Mr. Speaker! We Need To Get Back To Benghazi

[RobDownSouth]

Yes the New York Times, at the beck and call of injured Democrats everywhere, steps in to confuse the low information voter who won't know the difference between Al Qaeda and Al Qaeda "affiliated" terror groups, in order to blunt the truth about Obama's demonstrated incompetence.

The cowardly Vettebigot cannot refudiate the facts in the NY Times, so like a typical spineless Vietnam-era marine he resorts to "shootin' the messenger".

Didja see the Village Talking Heads turn on their master Darrel Issa this morning? They seemed very resentful about getting played by Issa.

 

[phrodeau]

Yes the New York Times, at the beck and call of injured Democrats everywhere, steps in to confuse the low information voter who won't know the difference between Al Qaeda and Al Qaeda "affiliated" terror groups, in order to blunt the truth about Obama's demonstrated incompetence.

Read the article for a change. Stop living in your false reality.

 

[Sean]

Yes the New York Times, at the beck and call of injured Democrats everywhere, steps in to confuse the low information voter who won't know the difference between Al Qaeda and Al Qaeda "affiliated" terror groups, in order to blunt the truth about Obama's demonstrated incompetence.

You look like more of an idiot with every passing day.

 

[unregistered]

 

[IrezumiKiss]

How's the scandal going?

http://24.media.tumblr.com/056d4d05c0861b5b75f10453c6b1b630/tumblr_mnd7v5Jwa41qhub34o1_250.gif

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_md3ukoOYpm1qa6g1m.gif

 

[RobDownSouth]

How The GOP Became A Party Of Benghazi ‘Truthers’

After a year of demanding answers about the terrorist attack that took place in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, the right wing got them in the form of a well-reported exposé by The New York Times‘ David Kirkpatrick.

And they don’t like these answers at all.

The Romney campaign suggested that the president was refusing to label the attack as “terrorism” and Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) suggested former UN Ambassador Susan Rice was lying and covering up the involvement of al-Qaeda when she offered CIA-approved talking points that the video played a major role in the attack.

Kirkpatrick’s reporting substantiates just about everything Ambassador Rice said as she appeared on several Sunday morning news shows just days after the attack:

Months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that al-Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault. The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi. And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.​

LINK

 

[KingOrfeo]

Something you achieved long ago, and since I don't drink, I'll never achieve the levels of idiocy you've managed.

Then you have not even that excuse. And you must admit, this is rather idiotic.

Yes the New York Times, at the beck and call of injured Democrats everywhere, steps in to confuse the low information voter who won't know the difference between Al Qaeda and Al Qaeda "affiliated" terror groups, in order to blunt the truth about Obama's demonstrated incompetence.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Republicans Insist al Qaeda Behind Benghazi Attack Because all Terrorists are al Qaeda

By: Hrafnkell Haraldsson
Monday, December, 30th, 2013, 8:47 am

A Republican member of the House of Representatives, which has backed politically motivated scandal after politically motivated scandal against the Obama administration, suggests that The New York Times report on Benghazi might be politically motivated.

In response to the Times’ report, Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) reassured “Fox News Sunday that the terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was indeed an “al-Qaida-led event.”

That’s all well and fine – a member of our government telling the mainstream media what at least some in our government believe – but a circular sort of argument taking place here as it was Fox News that told Mike Rogers and others like him what to believe about Benghazi in the first place.

These people enjoy repeating the same lies to each other (they can hardly repeat a truth they have never acknowledged). There is a sense of comfort to be had in shared lies, each reinforcing the other in the face of those nasty liberal facts – like those given by the New York Times.

Rogers, who is the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee (I know, the oxymoronic combination of “House” and “Intelligence” makes me cringe every time, too), said his committee made a more exhaustive investigation than the New York Times. What he means, of course, is that unlike the Times, his committee was prepared to ignore uncongenial facts.

He further suggested that there might be political motivations at work, a means to “clear” the already clearly innocent Hilary Clinton, in time for 2016. As opposed, you know, to the politically motivated scandal crafted by Republicans designed to smear Clinton in advance of the 2016 elections. He finds the timing “suspicious.”

So did we, Rep. Rodgers. So did we. And we still do.

“I don’t want to speculate on why they might do it,” Rogers speculated.

Right. No Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives has EVER speculated on fabricated misdeeds by any liberal.

