no question there is something the admin. wants to hide with how they would love this story to go away. Most of the media has tried to help since they are in Obama's bandwagon. It really does make this country look stupid to have blatant bias in our media who only find the "courage" to question republicans.
barryr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2014, 11:35 PM   #609
ant1999e
Ring of Famer
 
ant1999e's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: BFE
Posts: 6,644
Default

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/10/benghazi-timeline/

Sept. 12: Libya’s deputy ambassador to London, Ahmad Jibril, tells the BBC that Ansar al-Sharia was behind the attack. The little-known militant group issues a statement that says it “didn’t participate as a sole entity,” neither confirming nor denying the report.

Sept. 12, 6:06 p.m.: Beth Jones, the acting assistant secretary of state for the Near East, sends an email to top State Department officials that reads in part: “[T]he group that conducted the attacks, Ansar al-Sharia, is affiliated with Islamic extremists.” (An excerpt of Jones’ email was read by Rep. Trey Gowdy at the May 8, 2013, House oversight hearing.)

Sept. 12: Citing unnamed “U.S. government officials,” Reuters reports that “the Benghazi attack may have been planned in advance” and that members of Ansar al-Sharia “may have been involved.” Reuters quotes one of the U.S. officials as saying: “It bears the hallmarks of an organized attack.”

Sept. 16: Libya President Mohamed Magariaf says on CBS News’ “Face the Nation” that the attack on the U.S. consulate was planned months in advance.

Sept. 18: Obama was asked about the Benghazi attack on “The Late Show with David Letterman.” The president said, “Here’s what happened,” and began discussing the impact of the anti-Muslim video. He then said, “Extremists and terrorists used this as an excuse to attack a variety of our embassies, including the consulate in Libya.” He also said, “As offensive as this video was and, obviously, we’ve denounced it and the United States government had nothing to do with it. That’s never an excuse for violence.”

Sept. 19: The White House spokesman does not call it a “terrorist attack” in his press briefing. Carney says, “Based on the information we had at the time — we have now, we do not yet have indication that it was preplanned or premeditated.

Sept. 20: Carney calls it a “terrorist attack” after being asked how the White House now classifies the attack. But he says the White House has no evidence that it was “a significantly preplanned attack” and blames the video for igniting the incident in Benghazi.
ant1999e is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2014, 12:34 AM   #610
ant1999e
Ring of Famer
 
ant1999e's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: BFE
Posts: 6,644
Default

Here's Obama's statement 2 May 2014 on Ukraine:
"The notion that this is some spontaneous uprising in eastern Ukraine is belied by all the evidence of well-organized, trained, armed militias with the capacity to shoot down helicopters. Generally, local protestors don’t possess that capacity of surface-to-air missiles or whatever weapons were used to shoot down helicopters, tragically."
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2...eported-in-U-S
ant1999e is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2014, 12:54 AM   #611
Fear the Hawk
Ring of Famer
 
Fear the Hawk's Avatar
 
Proud member of the Deep State.

Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Boredom Capital of the Universe (Everett, WA)
Posts: 6,147
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ant1999e View Post
http://www.factcheck.org/2012/10/benghazi-timeline/

Sept. 12: Libya’s deputy ambassador to London, Ahmad Jibril, tells the BBC that Ansar al-Sharia was behind the attack. The little-known militant group issues a statement that says it “didn’t participate as a sole entity,” neither confirming nor denying the report.

Sept. 12, 6:06 p.m.: Beth Jones, the acting assistant secretary of state for the Near East, sends an email to top State Department officials that reads in part: “[T]he group that conducted the attacks, Ansar al-Sharia, is affiliated with Islamic extremists.” (An excerpt of Jones’ email was read by Rep. Trey Gowdy at the May 8, 2013, House oversight hearing.)

Sept. 12: Citing unnamed “U.S. government officials,” Reuters reports that “the Benghazi attack may have been planned in advance” and that members of Ansar al-Sharia “may have been involved.” Reuters quotes one of the U.S. officials as saying: “It bears the hallmarks of an organized attack.”

Sept. 16: Libya President Mohamed Magariaf says on CBS News’ “Face the Nation” that the attack on the U.S. consulate was planned months in advance.

