Pigotry you sound like a good loyal democrat. To you everything is left or right, this is not about politics this is about telling the truth to the American Public. I dont beleive that Obama had her change her story but his staff tried to protect the POTUS before the election. The truth needs to be told and let the chips fall where they may. i see that little twerp Panetta and Axlerod hands mixing in this pie. national Security of the United States is not about politics but about protecting the interests of the nation and telling the truth. do you recall a little oath of office.

What a load!

Yet our troops die in Afganistan every day........for what?

Disgusting!

of the Republican vote to deny more funding for the security of our embassies

Pig, come on! You should know by now that this isn't really how voting goes in Washington. There is so much pork attached to each bill that comes out of these congressional committees. Presidents have long asked for line item veto authority and for a short time was passed into law. However, in 1996 it was overturned by judicial review meaning it wasn't Constitutional. I mean, if I'm a Democrat and I want to add $50 million increase on spending for a planned parenthood bill I might have to vote yes on building 100 nuclear warheads to be delivered in 10 years to the military at a cost of $500 billion. This is how our crazy legislature works and is why we can't get crap done anymore!!! Each party makes offers the other simply can't agree to because it goes fundamentally against what the ideologies currently held by the opposing party. It is a game to those representative on Capital Hill. Why do you think they fight each other on C-SPAN everday and drink and party together at night. They don't hate each other the way we think they do... I promise you that!!!

It certainly ain't as cut and dry as you present!!! Christ, we all wish it were!

Sure Bandit. Election is over. Winner gets a green light to lie. Whoopeeee!

descrs,

We are not talking about Romney and the election here. Wake the f**k up! We are talking about Benghazi and Obama's failure to protect citizens abroad working for our government, failure to send help when there was time, and lying and covering it up. Kick him out!

Your little buddy Bush did a WHOLE lot worse lying to the American people and caused thousands of Americans to be killed in that hell hole called Iraq. But you don't hear and never did hear Democrats and news channels going on and on and on about that for months about Bush's MONSTER LIE... there were NO weapons of mass destruction in Iraq!!!

I really hope (but sincerely doubt) your post is supposed to be sarcasm.

Sorry, can't see as how any so called 'cover up' on this issue would have made ANY difference on the outcome of the election. You say it was done to protect the POTUS re-election. Man...l just don't see it. No evidence of any outrageous actions by this administration that lead to the attack. Could have something else been done to keep it from happening? Well hell...that would be a huge 'DUH'. Of course! Otherwise it would have never happened....you see...it's that 'hind sight' thingy we've all heard about. But I just fail to see any damning negligence by anyone yet. Time to learn from it and move the f*** along.

Pigotry:

War is brutal...there are always sacrifices..this time by Ambassador Stevens...R.I.P.

When did the USA declare war on Libya? Did Libya attack the USA prior to this event this year? Until B H Obama ordered troops into Libya, the USA had been allies with Libya during the G W Bush's administration on the 'War on Terror'. Obama wasted $3 Billion on helping terrorist take over Libya. How do I know? Because I have doing business in the Region and in Libya for serveral years. I was in Libya two (2) weeks prior to these attacks. It was not an surprise to anyone there. It was known about.

But the Obama Administration has acted with courage and good leadership. There are always some who try to do harm to us. We need to be vigilant. There are always exigencies.

Such BS!!!! B H Obama disgusts me.

In time of crisis, we need to come together instead of blaming each other.

Blame? That is what this administration does best. They cannot lead or govern. How sick.

The culture of corruption continues in the Barrack Hussein administration.

I'm sure as soon as this gets any closer to the real source(s) the almighty Executive Privilege pen will be proudly brandished by Barrack Hussein just like he did with Border Agent Brian Terry being murdered.

Lies, corruption and shame are what this pathetic excuse of a president brings to the American people.

This is what you get when you allow Chicago style thug politicians, with a complicit swooning media, to promote their dysfunctional social and economic justice nonsense on the American people. Political correctness is allowed to dictate rather than policy.

I hope all you Libbies who voted for Barrack Hussein in 2008 to pretend you weren't racists didn't do it again this time to prove your ignorance.

If you did, may God have mercy on your souls.

Saying it is a lie doesn't make it a lie.

Chris: Sure it does. Afterall from the beginning Obama said that the reason they attacked was because of a video. It's not our fault if liberal idiots actually fell for that lie. Don't you remember what he told Susan Rice to say to the United Nations?

It's actually the opposite. First of all, let's be clear what transpired here. What happened this week in Cairo, in Benghazi, in many other parts of the region, was a direct result of a heinous and offensive video that was widely disseminated, that the US government had nothing to do with, which we have made clear is reprehensible and disgusting.

Even the White House Press Secretary wanted to protect the lie:

The White House press secretary, Jay Carney, defended the administration's evolving version of events. "Over the course of the past two weeks, this administration has provided as much information as it has been able to," Mr. Carney told reporters traveling on Air Force One to Ohio on Wednesday. "We made clear that our initial assessment and interim reports were based on information that was available at the time."

You obviously think the American people are stupid, don't you Mr. President?

We knew the attack in Benghazi was terrorist act from beginning

With each new revelation, more of Obama's lies and coverup are exposed. The time is coming when even the most delusional Obama apologist will be forced to admit the truth.

For months knowledgeable State Department experts, including Amb. Stevens, had been warning that the Benghazi Mission was pitifully unprotected. They literally begged for more security. During that whole time, Obama refused to acknowledge the danger and denied all requests.

Finally, on September 11^th, the attack that Obama had refused to believe in, happened. Obama knew immediately that it was a terrorist attack, and that he was responsible for leaving the mission helpless. I'm sure the President experienced a horrible sinking sensation when he realized the he had made a catastrophic error so serious that it bordered on treason. Instead of trying to mitigate his blunder by immediately sending military support to Benghazi, he instead tried to cover it up by refusing all the pleadings for help. He fabricated a story out of thin air that it was a spontaneous protest against an anti-Muslim film, because the truth would have exposed his incompetence just prior to the election.

The truth is emerging like a rising tide that will eventually drown this corrupt President.

Top intelligence officials told NBC News Monday night that they have known the Sept. 11 attack on the Benghazi consulate was a terrorist act from the beginning.

And yet an American citizen remains in jail due to the political ambitions of our dear President.

THERESA-532036

According to Democratic House Oversight Committee staff, the amount that the GOP-led House passed for two accounts that pay for embassy security in fiscal 2012 ($2.311 billion) was $330 million less than the Obama administration had requested ($2.641 billion).

A GOP House Appropriations Committee aide confirmed the House bill had less in these accounts than what the administration requested.

However, the final bill, after being worked on by the Democratic-led Senate, put in more money than what had passed in the House. The final bill, which passed with bipartisan support, gave a total of $2.37 billion to these accounts for fiscal 2012 -- about $270 million less than what the administration had requested.

The GOP-led House did initially approve about $330 million less than what the administration requested, but in the final bill, passed with bipartisan support after adjustments by the Senate, put the amount a little closer to the administration's target.

Passed with bipartisan support!

STOP with the excuses about inadequate funding. This was a simple matter of common sense. We had inadequate security at one of our consulates, with four American citizens, in one of the most politically unstable regions in the world.

9/11 is a Muslim extremists holy anniversary. The simple solution was to move Ambassador Stevens, his staff and significant documents to Tripoli until security was reevaluated. This would have cost a few thousand dollars at most.

The loss of these Americans should be an outrage, but of course our complicit media will minimize this disaster to protect Barrack Hussein, as usual.

Every real American should be ashamed of this administrations corruption.

Couple of things here,

1st - Theresa "IF the Republicans were so worried about safety, they would have given the money requested to help with security,' - REALLY? There was apparently plenty of money available for the procurement of new Chevy Volts for EVERY EMBASSY at roughly 45k a piece with a total price tag of just over 3.1 million dollars. MORE THAN ENOUGH to cover the rent-a-cops. Point number 2 with your brain dead Rhetoric - there is this thing called the United States Marine Corps Embassy Guard Battallion, who provides internal security for US EMBASSIES AND CONSULATES. There was NO PLANS for such warfighters to be in Libya for roughly 5 years. Issue #3 - in the six months PRIOR to the attack, there were 13 direct threats and over 200 security incidents at that consulate, to include a bomb being used to blow a hole in the exterior wall. Issue #4 - Col Woods team requested and begged to stay on station but were ORDERED by the State (of head in the ass) Department to vacate, which they did in August, a mere 3 weeks prior to this attack. Issue #5 - The bull@!$%# song and dance about NOT KNOWING is a crock. There is this folder called the Daily Security and Intelligence Brief delivered to the POTUS EVERY MORNING 1st Thing, prepared by the National Security Advisor which details EVERY Security Threat, Every Intelligence Threat, and Every Security Incident that takes place at ANY US National Interest, to include bases, outposts, government buildings etc. Barracky Poo had at least 213 briefings on that specific consulate and DID SQUAT. For that, his ass should be in a ringer. And I don't care if it was Bush, Reagan, Dr. Effing Doolittle, or the Easter Bunny. That is incompetence and the lies that followed does indeed smell of cover up, just like Fast and Furious.

Descrs - " Your little buddy Bush did a WHOLE lot worse lying to the American people and caused thousands of Americans to be killed in that hell hole called Iraq. But you don't hear and never did hear Democrats and news channels going on and on and on about that for months about Bush's MONSTER LIE... there were NO weapons of mass destruction in Iraq!!!" - Utterly wrong and completely demonstrative of the typical libtard party line. In fact chief, Iraq had weapons of mass destruction - we know this to be a fact as a result of the Iran/Iraq War, the Gassing of the Kurds, the sale of 550 Tons of Yellow Cake (that is a nuclear component incidently) to Canada, and the very report of Dr. Hans Blix Former United Nations weapons inspector told former Prime Minister Tony Blair that he believed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction six months before the invasion of Iraq, the Iraq Inquiry has heard.