On the related subject of who did it, the New York Times report stressed al-Shariah but Rep. Peter King (R-NY), who is a member and former chairman of the House’s Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said “Shariah-Shmariah”:

“It’s misleading,” King said. “It’s a distinction without a difference.”

Well, if they insist. And they do:

The author of the Times report, David Kirkpatrick, told Fox News in response that “If you’re using the term al-Qaida to describe even a local group of Islamist militants who dislike democracy or have a grudge against the United States, If you’re going to call anybody like that ‘al-Qaida,’ then, okay.”

And they do call anybody like that al Qaeda. They have to do so in order to avoid lamely apologizing like Lara Logan.

It’s hard to go wrong when you call any attacker, whoever they are, whatever connections they might or might not have al Qaeda. Al Qaeda did it, even if they didn’t. We’re right, no matter what, even if we’re not.

Fox News and its pet Republicans have a strategy that is childish in its brilliance: they simply shield their eyes and plug their ears and say “I’m not hearing this!” They don’t want it to be true; it therefore cannot be true.

In fact, Fox News is telling us that there is “growing outrage” over the Times report. Of course, as Fox News admits, it is Fox News sources who are outraged. Not the American people. Because those Fox News sources “on the ground” when the attack took place, knew at once through some mystical means who launched the attack and why.

Like Rogers, I am not going to speculate on how that might be true. I’ll just end by saying that it’s all so much easier when you’ve predetermined your answers before actually examining the evidence.

Which brings us around to why Fox News exists in the first place.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Darrell Issa Hid The Truth About Benghazi For a Year While Attacking President Obama

By: Rmuse
Sunday, December, 29th, 2013, 10:38 am

It is an unfortunate human trait to look for some kind of moral wrong or legal malfeasance in specific events to incite general public outrage either to benefit someone or to cast aspersion on someone else. Shortly after Republicans won a House majority in the 2010 midterm elections a corrupt Republican, Darrell Issa, promised his only job as chairman of the House Oversight Committee was to have “seven hearings a week, times 40 weeks” investigating the Obama Administration when the 112th Congress began. Issa was desperate to find a scandal to take down President Obama and has investigated everything from the 2009 federal stimulus program to fabricating President Obama’s part in the scandalous Republican government shutdown two months ago.

Issa has wasted taxpayer time and money for three years looking for Obama Administration scandals he subsequently never found, including the tragic deaths of 4 American diplomats in Benghazi Libya on September 11 2012. Issa’s scandalous investigations aside, it was revealed yesterday that an extensive investigation into the attack on the diplomatic outpost that claimed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three diplomats’ lives found no involvement of al-Qaeda or other international terrorists groups whatsoever like Republicans have claimed for over a year. Instead, the attack was precipitated by, as first reported, extremist Christians in the United States.

A lengthy and comprehensive New York Times investigation informed what Republicans are desperate to keep under wraps because it revealed the Benghazi attack was “accelerated in part by anger at a U.S.-made video denigrating Islam.” The report parroted what any American with half-a-mind has known since Republicans began their relentless propaganda campaign that the Obama administration attempted to cover up al-Qaeda’s alleged role in the attack. According to the chairman of the House Intelligent Committee, Republican Mike Rogers, who kept the al-Qaeda meme alive last month on Fox News, “It was very clear to the individuals on the ground that this was an al-Qaeda-led event.”

However, according to the Times, “The only intelligence connecting Al Qaeda to the attack was an intercepted phone call that night from a participant in the first wave of the attack to a friend in another African country who had ties to members of Al Qaeda. But when the friend heard the attacker’s boasts, he sounded astonished and had no prior knowledge of the assault.” The report said militants surveyed the U.S. compound at least 12 hours before the assault started, but “the violence also had spontaneous elements fueled in large part by anger at the (anti-Islam) video that motivated the initial attack.” It is important to note that the video, titled “Innocence of Muslims,” was made by an American and “had also prompted protests for hours the day before at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo.”

The report continued that “Dozens of people (in Benghazi) joined in, some of them provoked by the video and others responding to fast-spreading false rumors that guards inside the American compound had shot Libyan protesters.” According to a suspect who denied participating in the attack, “the video insulting the Prophet Mohammed might well have justified the killing of four Americans.”