Sept. 18: Obama was asked about the Benghazi attack on “The Late Show with David Letterman.” The president said, “Here’s what happened,” and began discussing the impact of the anti-Muslim video. He then said, “Extremists and terrorists used this as an excuse to attack a variety of our embassies, including the consulate in Libya.” He also said, “As offensive as this video was and, obviously, we’ve denounced it and the United States government had nothing to do with it. That’s never an excuse for violence.”
So it appears that Obama was acknowledging the sources reporting that the attack was performed by terrorists.

Quote:
Sept. 19: The White House spokesman does not call it a “terrorist attack” in his press briefing. Carney says, “Based on the information we had at the time — we have now, we do not yet have indication that it was preplanned or premeditated.
And the fact he didn't specify terrorists mean what exactly?

Quote:
Sept. 20: Carney calls it a “terrorist attack” after being asked how the White House now classifies the attack. But he says the White House has no evidence that it was “a significantly preplanned attack” and blames the video for igniting the incident in Benghazi.
And what evidence was there at the time it was premeditated? Any chance Libya President Mohamed Magariaf was just expressing an opinion? What's his supporting evidence?

The "unnamed U.S. government officials" just said it "may" have been premeditated. Yeah. And Elvis "may" have been the bomber. I'm sure Bigfoot "may" have been involved too. There's lots of things that "may" have happened.

The rest of your sources simply place the blame on specific terrorist organizations (and not saying "premeditated"), and Obama seems to be acknowledging that as I pointed out.

Still struggling to find a "scandal" here. If you guys can't do any better than this I'm just going to move on.

Last edited by Fear the Hawk; 05-03-2014 at 01:00 AM..
Fear the Hawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2014, 09:58 AM   #612
ant1999e
Ring of Famer
 
ant1999e's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: BFE
Posts: 6,644
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt View Post
So it appears that Obama was acknowledging the sources reporting that the attack was performed by terrorists.
But he still blames the video.


Quote:
And the fact he didn't specify terrorists mean what exactly?

And what evidence was there at the time it was premeditated? Any chance Libya President Mohamed Magariaf was just expressing an opinion? What's his supporting evidence?
It was a terrorist attack. Those types of things are usually planned.

Let me ask you a question, if there was such a lack of evidence that it was premeditated, WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE THAT IT WAS CAUSED BY A ****ING YOUTUBE VIDEO

Last edited by ant1999e; 05-03-2014 at 10:01 AM..
ant1999e is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2014, 10:07 AM   #613
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 15,819

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

What's the important issue here?

How the attack was later characterized, or the failing of the system to adequately protect our diplomats/embassies/missions?

More focus on the common cause and less on the partisan would make sense.
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2014, 10:21 AM   #614
elsid13
Lost In Space
 
elsid13's Avatar
 
Bóg, Honor, Ojczyzna

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: DC
Posts: 23,424
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ant1999e View Post
But he still blames the video.




It was a terrorist attack. Those types of things are usually planned.

Let me ask you a question, if there was such a lack of evidence that it was premeditated, WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE THAT IT WAS CAUSED BY A ****ING YOUTUBE VIDEO
I have a question why does it matter if it was caused by video or not? Or when someone in White House called it terrorist attack. This desire to have a smoking gun for something ancillary to attack is waste of time.

The focus should be on identifying the culprits, bringing them to justice, asking why AFRICOM assets are in the US and Europe vs in bases in or offshore of Africa, and ensure that lessons learned are incorporated in future options to prevent attacks like this in the future. Instead of House focusing on oversight and ensure those actions are happening they are playing worthless political games because they want to pin something to Hilliary Clinton.
elsid13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2014, 10:23 AM   #615
peacepipe
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 13,089

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverBrit View Post
What's the important issue here?

How the attack was later characterized, or the failing of the system to adequately protect our diplomats/embassies/missions?

More focus on the common cause and less on the partisan would make sense.
Nothing. They just want something to complain about.
peacepipe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2014, 10:25 AM   #616
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
And so it goes...

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Trumpville (like Potterville, but stupider)
Posts: 79,488

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Phillip Lindsay
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elsid13 View Post
I have a question why does it matter if it was caused by video or not? Or when someone in White House called it terrorist attack. This desire to have a smoking gun for something ancillary to attack is waste of time.