Giving evidence to the Chilcot inquiry into the war, Blix said he told Blair of his belief privately some six months before the invasion.

"I, like most people at the time, felt that Iraq retains weapons of mass destruction," he said. "I did not say so publicly. I said it perhaps to Mr Blair in September 2002 privately, but not publicly."

Additionally, from the UNSCOM report on Iraq's WMD Program

On February 12, 2009, Iraq acceded tothe Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), a multilateral treaty banning thedevelopment, production, stockpiling, transfer, and use of chemicalweapons.[8] (To date, 188 countrieshave signed and ratified the CWC.) After joining the Convention, Iraq wasobligated to declare within 30 days any legacy stocks of chemical weapons it hadinherited from the Saddam Hussein regime. On March 12, 2009, Iraq declaredBunkers 13 and 41 at Muthanna containing filled and unfilled chemical munitionsand precursors, as well as five former chemical weapons production facilities,to the international body overseeing CWC implementation—the Organizationfor the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in The Hague, theNetherlands.[9]

As aresult, no record exists of the exact number or status of the sarin-filledrockets remaining in the bunker. According to the UNMOVIC final report in 2007,the rockets "may be both filled and unfilled, armed or unarmed, in goodcondition ordeteriorated."[10] In theworst-case scenario, the munitions could contain as much as 15,000 liters ofsarin. Although it is likely that the nerve agent has degraded substantiallyafter nearly two decades of storage under suboptimal conditions, UNMOVICcautioned that "the levels of degradation of the sarin fill in the rocketscannot be determined without exploring the bunker and taking samples from intactwarheads."[11] If the sarinremains highly toxic and many of the rockets are still intact, they could pose aproliferation risk.

Between the end of majorcombat operations in Iraq on May 1, 2003, and Iraq's accession to the CWCon February 12, 2009, U.S. and British occupation forces recovered hundreds ofchemical munitions containing degraded mustard or sarin, all dating from theIran-Iraq War of the 1980s or the 1991 Persian GulfWar.[17]

According to the ISGfinal report, published in September 2004, "Beginning in May 2004, ISGrecovered a series of chemical weapons from Coalition military units and othersources. A total of 53 munitions have been recovered, all of which appear tohave been part of pre-1991 Gulf War stocks based on their physical condition andresidual components. The most interesting discovery has been a 152mm binarySarin artillery projectile—containing a 40 percent concentration ofSarin—which insurgents attempted to use as an Improvised Explosive Device(IED). The existence of this binary weapon not only raises questions about thenumber of viable chemical weapons remaining in Iraq and [sic] raises thepossibility that a larger number of binary, long-lasting chemical weapons stillexist."[18]

On June 21,2006, at the request of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,Director of National Intelligence John D. Negroponte declassified the "keypoints" from a U.S. Army National Ground Intelligence Center report on therecovery of chemical munitions in Iraq:

• Since 2003 Coalition forces have recovered approximately 500weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent.
• Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-GulfWar chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions areassessed to still exist.
• Pre-Gulf War Iraqi chemical weapons could be sold on the blackmarket. Use of these weapons by terrorists or insurgent groups would haveimplications for Coalition forces in Iraq. The possibility of use outside Iraqcannot be ruled out.
• The most likely munitions remaining are sarin and mustard-filledprojectiles.
• The purity of the agent inside the munitions depends on manyfactors, including the manufacturing process, potential additives, andenvironmental storage conditions. While agents degrade over time, chemicalwarfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal.
• It has been reported in open press that insurgents and Iraqigroups desire to acquire and use chemicalweapons.[19]

Atthe time the Iraqi chemical munitions were recovered, Iraq was under militaryoccupation by the United States and the United Kingdom, which were parties tothe CWC. Accordingly, both countries were subject to paragraph 1(a)(i) ofArticle III of the Convention, which provides that a state party must declare tothe OPCW Technical Secretariat all chemical weapons "located in any placeunder its jurisdiction and control." In addition, according to paragraph 1of Article IV, the CWC's requirements for verifiable destruction apply to"all chemical weapons owned or possessed by a State Party, or that arelocated in any place under its jurisdiction and control." Finally,paragraph 9 of Article IV states, "Any chemical weapons discovered by aState Party after the initial declaration of chemical weapons shall be reported,secured and destroyed in accordance with Part IV(A) of the VerificationAnnex."

So, if I were you, I would EDUCATE myself before spewing more libtard misinformation. The reports are available on line for any brain dead libtard moron to read. And Take HEED OF THE DATES on the Reports, JUST FYI HERE the invasion of Iraq - Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), the U.S.-led coalition military operation in Iraq, was launched on. March 20, 2003 - The House Select Committee Report is dated June 21, 2006, Hans Blix's report to Tony Blair was September 2002, the ISG's report is 2004, and the UNSCOM Report is 2009, and IF you notice, there were BUNKERS identifies as holding MULTIPLE CHEMICAL MUNITIONS.

Thank you Will,

I too was unaware of WMDs being found after the invasion. Gotta love our MSM, they really know how to report the news.

Pigotry, bandit-3097615, amphiox, Chris-735081, descrs-1664846, BoredwithsameO, starsailing, StackDat, THERESA-532036, theotherguy1234, Chris from Yucaipa, et al.

Still worse than Islamic Jihadists that will defend President Obama Wrong or Right to your Deaths.

1. President Obama as Commander In Chief Ordered the US Military (US AFRICOM, US SETAF, US EUCOM) to Attack a US Ally President Gaddaffi in violation of US Law that Restricts and Limits the Presidential War Powers, 1973 War Powers Resolution (Act), aImpeachable Offense. SOS Clinton in admittance of President Obama's Guilt apologized to US Congress on behalf of President Obama, "I'm sorry".

US Military Asymmetric Warfare Forces attached to the CIA's SAD/SOG are "Boots on the Ground" since February 2011.

President Obama tells the US Public, "No US Military Boots on the Ground", eventhough, Arabic Al Jezeera, Libyan TV, is showing videos of the US (Redacted, Redacted) and British (SAS) Asymmetric Warfare Forces at Libya; the BBC also reports this.

2. President Obama Directly Supported the Fundamentalist Islamic Jihadists to Overthrow a US Ally President Gaddaffi that President Gaddaffi's Military was fighting. Intelligence Agencies Worldwide are confirming President Gaddaffi is fighting "Al Quada like" Islamic Jihadists.

President Obama says "Dictator Killing his own people".

3. President Obama Directly Supported the Fundamentalist Islamic Jihadists of the Libyan Rebels consisting of Al Quada Saudi Arabia (AQ), Al Quada Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), Al Quada Syria (AQS), Al Quada Yemen (AQY), Hezbollah, Al Quada Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), etc..

President Obama refuses to listen to his own Executive Intelligence Agency, the CIA., US and NATO Generals, etc. saying President Gaddaffi is fighting Islamic Jihadists.

4. The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group became the Government of Libya after President Gaddaffi is Murdered. The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group were the Islamic Jihadists killing US Military at Iraq.

President Obama says, Democracy won, a Dictator is dead. And promises the US Taxpayer Money to rebuild Libya.

5. The Fundamentalist Islamic Jihadists of Al Quada Saudi Arabia (AQ), Al Quada Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), Al Quada Syria (AQS), Al Quada Yemen (AQY), Hezbollah, Al Quada Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), etc. obtained 20,000 portable shoulder launched SA-7 anti aircraft missiles from the Main Libyan Military Depot at Hight Razma facility on the eastern outskirts of Benghazi with their stated goal of shooting down US Airlines "to cripple the US Economy".

They combine together as Ansar Al Shariah to protect and instate Fundamentalist Islamic Sharia Laws at Libya.

President Obama starts saying during his Presidential Campaign that Al Quada is defeated and is on the run.

5. President Obama's Executive Intelligence Agency, the CIA, at the US Consulate at Benghazi is tasked to locate the 20,000 portable shoulder launched SA-7 anti aircraft missiles.

President Obama and Vice President Biden start to incite the Islamic World during the Presidential Campaigns by stating "Osama Bin Laden is Dead and GM is alive".

The Islamic Believers Worldwide are getting pissed and hold rallies at Egypt, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Libya, etc. saying, "Obama, Obama, we are all Osama". President Obama ignores this.

6. Ansar Al Shariah start planning the 9/11 2011 Attacks as vengeance and revenge for the US Murder (their word) of their Islamic Holy Warrior of Islam Superstar Osama Bin Laden. This would be worse than murdering the Pope then Internationally admitting you did that; or saying that you murdered Mohammad and bragging internationally that you did.

7. The combined US Military Forces of President Obama's Operation Odyssey Dawn are at Italy. Just a couple of hours away from Libya (even by slow propellor aircraft). There is also at least one fully equipped US Army Airborne Brigade with USAF Airlift capabilty; Mission Quick Response Force. With all attachments including Field Artillery about 10,000 US Military Combatants. USAF and USN would also provide CAS (Close Air Support) especially with AC-130s, MQs (armed Drones), etc.. Other US Military Forces US Army Special Forces (with Airlift Capability), USN SEAL Teams (with Airlift Capability), USAF SOW STTs (with Airlift Capability), USMC MARSOC (with Airlift Capability), USMC Fleet Marines (with USN Airlift Capability), USN Ships and Submarines, etc..