Still, Congressional Republicans continue to assert that Stevens and three diplomats died in a carefully planned assault by al-Qaeda because they sought to undermine President Obama’s claim that al-Qaeda was decimated after killing its leadership including Osama bin Laden. Republicans assailed Susan E. Rice for announcing that based on early intelligence reports; the attacks were inspired by “spontaneous street protests that got out of hand as a result of the video denigrating the prophet Mohammed.” Susan Rice was mercilessly condemned by leading Republicans for allegedly lying about the attacks that led her to withdraw her name from consideration as President Obama’s Secretary of State.

For the past year-and-a-half Republicans led a phony search for a Benghazi scandal wasting taxpayer time and money, but why did criminal Issa never investigate the Christian extremists for making, promoting, and releasing the video that clearly fueled the attacks that killed four American diplomats? If the criminal really wanted to get to the bottom of who was responsible for the attacks he would have begun immediate investigations into American Christians and not President Obama.

Issa can hardly claim Christian extremists were innocent in provoking the attacks because American non-profit Media for Christ obtained film permits to shoot the movie in August 2011, and the project was promoted by Morris Sadek by email and on the blog of the National American Coptic Assembly. By early September, the film was dubbed into Arabic and broadcast on September 9 on Al-Nas, an Egyptian television station; at this point it is prescient to reiterate the video “had prompted protests for hours the day before (the Benghazi attack) at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo.” The extremist Christian pastor Terry Jones, known for a Quran-burning controversy that led to riots around the world and endangered American soldiers, knew of the video’s existence prior to the Benghazi attacks and promoted it by announcing his plan to show the 13-minute trailer at his church on September 11, 2012. It is incomprehensible that the video did not incite protestors to attack the diplomatic outpost due to “anger at a U.S.-made video denigrating Islam,” or that extremist Christians are not culpable for the violence in Benghazi.

Law professors and constitutional law experts pointed out the government cannot prosecute the film’s producer(s) for its content because of the First Amendment, but regardless of First Amendment rights, the Obama administration asked YouTube to review whether to continue hosting the video at all under the company’s policies. YouTube said the video fell within guidelines because it is against Islam, not against Muslim people and thus not considered “hate speech.” Ben Wizner of the American Civil Liberties Union said, “It does make us nervous when the government throws its weight behind any requests for censorship.” However, the Supreme Court has ruled that there are circumstances when free speech is not protected and pulling the video before it was exposed in Muslim countries would have saved four Americans’ lives.

A popular metaphor for speech or actions made for the explicit purpose of creating panic that can lead to injury or death, “shouting fire in a crowded theater,” is a paraphrasing Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.’s Supreme Court opinion in the case Schenck v. United States which held the defendant’s speech in opposition to the draft was not protected under the First Amendment. It is true that Darrell Issa is not, and never will be, a member of the High Court, but if he is frantic to get to the bottom of why four American diplomats were killed in Benghazi it is within his purview and duty to investigate the extremist Christians who incited protests and outrage at Americans in Cairo, and Benghazi, as a result of an anti-Islam video that denigrated the faith and its prophet.

Extremist Christians have a right of free speech, but when their “freedom” results in the deaths of, as Republicans continue repeating, “four American heroes,” then they explicitly created panic leading to the diplomats’ deaths. Fundamentalist Christians have expressed every form of hate speech imaginable against gays, immigrants, and particularly Muslims with impunity and it is high time they are brought to account for their actions. However, there is a tendency in America to give anyone thumping a bible and wrapping themselves in the flag a free pass because they are Christians. The current scandal in Washington is that slimy crook Darrell Issa who has had the same information the New York Times reported for over a year and sat on his ass wasting taxpayer time and money pursuing Barack Obama. Republicans owe Susan Rice a humble apology, the American people tens-of-millions of dollars, and have once again exposed themselves as America’s biggest scandal.

 

[landslider2000]

The Times, in seeking to clear the way for Hillary, probably just injected new vigor into the Benghazi discussion.

But three issues remain -- why the outpost was not secured, why defenders were not helped, , and why Obama, Rice, and Hillary lied about a video which was apparently not translated into Arabic until after the attack.

 

[Sean]

The Times, in seeking to clear the way for Hillary, probably just injected new vigor into the Benghazi discussion.

But three issues remain -- why the outpost was not secured, why defenders were not helped, , and why Obama, Rice, and Hillary lied about a video which was apparently not translated into Arabic until after the attack.

It was being shown, in Arabic, the day before. That's what caused the riots in Cairo.