The focus should be on identifying the culprits, bringing them to justice, asking why AFRICOM assets are in the US and Europe vs in bases in or offshore of Africa, and ensure that lessons learned are incorporated in future options to prevent attacks like this in the future. Instead of House focusing on oversight and ensure those actions are happening they are playing worthless political games because they want to pin something to Hilliary Clinton.
Bingo. Issa is the kind of scum that justifies the low opinion people hold of politics and politicians.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2014, 10:44 AM   #617
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 27,429

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elsid13 View Post
I have a question why does it matter if it was caused by video or not? Or when someone in White House called it terrorist attack. This desire to have a smoking gun for something ancillary to attack is waste of time.

The focus should be on identifying the culprits, bringing them to justice, asking why AFRICOM assets are in the US and Europe vs in bases in or offshore of Africa, and ensure that lessons learned are incorporated in future options to prevent attacks like this in the future. Instead of House focusing on oversight and ensure those actions are happening they are playing worthless political games because they want to pin something to Hilliary Clinton.
If I have to explain this again, you probably still won't get it. Here's the issue--the CIA warned the state department of an eminint terrorist attack. The CIA didn't say exactly WHEN it would happen, just that there was a strong chance that it would happen sooner rather than later. That's what the intelligence was saying and the State Department was warned, REPEATEDLY.

So, the question really is, why did the state department do NOTHING to insure security in Benghazi? They had been told over and over an attack was coming, so why not at least beef up security for the ambassador? Or, pull the ambassador out altogether?

. why? Is it because of some arms smuggling thing going on? Is it because the Whitehouse was using the Benghazi embassy as a key component in the illegal transfer of military assets to Syria? This makes sense. The Whitehouse didn't want more "security" at Benghazi because they didn't want more people there as possible witnesses to what was going on. The Whitehouse didn't want more exposure being placed on Benghazi. Also, this is why the whitehouse didn't want to pull anyone out, even though a terrorist attack was extremely possible.

Then, when the attack actually happened, and people died, the state department had to scramble for excuses as to how this could happen when the state department was warned about an eminent terrorist attack.

So the Whitehouse fabricates an excuse for the attack and feeds it to the state department. The state department and the whitehouse then start a cover up.

Last edited by Tombstone RJ; 05-03-2014 at 10:50 AM..
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2014, 10:56 AM   #618
ant1999e
Ring of Famer
 
ant1999e's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: BFE
Posts: 6,644
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverBrit View Post
What's the important issue here?

How the attack was later characterized, or the failing of the system to adequately protect our diplomats/embassies/missions?

More focus on the common cause and less on the partisan would make sense.
-4 Americans left to die
-Lack of security
-Lack of response
-The push to blame a YouTube video without any evidence
-The resistance to call it terrorism when heavily armed men attacked our Diplomat on September 11th
-The lies

I think it's all pretty important.
ant1999e is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2014, 11:15 AM   #619
W*GS
Eppure si scalda
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 35,734
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ant1999e View Post
-4 Americans left to die
-Lack of security
-Lack of response
-The push to blame a YouTube video without any evidence
-The resistance to call it terrorism when heavily armed men attacked our Diplomat on September 11th
-The lies

I think it's all pretty important.
Are these unimportant?

January 22, 2002. Calcutta, India. Gunmen associated with Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami attack the U.S. Consulate. Five people are killed.

June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. Suicide bomber connected with al Qaeda attacks the U.S. Consulate, killing 12 and injuring 51.

October 12, 2002. Denpasar, Indonesia. U.S. diplomatic offices bombed as part of a string of "Bali Bombings." No fatalities.

February 28, 2003. Islamabad, Pakistan. Several gunmen fire upon the U.S. Embassy. Two people are killed.

May 12, 2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Armed al Qaeda terrorists storm the diplomatic compound, killing 36 people including nine Americans. The assailants committed suicide by detonating a truck bomb.

July 30, 2004. Tashkent, Uzbekistan. A suicide bomber from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan attacks the U.S. Embassy, killing two people.