Uh, huh, President Obama as US Military Commander In Chief did all he could during the 7 hour attack on the US Consulate (US Diplomatic Soil) at Libya.

Voters
Politicians manipulate voters every day with half-truths -- or outright lies -- about taxes, spending and many other issues that directly affect the nation's prosperity.

Too many voters embrace feel-good propaganda that they want to hear instead of learning the basic facts about issues they care about. They should do a better job of calling out dishonest politicians -- and shunning media outlets that stoke political food fights.

http://money.msn.com/investing/11-things-wrong-with-congress

Note: Later information, the ex-USN SEALs (later killed) were using laser designators to provide Terminal Guidance to any air to ground missile support from MQs (armed drones) or AC-130s (pin point sniper mode, including even more accurate Redacted air to ground missiles) to attack the Islamic Jihadists attackers heavy machinegun and mortar positions; however, President Obama only sent an unarmed RQ (drone). The RQs and MQs are assigned to the President's Own Executive Intelligence Agency, the CIA, and flown by USAF Pilots. So this had to be Ordered or Authorized by President Obama as Commander in Chief.

The Democrats have their heads in the sand and do not want to hear the truth.

They are just stupid !

Obama* refused to send help after many requests for help.

This has nothing to do with the republicans or Romney.

This is all on Obama*

Democrats in Denial.

The truth will come out and it is all on Obama*

Cover it up the best that you can but it will not help.

@ Chris from Yucaipa

Spoken Like a true liberal, Change the Subject, Ignore the Facts, Marginalize and Name Call.

Unless of course, "f*cking butthurt cons" is not short for conservatives, then I apologize for speaking out of turn.

My guess is you are too ignorant or of a sufficiently diminished mental capacity to formulate a cognitive and cohesive argument to support your position. And you must revert to parroting what others have said, even though you fail to fully comprehend what was said. But hey, you're cool, right? You sure told us off.

Jez, the election is over. The republicans lost. Time to move on and support the guy that the MAJORITY wanted in the White House,

Actually, let me explain something about the majority...until the ELECTORAL COLLEGE is dissolved, you will NEVER KNOW the TRUE MAJORITY.

You know why? Because depending on where you live, many people DO NOT VOTE because they know their vote is worthless due to their STATE.

I have friends who live in MD that are Republican and didn't vote because it really didn't matter because the state is BLUE. I also have friends who are Democrat who live in Texas and didn't vote because the state is RED. Even though there is a POPULAR vote, they didn't want to waste the time in line because they knew the state was for the other party even though their vote still could have gone to the popular vote.

That should tell you something...that people feel their vote is worthless.

It's time to END the electoral college and let the MAJORITY decide who is President. Whether that is a democrat or a republican, the EC is outdated and stops people from voting.

Yes there will always be people who don't vote. But at least you can make sure people know their vote WILL COUNT and won't be wasted in a state that they have no chance of winning.

Regarding the article, the administration flat out lied. You can sit there and spin it all you want. They knew it was a terrorist attack that was planned on 9/11. This has been known for months. They denied it to protect Obama for the election. I'm a moderate and can obviously see the facts.

James-546195-1049965,

Since there are so many illerates and uneducated posting nonsense opinions on Newsvine's "Get Smarter Here". This link will help:

An education about the Electoral College

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50133559n&tag=showDoorFlexGridLeft;flexGridModule

ThaMonkeh - shooting down every bill that would have helped job growth

ROTFLMAO. Demoncraptic Senator Harry Reid has eyes in his arse hole to read all the Jobs Bills he is sitting on.

And HOW the H3LL does President Obama spending $2.1 Trillion that was not previously Budgeted For, requiring President Obama's Demanded Proposal to US Congress for "Across the Board" Budget Cuts to All Programs (like Medicare), Projects (like US Infrastructure Projects of the US Army Corps of Engineers), Agencies (like FEMA (current NY, NJ), Department of Education, etc.) including Cuts to the Entitlements and Benefits of the "47%" (actual 49%) to pay for President Obama spending $2.1 Trillion CREATE F**KING JOBS ThaMonkeh.

So sure ThaMonkeh, President Obama in his President's Proposal to US Congress demanded the Fiscal Cliff for all the Obama Lemmings to Jump Off while on the Obama Road To Greece.

AND TO CIRCUMVENT THE US CONGRESS "The Will of the People" President Obama's Actions (keep clicking "Next", see anything Unconstitutional, TOUGH, that is what YOU voted for:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions

You got LIED TO ThaMonkeh about "Obstructionist" US Congress, just like all the other Obama arse puppets.

ThaMonkeh - We saw an attack, we had no idea why they did it, what it was about.

That "we" was only YOU, not those of us with cognitive reasoning skills, that were not too lazy to start looking at all available sources of information, instead of being used as Obama arse puppets as well as being spoonfed SH!T.

This is you and your collective blame (trying to include everyone in your own stup!dty) of "we":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJDni6Bopzo

ThaMonkeh - The American people have been begging you people to work WITH the Democrats and FIX THE FRELLING NATION.

Again with the Collective Blame ("The American people"), the "you people" (again the "you people" like the N Word), YOU MADE YOUR CHOICE TO HIRE THE DEMONCRAPS WITH NO IDEA HOW TO FIX THE MESS THEY CREATED that will plagiarize any or all solutions and claim them as their own:

example: You Blame Game Blaming Bush that President Obama inherited the US Economy, so you don't even bother (Too F**king Lazy) to do the Real Research to figure out what happened. And when the Research is presented with the Real Solution, then the President Obama arse puppets start their Name Calling.

BE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR INDIVIDUAL CHOICES, ThaMonkeh, THAT IS WHAT YOU VOTED FOR, SO LIVE WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA'S UNITED SOMALIA OF AMERICA.

Do not even attempt to Punish the Individuals that made successful Individual Choices by taking from them, to reward those that made Failed Individual Choices (the same Failures over and over again) as part of your typical Demoncrap Blame Game.

david you are full of @!$%#. and off topic. I agree with the decision not to go to the rose garden and give al-Qaida a high five for killing our people. It not a lie, they are extremists.

Just to point out to the Democrats who are defending this President on covering up this Terrorist Attack... Nixon won with 62% of the peoples vote.

You may want to think on that a bit.

The only reason this Admin is coming out with tidbits of real info is they have been caught with their pants down. They know they were caught in a mess of lies.

Not only did they not help the folks in Benghazi but the attacks were actually 2 differnt ones. First the Consulate was attacked where ambassador Chris Stevens was killed but then 5 to 7 hours later the CIA annex was attacked, the reason is that Al Quada wanted there prisoners back. The annex was armed were equipped with Mark 48 machine guns and had two types of laser capability. Each weapon had both a “passive” as well as a “visible” laser that could be used against the Libyan attackers. These machine guns were caked with blood from Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty. Being that they had lasers they could have received air assistance buy laser guided munitions

BUT OBAMA CHOSE NOT NOT HELP OUR FELLOW AMAERICANS, HE CHOSE TO JUST SIT BACK AND WATCH. WHAT WENT DOWN IS INEXCUSABLE. THEN FOR WEEKS ALL WE GOT WAS LIES

descrs,

Bush went to congress for approval before we went into Irac, according to law. Unlike Obama who went into Lybia without approval from congress. About not hearing democrats complain about going into Irac, I heard democrats crucify Bush everyday, for years. Remember this ? Bush lied, people died? For years? If you make statements, make them truthfully, not in your ususal partisan way.The democrats voted for war in Irac, and they believed Colin Powell's assurance that Irac had weapons of mass destruction. Now he denies it and became a democrat. The democrats changed their story when no WMD's were found, and blamed Bush for lying. This is typical of democrats. They lie, and lie, and lie and then believe their own lies. So dont talk to me about republican lies. Obama's whole presidency has been based on lies.

alan, that might fly IF the remarks happened on 9/11/2012; however, they were on 9/12/2012 which means they CAN NOT have been about 9/11/2001. Those remarks were about the BENGHAZI ATTACKS. Mitt Romney had already come out at 10 pm the night before with his comments (that were wrong) and then repeated them on 9/12 in the morning - before Obama went out to the Rose Garden and made his remarks.

In addition, NOBODY was "watching the attacks in real-time". There was one person who was LISTENING in real time and we did not get the security tapes until TEN DAYS after the attack. Y'all need to stop reading Conservative blogs or watching the echo chamber or listening to the conspiracy theorists on the radio.

NO investigation into a crime will release sensitive information that might help catch the perpetrators in the immediate aftermath. The Intelligence Community released the information that they deemed unclassified and what was their best guess at the time. Did you WANT the people who attacked to know that we knew who they were so that they would go to ground and not get found? REALLY?

Doesn't matter one bit that the Obama administration was deceitful on the Benghazi affair. Obama never takes any responsibility for anything negative. Media/Press will give him a walk on this just like they have everything else. There will never be any tough questions asked that require a straightforward answer of facts.

NBC enough with the lame excuses.

Intelligence officials: We knew attack in Benghazi was terrorist act from beginning
And yet they LIED!!!!!

Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, who said what transpired was a “spontaneous reaction to a hateful and offensive video.”

Any attempt by the white house to side with muslims and deceive the American public is an act of treason! IMPEACH NOW!!!!

James-546195-1049965 Beg your pardon but there is a reason for the Electorate College. It was devised as a plan so that the least populated States would have some voice in the election of the President. I do not think that it would be wise to replace it and try to smother states like Delaware, Alaska, Rhode Island, etc. If we were to do the election by popular vote then the reps would lose again and again. They (reps) have lost 5 of the 6 past presidential elections popular vote.

I am 64 and wear Big Boy Pants these days.... I have learned not to get too wrapped up in what Politicians say but focus on what is DONE.