 

[Sean Renaud]

The didn't lie either, if anything the current report suggests they downplayed the video's importance because they were, per usual, pussies. The location wasn't secured for a number of reasons including it would cost money that Republicans were unwilling to pay for and there was an actual embassy they could easily have relocated to and were advised to do.

 

[RobDownSouth]

The Times, in seeking to clear the way for Hillary, probably just injected new vigor into the Benghazi discussion.

But three issues remain -- why the outpost was not secured, why defenders were not helped, , and why Obama, Rice, and Hillary lied about a video which was apparently not translated into Arabic until after the attack.

Didn't read the Times article didja?

Whassmatta, too many inconvenient facts for your cowardly Airborne Ranger ass to handle?

 

[landslider2000]

Not accurate in regard to funding. They probably didn't secure the outpost because it would have drawn attention to the dire security situation in Benghazi when Obama was saying bin Laden's demise had mostly quelled terrorism.

So Obama, Rice, and Hillary concocted the fairy tale about a precipitating video. And they lied on as many TV shows as would have them.

The other sad thing is that the once-august NY Times, once deemed to be scribbling the first draft of history, is now reduced to spindoctoring for Obama and Hillary.

 

[Liar]

It's like a broken record, innit?

 

[Sean Renaud]

The Obama Administration advised Stevens to leave. He chose not to because he felt safe. It turned out he was wrong but still.

 

[RobDownSouth]

It's like a broken record, innit?

I picture landslider with his fingers in his ears repeating "la la la I can't HEAR you!" at the top of his lungs.

He has an almost Vettemanesque need to disregard inconvenient facts.

 

[lilsarah91]

Something you achieved long ago, and since I don't drink, I'll never achieve the levels of idiocy you've managed.

Yeah, you've managed to achieve your vast levels of idiocy without any chemical help. HAHAHA, and that's impressive my friend. Bravo!

 

[unregistered]

 

[Skiddles2014]

I will laugh so hard if Hillary gets elected.

 

[Sean Renaud]

The Republican chairman of the House Intelligence committee and a Democrat both came out today to say the NYTs is in error, like we all guessed right off the bat. The New York Times should issue a statement, "we amend the news to fit the narrative of liberal politicians in the limelight, especially when we need to repair the presidential aspirations of Democrat candidates, like Hillary Clinton."

Doesn't trust the government to tell him the truth. Unless it tells him what he wants to hear.

 

[RobDownSouth]

The Republican chairman of the House Intelligence committee and a Democrat both came out today to say the NYTs is in error, like we all guessed right off the bat. The New York Times should issue a statement, "we amend the news to fit the narrative of liberal politicians in the limelight, especially when we need to repair the presidential aspirations of Democrat candidates, like Hillary Clinton."

Fuck Darrell Issa. He's arguably one of the few human beings on this planet with less personal honor than you.

Ole Darrell was really exposed as a complete and utter fraud by the NY Times and even his normally friendly conservative talking head buddies have said he might have stretched the truth a little bit (which is Tardspeak for "he got caught lying his ass off").

Darrell is trying to salvage his reputation now and lashing out in all directions. Very few people are coming to his defense (with the obvious exception of you....you bottom-feeders have to stick together I guess).

Once again you bring great dishonor to the USMC with your continued lying about Benghazi in the face of overwhelming facts to the contrary.

#MassiveVetteFail
#Disgrace2TheCorps
#MarineWithoutHonor

 

[KingOrfeo]

It's like a broken record, innit?

Well, yeah, I gWell, yeah, I gWell, yeah, I g

 

[KingOrfeo]

I will laugh so hard if Hillary gets elected.

Don't laugh! Do the Snoopy Happy-Dance!

http://www.astronautsarecool.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Snoopy-Dance-3.jpg

 

[IrezumiKiss]

The Republican chairman of the House Intelligence committee and a Democrat both came out today to say the NYTs is in error, like we all guessed right off the bat. The New York Times should issue a statement, "we amend the news to fit the narrative of liberal politicians in the limelight, especially when we need to repair the presidential aspirations of Democrat candidates, like Hillary Clinton."

Doesn't trust the government to tell him the truth. Unless it tells him what he wants to hear.

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m9wofiCO961qa6g1m.gif

http://gifsforum.com/images/gif/victory/grand/victory-eccbc87e4b5ce2fe28308fd9f2a7baf3-1344.gif

http://apotential.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/what-alison-brie.gif?w=584

http://awesomelyluvvie.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/ItsTrueTho.gif