December 6, 2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate and occupy the perimeter wall. Nine people are killed.

March 2, 2006. Karachi, Pakistan again. Suicide bomber attacks the U.S. Consulate killing four people, including U.S. diplomat David Foy who was directly targeted by the attackers. (I wonder if Lindsey Graham or Fox News would even recognize the name "David Foy." This is the third Karachi terrorist attack in four years on what's considered American soil.)

September 12, 2006. Damascus, Syria. Four armed gunmen shouting "Allahu akbar" storm the U.S. Embassy using grenades, automatic weapons, a car bomb and a truck bomb. Four people are killed, 13 are wounded.

January 12, 2007. Athens, Greece. Members of a Greek terrorist group called the Revolutionary Struggle fire a rocket-propelled grenade at the U.S. Embassy. No fatalities.

March 18, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Members of the al-Qaeda-linked Islamic Jihad of Yemen fire a mortar at the U.S. Embassy. The shot misses the embassy, but hits nearby school killing two.

July 9, 2008. Istanbul, Turkey. Four armed terrorists attack the U.S. Consulate. Six people are killed.

September 17, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Terrorists dressed as military officials attack the U.S. Embassy with an arsenal of weapons including RPGs and detonate two car bombs. Sixteen people are killed, including an American student and her husband (they had been married for three weeks when the attack occurred). This is the second attack on this embassy in seven months.
W*GS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2014, 11:56 AM   #620
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 15,819

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

W*GS, excellent post. I would add Iraq to that list, the biggest clusterfeck of them all, on many levels, IMO.
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2014, 12:09 PM   #621
ant1999e
Ring of Famer
 
ant1999e's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: BFE
Posts: 6,644
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by W*GS View Post
Are these unimportant?

January 22, 2002. Calcutta, India. Gunmen associated with Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami attack the U.S. Consulate. Five people are killed.

June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. Suicide bomber connected with al Qaeda attacks the U.S. Consulate, killing 12 and injuring 51.

October 12, 2002. Denpasar, Indonesia. U.S. diplomatic offices bombed as part of a string of "Bali Bombings." No fatalities.

February 28, 2003. Islamabad, Pakistan. Several gunmen fire upon the U.S. Embassy. Two people are killed.

May 12, 2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Armed al Qaeda terrorists storm the diplomatic compound, killing 36 people including nine Americans. The assailants committed suicide by detonating a truck bomb.

July 30, 2004. Tashkent, Uzbekistan. A suicide bomber from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan attacks the U.S. Embassy, killing two people.

December 6, 2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate and occupy the perimeter wall. Nine people are killed.

March 2, 2006. Karachi, Pakistan again. Suicide bomber attacks the U.S. Consulate killing four people, including U.S. diplomat David Foy who was directly targeted by the attackers. (I wonder if Lindsey Graham or Fox News would even recognize the name "David Foy." This is the third Karachi terrorist attack in four years on what's considered American soil.)

September 12, 2006. Damascus, Syria. Four armed gunmen shouting "Allahu akbar" storm the U.S. Embassy using grenades, automatic weapons, a car bomb and a truck bomb. Four people are killed, 13 are wounded.

January 12, 2007. Athens, Greece. Members of a Greek terrorist group called the Revolutionary Struggle fire a rocket-propelled grenade at the U.S. Embassy. No fatalities.

March 18, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Members of the al-Qaeda-linked Islamic Jihad of Yemen fire a mortar at the U.S. Embassy. The shot misses the embassy, but hits nearby school killing two.

July 9, 2008. Istanbul, Turkey. Four armed terrorists attack the U.S. Consulate. Six people are killed.

September 17, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Terrorists dressed as military officials attack the U.S. Embassy with an arsenal of weapons including RPGs and detonate two car bombs. Sixteen people are killed, including an American student and her husband (they had been married for three weeks when the attack occurred). This is the second attack on this embassy in seven months.
These were all tragedies.

Did we leave any Americans to die in these occurrences?
Was an American Ambassador killed in any of these?Were any of these covered up to protect a presidents reelection?
Were any of these falsely blamed on a YouTube video?
Did we leave any Americans to die in these occurrences?
Was an American Ambassador killed in any of these?
Were the American people constantly lied to in these situations?