It is silly to grind and grind on Rice saying it was the video vs. a planned terrorist attack, what @!$%#ing difference does that really make?

What I want to know is IF and WHEN requests were made by Stevens or his staff for extra protection. And if made, who ignored them and why?

What is really sad about politics in this country is how supporters can justify two wrongs. There is no doubt that the Obama administration decided to perpetuate a lie about the attack in Libya, and it would seem for purely political reasons. But all the Obama supporters can do is point at what they claim are lies by Republicans, instead of holding their own party accountable. Talk about a get out of jail free card for politicians, it is pretty pathetic of anyone that can find any reason to ever justify lying. It is way past the time that if supporters and even the media have a standard for the opposing party, it is the same standard they apply to their own.

Personally I think almost everyone trying to make some of us guilty for what some of them did is treason. No one in our government killed those poor people and no one from our government is guilty in any way for any thing connected with it...anyone trying to infer such a thing is purely doing it for political gain or from just being low class and uneducated and addicted to the conspiracy channel...Fox.

Most of these folks would not be pointing fingers at anyone if the President was a nice comfortable shade of white.

starsailing

Reading ability is obviously NOT an ability you possess. The following is quoted directly from the article.

Top intelligence officials told NBC News Monday night that they have known the Sept. 11 attack on the Benghazi consulate was a terrorist act from the beginning.

You voted for this guy America....

War is brutal...there are always sacrifices..this time by Ambassador Stevens...R.I.P.

According to President Obama, the United States was not in a war with Libya. Instead it was a kinetic military action. Is that not what he said?

How many "war" has the President Obama started since being initially elected in 2008? His party and the press want the American People to believe none. But what is the truth?

As yourself these questions:

* Would the Al Quada group that killed the US Ambassador in Libya been able to do so if Quadafi was in power and bombing Benghazi?

* Would the missiles that belonged to Quadafi's soldiers two years go be found in Syria today if Quadafi was still in power?

* Would those missiles presently be used to fire on Israel today if he was in power?

All of this has been stated before on news agencies like CNN, CBS, and NBC, but it has not be pressed to question if those actions would be the case if the US did not throw an ally (or allies) under the bus in 2009 and 2010.

Why was an un-armed drone used to watch the attack in Bengazhi that lasted 7-8 hours when just the year before the US had armed drones in that region assisting in the capture and killing of the leader of that country?

Steve Sjurset

We don't care who you voted for. The problem is, you got your head up your ass. if you don't have a problem with what happened, you shouldn't be allowed to vote anyway. The true definition of "sheeple".

"Sheeple" is one of those words used exclusively by those it was intended to describe.

descrs-1664846 do a little research and you will find more American men and women have died under Obama's administration than Bush's.

Benghazi is nothing more then the GOP & their Looney Buddies looking for "REVENGE" !!!!!!!!!!!!!

WeAllHaveOpinions

descrs-1664846 do a little research and you will find more American men and women have died under Obama's administration than Bush's.

Do the first 2,998 count?

Layers and layers of misdirection for what purpose; primarily to cover up incompetence and lack of leadership! Wow, 4 people are dead, and we the American people blindly accept the words of deception because we don't want to face the truth that lies in front of us. You Democrats have conveniently whitewashed the deaths to cover for your candidate's lack of integrity and leadership. Photo-ops don't build true character, only disguise it. An ugly part of your Presidents true persona is exposed. As the president said, "Don't attack Rice, attack me". Well Mr. President, I think we should! I think we need to!

What else does your President keep hidden about his true persona. Maybe the case of the deaths of two fellow male church members in Chicago that had close personal ties and alleged sexual contact with the President should be reopened. It seems that entire story was conveniently swept under the rug also.

/yawn

wake me up when this political witch-hunt goes away and we can start talking about REAL issues...

Hey Opinions from Fox #1.60, lets not forget who started the wars, can you say "W" !!!!

Sheep!

If Obama didn't trust Rice enough to tell her the Truth, why should the public trust her to be our Secretary of State?

alan said:

Failure to protect four Americans after they made many requests for more security,

Ambassador Stevens diplomatic team asked for an extension of the SST team to continue in Tripoli back in June. State Dept officials declined the request, not the President.

failure to send help when the attacks started,

Help was sent.

At the time the attack started on the Benghazi consulate, Ambassador Stevens and Security Officer Smith were secured in a 'panic room' inside the consulate while the other members of the security detail went to another building to retrieve arms and gear. upon returning to the main building that housed the panic room, they discovered Smith and Stevens had left the panic room because it was filling with smoke and tried to make their way outside. Smith as overcome with smoke and found by the security team, but they were unable to find Stevens in the burning building, so they retreated. a number of the Benghazi locals found Stevens in a locked room on the other side of the building, pulled him out of the window, and rushed him to the hospital, where doctors worked on him for almost an hour before pronouncing he'd died of smoke inhalation.

Doherty and Woods were ex-SEALS turned private security contractors working at the CIA annex a mile down the road that was attacked three hours after the consulate burned. They were trying to help 30+ Americans from the diplomatic detail evacuate when the annex came under attack by the extremists and they died during the attack.

These were two separate incidents one mile and three hours apart. Doherty and Woods were never at the consulate that night.

You know, I've been seeing a lot of people commenting based on misinformation. I'm going to set a few facts straight here:

1) Ambassador Stevens asked for an extension on his SST from the State Department, and he asked it for the embassy in Tripoli.

2) The official US Embassy is in Tripoli. The consulate, where Ambassador Stevens died, is in Benghazi, about 400 miles away. It is a set of office buildings surrounded by a wall. It is not a regularly-staffed office, no people actually work out of it, it is a satellite location for the diplomatic team to conduct meetings with parties on the east half of the country.

3) Stevens and Smith were the only two that died at the consulate; Doherty and Woods, both former Navy SEALS privately contracted by the CIA, were killed in the attack on the CIA annex some distance away three hours later. They were killed while helping 30+ Americans evacuate.

4) Stevens was NOT raped, tortured sodomized or anything of the sort.

5) Part of the responsibility for the incident must lie with Ambassador Stevens himself. He traveled to the consulate that day from the (fortified and guarded) Embassy in Tripoli for some local meetings that took longer than he expected; he decided not to travel back to the embassy, but to stay overnight at the consulate and resume meetings the next day. There were only about seven people in the consulate that night when Stevens saw his last visitor (a Turkish diplomat) out of the building at about 8:30 local time. Knowing the area was full of unrest, and protests had been going on about the anti-Muslim video throughout the day (a Libyan witness interviewed about the incident said he saw a few members of the militia responsible gathering ordinary people outside the consulate to protest the video) in hindsight the decision to overnight in a building with inadequate protection was inappropriate.

6) There were roughly about 125-150 attackers.

7) The Libyans were extremely sorry and there was an outpouring of support. There were demonstrations in Benghazi and Tripoli on September 12, condemning the violence and holding signs such as "Chris Stevens was a friend to all Libyans," "Benghazi is against terrorism," and other signs apologizing to Americans for the actions in their name and in the name of Muslims. The NY Times noted that young Libyans had also flooded Twitter with pro-American messages after the attacks. It was noted that Libyans are typically more positively inclined towards the United States than their neighbors. A 2012 Gallup poll noted that "A majority of Libyans (54%) surveyed in March and April 2012 approve of the leadership of the U.S. -- among the highest approval Gallup has ever recorded in the... region, outside of Israel." Another poll in Eastern Libya, taken in 2011, reported that the population was at the same time both deeply religious conservative Muslims and very pro-American, with 90% of respondents reporting favorable views of the United States.

8) A week after the attack on the consulate the ordinary people of Benghazi rose up against the militants responsible, storming their compound and driving them out while shouting slogans like 'Justice for Chris' and 'Libya Lost a Friend' as they did so. Two days later the Libyan government declared these unauthorized militias illegal and decreed they disband. The decree also made public carrying of weapons illegal; and the next day hundreds of Libyans handed over their weapons. The government also started raiding bases and compounds held by these rogue militia, to the general approbation of the people.

9) On September 12, during press conference in the Rose Garden called in response to the attack, President Obama said:

"...no acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done."

Whether he meant that to mean he did view the incident as a terrorist act or not is up to personal interpretation.

Now that the Repub-A-Cons are Finished it's time to turn the page and rebuild all the damage "W" did to our Nation !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I fail to see how Benghazi has anything to do with Romney.

Obama and Clinton decided long ago to have a very different strategy in that region of the world that previously implemented which is their right. It was easy to bash the Bush strategy because peace in the Arab nations certainly did not get better. However, today it is even worse. The question is why.

The consulate has been previously attacked. That is not a republican talking point, but a fact. Threats were coming in quickly and often and for some reason ignored. The man that owned that building that the US was leasing as our consulate was shocked how little security was placed around that building. That happened because of the low profile, easy access, that Obama wanted our embassies to have. So instead of a compound that was fortified he wanted the Ambassador to have more freedom to engage locals and not work behind fortified walls. The locals thought we were nuts, but that was the plan.

I have always said this administration is extremely naive when it comes to dealing with thugs and terrorists. The UK and the Red Cross got out of Dodge while the US pretended that things were fine. They did not ramp up security but stayed the course and that is how an attack was made easy and our citizens were killed.

If security was not sufficient due to funds as dems like to suggest, then bring the men home until the security and cost situation is sufficient. At the very least make huge noise about lack of funds which would be easy since the media loves this administration. We heard nothing because that loud cry would suggest that things in Libya were unraveling quickly and Obama didn't want us to suspect that terrorism is growing not diminishing.