Is Bengazi less important than these?
ant1999e is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2014, 12:23 PM   #622
W*GS
Eppure si scalda
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 35,734
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ant1999e View Post
These were all tragedies.

Did we leave any Americans to die in these occurrences?
Was an American Ambassador killed in any of these?Were any of these covered up to protect a presidents reelection?
Were any of these falsely blamed on a YouTube video?
Did we leave any Americans to die in these occurrences?
Was an American Ambassador killed in any of these?
Were the American people constantly lied to in these situations?

Is Bengazi less important than these?
Did Faux News and the GOP trumpet all these tragedies like they have Benghazi, or were they all merely briefly noted and then forgotten because Bush was President?
W*GS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2014, 12:59 PM   #623
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 27,429

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by W*GS View Post
Are these unimportant?

January 22, 2002. Calcutta, India. Gunmen associated with Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami attack the U.S. Consulate. Five people are killed.

June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. Suicide bomber connected with al Qaeda attacks the U.S. Consulate, killing 12 and injuring 51.

October 12, 2002. Denpasar, Indonesia. U.S. diplomatic offices bombed as part of a string of "Bali Bombings." No fatalities.

February 28, 2003. Islamabad, Pakistan. Several gunmen fire upon the U.S. Embassy. Two people are killed.

May 12, 2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Armed al Qaeda terrorists storm the diplomatic compound, killing 36 people including nine Americans. The assailants committed suicide by detonating a truck bomb.

July 30, 2004. Tashkent, Uzbekistan. A suicide bomber from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan attacks the U.S. Embassy, killing two people.

December 6, 2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate and occupy the perimeter wall. Nine people are killed.

March 2, 2006. Karachi, Pakistan again. Suicide bomber attacks the U.S. Consulate killing four people, including U.S. diplomat David Foy who was directly targeted by the attackers. (I wonder if Lindsey Graham or Fox News would even recognize the name "David Foy." This is the third Karachi terrorist attack in four years on what's considered American soil.)

September 12, 2006. Damascus, Syria. Four armed gunmen shouting "Allahu akbar" storm the U.S. Embassy using grenades, automatic weapons, a car bomb and a truck bomb. Four people are killed, 13 are wounded.

January 12, 2007. Athens, Greece. Members of a Greek terrorist group called the Revolutionary Struggle fire a rocket-propelled grenade at the U.S. Embassy. No fatalities.

March 18, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Members of the al-Qaeda-linked Islamic Jihad of Yemen fire a mortar at the U.S. Embassy. The shot misses the embassy, but hits nearby school killing two.

July 9, 2008. Istanbul, Turkey. Four armed terrorists attack the U.S. Consulate. Six people are killed.

September 17, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Terrorists dressed as military officials attack the U.S. Embassy with an arsenal of weapons including RPGs and detonate two car bombs. Sixteen people are killed, including an American student and her husband (they had been married for three weeks when the attack occurred). This is the second attack on this embassy in seven months.
I don't doubt all this stuff happened, but where did you get this information, do you have a link?
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2014, 01:10 PM   #624
ant1999e
Ring of Famer
 
ant1999e's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: BFE
Posts: 6,644
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by W*GS View Post
Did Faux News and the GOP trumpet all these tragedies like they have Benghazi, or were they all merely briefly noted and then forgotten because Bush was President?
These tragedies weren't covered up/lied about.

Last edited by ant1999e; 05-03-2014 at 01:34 PM..
ant1999e is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2014, 01:46 PM   #625
barryr
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 14,959

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

, so a long list of terrorist attacks is supposed to somehow explain why Benghazi gets practically ignored by the liberal media? More like those others didn't get much play because they mostly appear to be terror attacks by Muslims and we're supposed to be conditioned and indoctrinated to believe Islam is for peace.

But how many of those had people in the WH lying about it? Tried to blame a video of all things?

But hey, not long ago we did have many deaths being reported all the time. It was our troops, daily death counts. But despite our troops still being killed in the ME, it seems not important to mention it anymore. Gee, I wonder why?

News is news if the liberal media deems it so, and it just happens to fit their narrative.
barryr is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:27 AM.


Denver Broncos