The attack on that consulate was no surprise. There were lots of warnings. We chose to ignore those warnings and then began the cover-up when the worst happened. The cover-up is that we were never prepared for any attack which we should have been since a previous attack had already occurred and others left the country fearing for their lives.

Stupid. Just plain stupid.

My brother Democrats can't accept the truth. This is not about who won or who lost the election, this is about to find out who is responsable in the Bengazhi debacle the end with 4 Americans dead and who is responsable to change the talking points for Rice, ultimately , why those talking points were changed to blame the Mohamad film . Rice was sent with talking points from the White House to lie to Americans with a wrong statements in order to , denies the failure of the foreign policies of the Obama Administration , " Osama is dead , AlQaeda is too", nothing more far from truth.The failure of this Administration in the so called Arab Spring which its success will bring peace, tolerance and democracy ia part of the fantasy , because in Egypt Christians are subject of intolerance , abuse and treated like second class citizens under the regime of the Islamic Brotherhood. Yes Obama lie to stop his bias freedom of speech were is ok speak in different ways about Jesus and Christians but not about the Prophet Mohammad and his religion of hate. Rice lie 5 times and Obama did in the UN after 2 weeks to protect their failure to protect Ambassador Stevens, Rice lie to protect the people who order the CIA agents in Benghazi do not help the consulate , one agent disobey the orders, but was killed in his attempt. Obama the truth from the first time because he has daily brief with security agencies, Obama said the blame is on me........ that is the only truth .

غالبية الأمريكيين يعتقدون أن إدارة Obama كذب لإنقاذ الانتخابات

theboys,

Well said.

I'm not one of the extremists saying Obama should be impeached over this, but I do think this was a clear case of a mixture of incompetence and the problems associated with trying to use a pacifist foreign policy in a place like the Middle East. Although there are things Obama has done that I support, when it comes to foreign policy he seems to be Carter part II.

Agent Tyrone Woods laser painted the mortar locations that were firing
on the consulate. He was trained as a Navy Seal. He would not have done
that unless he was communicating with someone about firing on those
mortar locations. He gave up his position and was killed painting those
mortar locations to save the people of the consulate. I want to know who
he was communicating with, and why we did not take out the mortar
positions he painted. Whine all you want. We have a right to know the answers.

This has been the Worst Administration in the History of the Presidency and you fools elected him again. It truly is sad when the fools outnumber the sane and a person can buy his way into office.

The Conservatives will be called on to bail this country out again and I do not know if after 4 more years of debt and despair if we will be able to do it. This worthless failed Administration will destroy America. We are the laughing stock of the world. You should be proud.

What a ruse. So much gobble gobble over semantics. The mistake here was the state department responding to complaints that our diplomatic missions were beginning to resemble fortresses in Muslim countries. Since there was a change in government in Libya they took a poorly calculated risk. There has never been a denial. The Koran teaches its minions to attack unbelievers, this is not Obama's crime, it is the crime of the perpetrators and the doctrine that inspired the act.

Attacking Obama and Rice for this is unproductive and pedantic. It's an argument over motive of the perpetrators. Were they terrorists? YES. Were the protesters at the Egyptian embassy also terrorists? Yes, they were storming the embassy ground without the intervention of the police.

Yes it was an act of terror. The State department needs to build the embassies in Muslim Countries designed to mitigate the effect of an attack, (i.e. fortress). Who's to blame? The Islamicists and their bully book.

What? It wasn't about the video? But Chris Matthews said it was about the video! I'm shocked!

Just kidding, everyone knows the truth, it was a terrorist attack, and someone in the White House gave the order to The State Department and CIA to stand down. Who? We will never know because the media will never try to find the answer, and the White House will never volunteer the truth as been shown throughout this mess.

First of all there is no evidence that this admin lied about anything. All testimony affirms that Susan Rice said exactly what she was allowed to say by the intelligence community and her talking points were approved by the House Intelligence Comm. before she said them. Had she said anything differently she would have been guilty of disclosing classified info. Secondly there is ALWAYS justification for facts to be omitted from public comment when it comes to intelligence and national security issues. Anything the American people know, the world knows. If we knew everything that goes on around the world in the name of national security your hair would turn white overnight. Intelligence and security matters can never possibly be understood by the average person. When all of the political rhetoric, the republican "we hate Obama" childishness and John McCain's apparent senility attack is set aside, what difference does any of this matter? Does the average person really care if this was a planned attack or an attack of opportunity? Really....think about it. The end result is that 4 people were killed and that is always tragic regardless of the cause. They were foreign service employees in the heartland of extremism. If the republicans now want to insist that there should have been more security, then why did they deny additional funding for diplomatic security? The simple truth is that it would not have made any difference. There could not have been enough security personnel to protect that Mission from an RPG attack. The only way to prevent an incident like this is to close all of our embassies, consulates and missions in that entire region. Of course that will not happen and if it did, the republicans would call it a horrible foreign policy move and accuse Obama of being weak. McCain, Graham et al are nothing but recalcitrant children and they need to grow up and move on with the business of helping to heal this country.

It is really clear from many of the comments that some people read the headline, copied and pasted it and "yelled" LIES, without reading the actual article. Republicans just don't realize that a main reason why they lost the presidency is that the middle of the road people were so tired of hearing the crazy lies coming out of the right. They were tired of seeing the outrageous posts about Obama in emails and on facebook, only to find out that there wasn't a bit of truth to it. They were tired of comments being taken out of context to make someone look bad.

This is exactly what is happening again. When we were attacked in our own country and thousands of people were killed, there had been intelligence that this would happen, but nothing was done by Pres. Bush, yet our country became more united. There were a few crazies out there crying that it was a conspiracy, etc, but the overwhelming majority stood behind OUR president, because it was an attack by our common enemy against US. This is a very similar situation, except (thankfully) there were not thousands of lives lost (I don't want to diminish in any way the value of the 4 lives that were lost). We should all be standing behind our president in our common goal of eradicating the enemy and helping the people of the world see that we are not their enemy, but al queda is. It really sickens me that people with their extreme hatred will divide our country instead of making it stronger. Grow up and understand what patriotism really is.

stexasdave

First of all there is no evidence that this admin lied about anything. All testimony affirms that Susan Rice said exactly what she was allowed to say by the intelligence community and her talking points were approved by the House Intelligence Comm.

Why Susan Rice was the spoke person for Obama and why not a respectful member of the Intelligence Community. Why not Hillary Clinton , while she prefer to stay aside from the debacle to protect his future as a candidate in 2016 going overseas while her people are killing. Obama make of this a political lie. General Petraus told congress in his second appearance this time acting as a retired head of the CIA , is agency give their report to the intelligence advisory in the White House , telling that it was an AlQaeda attack. Even if , Obama wasn't sure it was a terrorist attack , why to blame the Mohamad film, why not just tell us the case is under investigation , why Obama told to UN the same lie for after 2 weeks of " investigation", when they already knew , it was a planned terrorist attack. It is simple this is all a big lie.

RWNJ: why did Rice say what she said, was she lying, was she covering up ?

Reality:

So why were those unclassified talking points created in the first place?

Officials say they were produced in response to requests from the House Select Committee on Intelligence for language that could be used in media interviews.

The main purpose was to provide talking points sensitive to the fact that there could be legal proceedings in the future, the senior official said. Initial intelligence was tenuous, and affiliations were unclear.

Investigators also worried the investigation could be compromised if they provided too much information.

So, the GOP House committee asked the intelligence community what they could say, they put together the memo and gave the same memo to everyone. Apparently, the GOP just didn't like the memo because it did not destroy the President enough. Welcome to reality GOP.

This country is stuck with this corrupt lying POS for another 4 yrs because enough TAXPAYERS didn't get off their ASS and vote for someone who would have been a great President. obumbo was put in office mostly by deadbeats on the public dole and illegals along with blacks. Well, ya got what ya voted for folks and we continue the downward spiral. As someone said, we will be destroyed from within.

White House and intelligence officials meanwhile are denying charges by Republicans that there was an attempt to whitewash the origins of the Benghazi attack to protect the president politically.

LOL. And the Progressives and surrogates are falling in line.....Pigotry is a good example.

The President WON.....time for some TRUTH.

Too much stupidity and a lack of ability in critical thinking. As Sally Lu said above, certain people seem to be very quick to read the headline, see that intelligence knew it was 'terrorism' all along, and feel justified in calling everything else lies based on that. They don't seem to understand (and this is what I have said all along) that something can be planned and be terrorism and ALSO spontaneous and terrorism. It really just boils down to that. I should be astonished that people can be this stupid, but unfortunately I'm not.

"So why were those unclassified talking points created in the first place?

Officials say they were produced in response to requests from the House Select Committee on Intelligence for language that could be used in media interviews.

The main purpose was to provide talking points sensitive to the fact that there could be legal proceedings in the future, the senior official said. Initial intelligence was tenuous, and affiliations were unclear.

Investigators also worried the investigation could be compromised if they provided too much information."

And you really want to besmirch Susan Rice's career for this. Where is the lie? Where is the evil? Where is the harm - if it was to assist bringing the perpetrators to justice?

Why Susan Rice was the spoke person for Obama and why not a respectful member of the Intelligence Community.

Why was Condeleeza Rice or Colin Powell used as a spokesperson by the Bush administration after 9/11 and in the build up to the Iraq war, and not someone from the intelligence community?

God almighty!!!!!!!!!!

Average Americansaid;

Agent Tyrone Woods laser painted the mortar locations that were firing
on the consulate. He was trained as a Navy Seal. He would not have done
that unless he was communicating with someone about firing on those
mortar locations. He gave up his position and was killed painting those
mortar locations to save the people of the consulate. I want to know who
he was communicating with, and why we did not take out the mortar
positions he painted. Whine all you want. We have a right to know the answers.

Woods and Doherty were CIA contractors (not CIA agents) and were ex-SEALS. They were at the CIA annex that was assaulted around 4 AM that morning--three hours after Ambassador Stevens' death. Doherty and Woods were never at the consulate that night.

After the consulate attack and before the annex attack, Libyan government forces met up a group of Americans (believed to be eight reinforcements from Tripoli) that had arrived at the Benghazi airport and went with them to the CIA annex at about 4 am to assist in transporting approximately 32 Americans at the annex back to the airport for evacuation. As they were at the annex arranging for the transportation back to the airport a single shot rang out, quickly followed by RPGs and then a mortar that hit the annex roof killing Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods while operating their machine gun while Ubben suffered shrapnel injuries and several broken bones. According to Ubben's father, "The first [mortar] dropped 50 yards short and the next two were right on target.

@Chris from Yucaipa: Absolutely agree with you. Fools, moving hither and yon high up on a rope bridge. They look and sound like "blowflies" hunting a turd pile, with McCain and Graham herding the swarm. Ah well. The antics of fools allows us to know who and where they are.

theboys said:

The consulate has been previously attacked. That is not a republican talking point, but a fact. Threats were coming in quickly and often and for some reason ignored. The man that owned that building that the US was leasing as our consulate was shocked how little security was placed around that building. That happened because of the low profile, easy access, that Obama wanted our embassies to have. So instead of a compound that was fortified he wanted the Ambassador to have more freedom to engage locals and not work behind fortified walls.

Let me correct a couple of misconceptions here;

1) The consulate did have walls.

2) There have been two attacks at that location since Jan 2012:

• In April 2012, two former security guards for the consulate threw a homemade 'fish bomb' over the consulate fence; the incident did not cause any casualties.
• The Imprisoned Omar Abdul Rahman Brigades released a video of what it said was its detonation of an explosive device outside the gates of the U.S. consulate on June 5, which caused no casualties but damaged the consulate's perimeter wall, described by one individual as "big enough for forty men to go through."The Brigades claimed that the attack was in response to the killing of Abu Yahya al-Libi a Libyan al-Qaeda leader who had just died in an American drone attack, and was also timed to coincide with the imminent arrival of a U.S. diplomat. There were no injuries, but the group left behind leaflets promising more attacks against the U.S.

3) The consulate is a satellite office from which the diplomatic team can hold meetings. It is not regularly staffed and no people work out of it on a permanent basis. Ambassador Stevens was meeting locals that day; the meetings ran over (his last appointment was a Turkish diplomat around 8:30 local time) and the Ambassador decided to overnight at the consulate instead of traveling the 400 miles back to the Embassy in Tripoli then 400 miles back out to Benghazi for another round of meetings the next morning.

Can we say Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! Follow blindly sheep. Maybe the media will do their job this time.

Intelligence officials knew it was a terrorist attack from the beginning?

Well, someone needs to tell Obama because he was telling the world and the UN that it was because of a youtube video.

The President of the US should not be spreading lies.

It's obvious that the libs on this site have learned well from the White House and from the mainstream media: when confronted with irrefutable evidence of a f**kup,try to change the subject, or just make up some irrelevant crap and state it loudly and arrogantly......pathetic!

By the way, just because president Santa Claus won with barely 51% of the vote, it does NOT mean that the whole country approves of him and his awful policies. So, knock that s**t off, okay?

Hi Sally Lu,

I think you are a dangerous person. Dangerous to our nation I mean. You want to excuse the Obama administration for what took place in Benghazi, particularly those things that took place after the attack, despite the repeated requests for more security, the history of increasing terrorist activity in Benghazi in the months prior to the attack, the previous attacks on this particular consulate, and even Ambassador Stevens' own cable to his superiors in Washington specifically identifying the various terrorist groups operating in the area with the warning that the consulate could not withstand an organized attack. One of these warnings/requests even came from Stevens on the day he was killed.

And, instead, you want to return to 9/11/01 and blame the previous administration by claiming that there was information available which was actionable. I say there was none. No where, no how, no when, just who. But if you put all of this into context, which I think you manifestly will refuse to do, you would find that your claim about the first 9/11 would have required the complicit actions, or inactions, of perhaps dozens, if not hundreds, of intelligence and military and political officials. Is that really possible?

However, we have testimony about the Benghazi attack that intel officials gave political officials the complete skinny about this being a terrorist attack, and then we have the administration coming out for many days saying something very different. I think you have to ask why. Why would the administration say it was a spontaneous riot over a video if it wasn't? Their claim, now, is that they didn't want the attackers to know we were on their trail. On its face this is laughably stupid. They now claim they didn't want to identify a wrong group of terrorists which could then be used to derail a future prosecution. Again, this is laughably stupid.

Ask yourself, instead, this one simple question--this doesn't even get deep into what happened or why but it might spur some interest on your part to look for yourself--"Why didn't the administration simply say that the attack was conducted by terrorist forces which we are, at this point, unable to identify publicly for national security reasons?" Simple, probably still not true, but it would have avoided the need for the administration to tell an untruth, one they knew was untrue, which was at the same time it was a lie was pathetically stupid.

Rob80-4249854

Why Susan Rice was the spoke person for Obama and why not a respectful member of the Intelligence Community.

Why was Condeleeza Rice or Colin Powell used as a spokesperson by the Bush administration after 9/11 and in the build up to the Iraq war, and not someone from the intelligence community

Rob you should know Powell was the Secretary of State............. where was Hillary. Rice was President Bush's National Security Advisor during his first term, making her the first woman to serve in that position. Before joining the Bush administration, she was a professor of political science at Stanford University where she served as Provost from 1993 to 1999. Rice also served on the National Security Council as the Soviet and Eastern Europe Affairs Adviser to President George H.W. Bush during the dissolution of the Soviet Union and German reunification. Much more qualified than Susan Rice. I'm amuse for your bias ignorance

TO: floridamom1 who wrote:

"... A courageous leader would have told the truth to the families of those who were killed..."

How would you know what's been said to the families, or what's been done for the families?

You don't know, and you couldn't know.

Did you people even read the article?

Officials said that although there was no question that the attack was terrorism, they did not know whether they were spontaneous or planned long in advance. They also did not have the suspects’ identities.

That’s why, they said, they kept their unclassified talking points for Rice vague to avoid compromising future legal proceedings.

So, where exactly does this article suggest that the Obama administration lied? Actually, all this does is confirm that the White House didn't lie, that the intelligence community didn't know at first if it was spontaneous or pre-planned, and that Rice and Obama told us what they were given by the intelligence community.

Which is exactly what the Obama administration has been saying all along... so, where's the revelation here? Where's the big lie?

It's kind of sad that some of you are so desperate in your Obama-hating that you just read whatever you want into an article that is readily available to all of us -- an article that (aside from the trumped up headline), explicitly supports the fact that the Obama administration didn't lie.

In case we needed anymore proof that some conservatives and the rabid Obama opposition don't care about facts -- just twisting them to fit whatever viewpoint they want -- then here is your evidence. Read these comments and compare to what the article actually says.

I'm sure the truth will come out as soon as the "investigation" is finished. I think they plan on having that investigation finished up and reported some time between March 13th two thusand and go srew yourself, and April 31st two thousand and I ain't reporting jack $h!t.

The intelligence community did exactly what it should have done. Keep it vague. They don't want those who did the attack to know how much we actually know, so we can catch them. The terrorists have access to all of the news sites, as well as, this site, and if there was full disclosure of the event, they would know everything too.

People are nuts to think that something like this could be covered up through the election as it was "NOT" and the white house press sec. informed the media that it was a terrorist attack on Sept. 20, way before the election. It is clear from President Obama's statement the day after that he knew that this was a terrorist attack. Sometimes from the intelligence point of view it is good to create confusion in the minds of the perpetrators so that they will be off guard and that's why "THEY" (the CIA) gave out the talking points to the politicians.

This President is the same guy who focused on and took out Osama and many high profile terrorists by making leadership decision at crucial times and people are going after him rather than the previous administration which misled the entire planet into going for an unnecessary war, spending $2Trillion, killing more Americans than 9/11 in the process and scores more innocent Iraqis. I believe Colin Powell also had some talking points when he went in front of the UN. No one is asking for a prosecution for those crimes?

For a moment I actually considered debating some of the above posts but then realized that the f*cking butthurt cons on this forum are basically standing here, fingers in your ears and stomping your feel as you scream LIES! LIES! It's a disgusting fact and just not worth doing it any more.

Same here.... it's just not worth it - especially when I see the same BS being posted by the same people whom I thoroughly debunked before on the same issues. It's like they bash their head every night with a mallet so when they awake the next morning they forget their hysterical nonsense being proven wrong.

All these Captain Hindsights acting as if they are not totally useless superheroes... just too much fun.

Keep it up RW, really - I implore you. Once I would discourage such complete and utter lunacy .... but now I'm just curious how many more beatings will it take for ya'll to realize that your strategy of hate, lies, blind bias, and willfull ignorance is not viable?

Siobhan27

conservatives and the rabid Obama opposition don't care about facts.........the intelligence community didn't know at first if it was spontaneous or pre-planned, and that Rice and Obama told us what they were given by the intelligence community

One more time, the Rep. of the Intelligence Committee in congress are investigating this whole Benghazi fiasco in order to get the true, so far Rice was sent with misleading talking points, it is not only about if, it that was an spontaneous or it was a AlQaeda planed attack , it is also not knowing all the facts they still blame the Mohammad film.

It's the last gasp of a dying political party and the cons intend to take everyone with them that they can.

The next 4 years will be spent punishing Obama and the people who voted for him. It's going to be them standing in the way of everything while telling us "See, you should have picked Mitt and this wouldn't have happened."

And to you idiots who think you are Constitutional internet scholars with your talk of impeachment and treason, even the die hard Repubs with all their searching and hoping to find something, haven't found anything they can hang him with. So what makes your ass sitting in front of the computer can?

siobahn, so the report says it was terrorism but they didn't know if it was planned or not. In that case the last thing the administration should have done was blame either a coordinated attack or a spontaneous video cause. But they went with "it was the video" with a 100% certainty reason. Ask yourself why? That means they thrrew out the other option before it was investigated. A reaction without a full investigation, as we also saw with the professors arrest when BO blamed the cops before an investigation....that proved him wrong. Both knee jerk reactions.

Sumka ..... maybe it wasn't a coverup, but how many times did the media mention this in the 2 months prior to the election. After the first couple of days it was a virtual complete blackout from the mainstream media. 4 people dead with breaking stories all the time and nothing. I remember watching Madow one night on one of the days of a breaking story on it, she said nothing and spent 5 minutes on Romney collecting goods for the red cross for hurricane people and why it says on the red cross site not to collect goods but send money. LOL Seriously 5 whole minutes on that. I couldn't help but laugh how that took priority over info on our ambassador getting murdered.

BigATC said:

the report says it was terrorism but they didn't know if it was planned or not. In that case the last thing the administration should have done was blame either a coordinated attack or a spontaneous video cause.

I'll respectfully disagree with you there, since Libyans interviewed after the attack said that a couple of the militants that were later responsible for the consulate attack were out in the street earlier that day trying to incite passersby into a protest chant referencing the film.

I couldn't help but laugh how that took priority over info on our ambassador getting murdered.

Ambassador Stevens was not murdered. He died of smoke inhalation.

So did Smith.

Doherty and Woods were at the CIA annex using machine guns on the roof to cover the evacuation of 30+ Americans from the diplomatic team and the CIA four hours after the consulate burned. They died when the extremists aimed mortars at them.

shuklack:

it's just not worth it - especially when I see the same BS being posted by the same people whom I thoroughly debunked before on the same issues.

It's an uphill battle. You know what they say, 'There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.'

@ Chris From Yucaipa  #1.40

@DumbFarmBoy

You attempted witty, and instead came out sounding idiotic. You are EXACTLY the type of person I was describing in my post.

Try ice. It helps with that butthurt.

See, I told you.

My guess is you are too ignorant or of a sufficiently diminished mental capacity to formulate a cognitive and cohesive argument to support your position. And you must revert to parroting what others have said, even though you fail to fully comprehend what was said. But hey, you're cool, right? You sure told us off.

But yes, my butt hurts, and I am tired of being screwed by dope smokin' hippy liberals like you who only want to suckle off the Gov't teet, instead of contributing to society, and vote for the Candidate who promises the most from the public treasury.

All you can do is change the subject, marginalize, name call. You completely ignore the facts AND THESE ARE FACTS, NOT SOME MYSTICAL MANIFESTATION OF THE FAR RIGHT.

His Majesty HIMSELF wrote this (or at least narrated to to someone to write)

So unless you can show me an interview where he denounces his Parents, Grand Parents, Mentors and Associates, and DENOUNCES communism as Anti-American. Then HE is a communist.  (But to you people that's a good thing, you just don't get it) Ever watch an Episode of Star Trek, one with Borg? I find it interesting, those people(characters) understand the evils of the Collective, as liberal as they are, but you can not seem to get a handle on it.

{The only problem is, the man is a consummate liar. If you actually believe he knew Rev. Wright for 20 years and never heard the man go off the tracks with one of his "GD America" rants, or didn't know the man's true beliefs, then you are indeed a gullible fool}{But he said, he never heard such rants before, this was something new to him} Yeah, right, and Clinton didn't inhale.

He is Anti-American. Which why I can not, will not get behind him. I will be in front of him, trying to head him off. But you go ahead, join the Borg, be one with the Collective.

@ Shuklak #1.100

Same here.... it's just not worth it - especially when I see the same BS being posted by the same people whom I thoroughly debunked before on the same issues.

Then Debunk mine....I have yet to see an interview where he denies His book. (That is not to say he did not give such an interview and I missed)

If you can prove to me that he is not a Racist, A Bigot. A Communist. then I will apologize and retract my post.

Every Action I have seen him take, is in line with his "Collective" mindset and Communist roots.

1) "You Didn't Build that", the collective did, (the collection of tax payers who paid for the infrastructure, and collection of employees that work for you) Well, I didn't have any employees when I started my first business, So I built it. I paid Taxes too, and lot more than my neighbors, So I built it. And the first roads, canals and railroads were built by individuals, not governments. the Government didn't take over most road maintenance until the '30's under FDR's socialist regime.

2) Let' Bail out the Unions, oh I mean the car makers... commUNIONists.

Shall I go on...

But you Love Obama, don't you? He will change America, won't he? He will make it better, right? That's why you Love Obama, right? He get's it.

The German people Loved Hitler too, and for the same reasons (and many German people still loved him at the end of the war, and they blamed the Generals for letting Hitler down, IT WAS NOT HITLER'S FAULT). I didn't necessarily like Romney, but I could respect him. A leader should be respected, not loved. Loving your leader can lead to some very dire outcomes, (ask the folks of Jonestown, Branch Davidians, and Germans)

One should substitute the words "The Jews" for the words "The Rich" or "The 1%ers" and see how that chant works out. Is that a little too close to the mark? Oh that's right, can't happen here, this is America. That's what the Jews in Germany thought too. 

But I too waste my breath, I could sooner convince Jesus that there is no God.

There are very good strategic reasons why one would not tell the truth in the middle of a military operation. In any case, whether you call it an act of terrorism or an act of riotous vandalism is JUST WORDS. Let's get the GOP to be concerned with something important.

Dumbfarmboy

Yep, you are I guess. And I take great offense at your characterization of us liberals. I work hard etc. etc. etc. and am still working and will until I die. And although I can't prove it, I will make a claim that I've contributed vastly more to society than you've done. We can get into a pissing contest on that, but why bother it's the internet and nobody can tell. I am just not blinded by the GOP bandits who are the ones really stealing from the country rather than those who want us be able to get our country back. To allow a level playing field for success and for everyone to pay their fair share. You characterization and comparison to Hitler would be funny if it weren't essentially evil and demented. Your brand of Koolaid tea is blinding you.

Here's your challenge back at you......Prove to me you are not a bigot, a racist and a closet Nazi.

@ Amanda-201

It's an uphill battle. You know what they say, 'There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.'

I could not agree more. It is funny, how many times I see Liberals speaking about themselves as if they are talking about Conservatives.

@ Siobhan27

So, where exactly does this article suggest that the Obama administration lied? Actually, all this does is confirm that the White House didn't lie, that the intelligence community didn't know at first if it was spontaneous or pre-planned, and that Rice and Obama told us what they were given by the intelligence community.

You really should get your news from more than one source, especially the Most Socialist Network Broadcasting Communism, they are going to twist the story around to make his Majesty appear in the best light. Now, if you combine, Fox, CNN, the Wall street Journal, and maybe the Post then you may end up with half the story, but you'll never know which half of the story.

Farmboy:

Can I ask you a question? Why do you call yourself 'Dumb Farm Boy'? Isn't that kind of self-derogatory?

Now, in answer to your question...those on the far side of liberalism can display willful blindness. Those on the far side of conservatism can be blind. It doesn't matter what side you're on, those on both sides can refuse to see what's in front of them.

And I'd like to address a few things about your previous post:

So unless you can show me an interview where he denounces his Parents, Grand Parents, Mentors and Associates, and DENOUNCES communism as Anti-American. Then HE is a communist.

So if someone does not say something then it automatically means they are the exact opposite? Mr. Romney never (that I heard of) said communism is anti-American, so by your reasoning Mr. Romney must be a communist. Paul Ryan has never come out and specifically denounced communism as anti-American, that I heard of,so he too, must be a communist. Neither Joe Biden or Michelle Obama have come out and publically denounced communism as being anti-American, so therefore, they must be communists. President Obama's children have never come straight out and said communism is anti-American so therefore they MUST be communists. John McCain has never come out and publically denounced communism as being anti-American, so therefore he too must be communist. And the list goes on....

1) "You Didn't Build that", the collective did, (the collection of tax payers who paid for the infrastructure, and collection of employees that work for you) Well, I didn't have any employees when I started my first business, So I built it. I paid Taxes too, and lot more than my neighbors, So I built it.

Yes, you may have started it, but you had to have permission from the government (had to get a business permit) and you had to have customers so your business should grow. You can say you started your own business, but no person is an island.

And the first roads, canals and railroads were built by individuals, not governments. the Government didn't take over most road maintenance until the '30's under FDR's socialist regime.

The very first roads were worn into the ground by the passage of many feet, until the grass was worn away and there was nothing but dirt. So the collective built it. And I've never heard of a canal being built by one person- the concrete had to be mixed at a factory by one group of individuals, the steel rebar had to be manufactured by another set of individuals somewhere else. And seriously, no railroad was built by one person--it takes many, many people to build a railroad, from the people who make railroad ties and braces and switches to those who physically constructed it foot by foot.

But you Love Obama, don't you? He will change America, won't he? He will make it better, right?

From my point of view, yes, he did. I was on welfare when President Obama took office in 08. My husband was declared disabled in 07, and I had a bout with breast cancer that left me unable to hold down a job between doctors visits and treatment/therapy. We have two kids, and my youngest is autistic. I was unemployed, on welfare, when the welfare-to-work program sent me to an assignment as a receptionist for a renewable energy firm.

Shortly after I took the temporary spot there, President Obama signed the ARRA act, and suddenly the company I was working for had funding for all of these renewable energy projects that they had planned. They decided they needed someone full time, so they hired me from the welfare-to-work program, and then because of the emphasis on training employees in the renewable energy and tech fields, I received biometrics technician training and electric vehicle supply equipment installation training, and certifications for those are transferable so I have marketable skills I can use to get another job if something happens to this one. so i got an immediate job that paid well enough that while I can't exactly say that life is perfect, my rent has only been late once since I started working.

So his policies made a lot of difference for me. Today I work, pay taxes, and the only assistance we get from the government is medical assistance for my youngest child so he can get extra help and an IEP plan at school.

@ Ferrosynthesis #1.107

Dumbfarmboy

Yep, you are I guess. And I take great offense at your characterization of us liberals. I work hard etc. etc. etc. and am still working and will until I die. And although I can't prove it, I will make a claim that I've contributed vastly more to society than you've done. We can get into a pissing contest on that, but why bother it's the internet and nobody can tell. I am just not blinded by the GOP bandits who are the ones really stealing from the country rather than those who want us be able to get our country back. To allow a level playing field for success and for everyone to pay their fair share. You characterization and comparison to Hitler would be funny if it weren't essentially evil and demented. Your brand of Koolaid tea is blinding you.

Here's your challenge back at you......Prove to me you are not a bigot, a racist and a closet Nazi.

I accept your challenge. I am a racist, I am human. If you do not understand that, maybe you need a refresher course in human behavior. But, do I disassociate myself from others based on race? No. [I give everyone an equal opportunity to disappoint me] ;-)

Bigot a: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; b: one who regards or treats the members of a group with hatred and intolerance

If I were a bigot would I offer to apologize and repeal my post if proved wrong? No.

Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei is abbreviated Nazi, or National Socialists. I am no socialist, by any stretch of the imagination. And I am very much anti-fascim. But my guess is you really have no understanding of either of these words "Nazi" or "Fascist", you only associate it with evil.

Were my original post disrespectful? Did I attack the liberal before they flung innuendo at me, challenging my sexual preference? Nope.

Nor will I argue that you are not a hard working individual. But you would vote for candidates that would support these wastrels, the societal leeches, therefore you are as guilty as those that are.

As far contributing to society, during my life time I have fed thousands of people, I used to grow food for a living (and my brothers continue the practice, and I chip in when I can). I have payed hundreds of thousands in taxes (and continue to pay more) As business owner, I have employed several people and directly supported other businesses that employed more people. And I have volunteered my construction equipment to clean up after several severe storms. (the housing crash killed that business however)

But I would agree on one point, we do need to put a lid on these Corporate Conglomerates that seem to be in the drivers seat. We need to reduce government regulations. (level the playing field) In many instances it requires a full time employee to ensure that one is in compliance with these regulations, how can a small (family) business stay in business with kind of expense? And we just added another with the ACA.

And Please tell me, what is one's fair share? 50%, 75% 90%? But I do agree, everyone should pay a fair share. The Key words are "Pay a Share". Even if it is only 2 or 3 percent. We definitely need to rework the Tax code, as it can cost several thousand dollars just to figure out how much tax is owed. Is that fair?

My brand of Kool-Aid is history, and it has a tendency to repeat itself. Think about that.

Wow, so many comments, so many posts of bull@!$%#. Obama did NOT hide anything, it was the intelligence agencies who put out the declassified talking points. This is yet another republican attempt to create a 'scandal', when in reality it is a tragedy that we need to investigate to make sure it doesn't happen again. Get over yourselves.

@ Amanda-201

Farmboy:

Can I ask you a question? Why do you call yourself 'Dumb Farm Boy'? Isn't that kind of self-derogatory?

I no longer live on a farm, hence the "Dumb" part. The worst thing I ever did was get a Degree in Mechanical Engineering, move to the City and have to live in and amongst bigoted, myopic, inane morons.

Now, in answer to your question...those on the far side of liberalism can display willful blindness. Those on the far side of conservatism can be blind. It doesn't matter what side you're on, those on both sides can refuse to see what's in front of them.

I will agree with that statement. It takes a mature mind to see both sides of the issue. And there is decidedly some immaturity on both sides. One might argue more on one side than the other, but we shant get into that here. ;-)

And I'd like to address a few things about your previous post:

So unless you can show me an interview where he denounces his Parents, Grand Parents, Mentors and Associates, and DENOUNCES communism as Anti-American. Then HE is a communist.

So if someone does not say something then it automatically mans they are the exact opposite? Mr. Romney never (that I heard of) said communism is anti-American, so by your reasoning Mr. Romney must be a communist. Paul Ryan has never come out and specifically denounced communism as anti-American, that i heard of,so he too, must be a communist. Neither Joe Biden or Michelle Obama have come out and publically denounced communism as being anti-American, so therefore, they must be communists. President Obama's children have never come straight out and said communism is anti-American so therefore they MUST be communists. John McCain has never come out and publically denounced communism as being anti-American, so therefore he too must be communist. And the list goes on....

Your argument has one fatal fallacy, Obama has admitted that he sought out these "Marxist Professors", his parents, grand parents and mentors were documented "Communist", one would presume they taught him to be the same. Romney et. al. never claimed such, and therefore would not need to deny nor denounce it.

Yes, you may have started it, but you had to have permission from the collective government to get a business permit, and you had to have customers so your business should grow. You can say you started your own business, but no person is an island.

Never said I was, and nothing is done in vacuum. Yes, we understand that. Nor did I say we need to do away with regulation all together. I recognize the need for regulation, more than you I am sure. But it has past the point of diminishing returns.

The very first roads were worn into the ground by the passage of many feet, until the grass was worn away and there was nothing but dirt. So the collective built it. And I've never heard of a canal being built by one person- the concrete had to be mixed at a factory by one group of individuals, the steel rebar had to be manufactured by another set of individuals somewhere else. And seriously, no railroad was built by one person--it takes many, many people to build a railroad, from the people who make railroad ties and braces and switches to those who physically constructed it foot by foot.

If you look at the history, the first canals and railroads were financed by individuals not the government. and the first roads and bridges, at least out here in the midwest, were financed and maintained by the land owners to access their property, not the government. It wasn't until the '30's and mechanization that the Townships took over those responsibilities.

And perhaps this is the root of our miscommunication, "Who financed it" rather than "Who built it", because when I hear "who built it", I consider who financed it as well, not just the labor and materials involved.

So his policies made a lot of difference for me. Today I work, pay taxes, and the only assistance we get from the government is medical assistance for my youngest child so he can get extra help and an IEP plan at school.

You are welcome. As I am sure that some of my tax dollars went to pay for your welfare and the "Renewable Energy" program that you now work for. ;-)

But seriously, I glad things worked out for you. And I am sure that your family helped out a great deal too. And at no point did I say we should not take care of those who NEED, and will utilizes the help. My problem is with those who continually find themselves in "need" of help, or put themselves in that position e.g. drug users. Or those that are unappreciative of the help given, and seem to think they are 'entitled' to it.

But the government should be the source of last resort. Family, church and community should be first, nor should it be a Federal Program, it should remain in the State's control. {A Democracy will survive only until the people learn they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury} PS, get ready for your company to go bankrupt when the funding stops, just ask the folks at Siemens.

@ Amanda-201

Farmboy:

Can I ask you a question? Why do you call yourself 'Dumb Farm Boy'? Isn't that kind of self-derogatory?

and it is actually self-deprecating...

So unless you can show me an interview where he denounces his Parents, Grand Parents, Mentors and Associates, and DENOUNCES communism as Anti-American. Then HE is a communist.

That's about the stupidest f*cking thing I've heard this week. You've outdone yourself. I mean I didn't expect anything actually intelligent from you but dayum son.

It's not his job to prove he's not a Communist. It's your job to prove he is. Might want to take a look at Russell's Teapot. That is, if you can find the time between when you're not posting idiotic nonsense.

Chris from Yucaipa

The next 4 years will be spent punishing Obama and the people who voted for him.

WOW! The second term hasn't even started and liberals are already making excuses. Well at least even they can see whats coming even if they won't accept any of the responsibility for it. You'd think eventually their arms would get tired from all the finger pointing they do.

@ Chris

I see your reading comprehension levels have not risen since your last post.

As is often quoted "The acorn does not often fall far from the tree".

I have posted documented evidence that by nurture he was raised in a Communist Environment and continues to surround himself with known self proclaimed Communists (e.g. Van Jones, William Charles Ayers, Bernardine Rae Dohrn.

I have posted quotes from his own book.

I have given examples of his actions.

What more do you need? If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, do you think it is a Penguin?

Of course it is a penguin, other wise it would be a conspiracy theory.

It may be possible he is not a Communist, hiding his true nature, but a Tiger does not often change his stripes.

Hahahaha....And now even more Obama CYA / CIA Benghazi-Gate "Spin" spews forth.....Want to keep your nice cushy CIA Job? You had better come up with "Some Kind of BS" about Our Secret CIA Prison that sticks to the Benghazi-Wall!

Here's the "Latest" nonsense from the Obamney Administration..... We didn't "Lie To America" it just got "Magically Lost In The Translation" somehow!

Hahahaha......Right!

Impeach Obama 2012 for the Cover-Up Of Murder....At least Richard Nixon had the "Honor" to Resign!

"Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. " ~George Orwell

Three words describe this disaster.

Incompetence--The embassies and consulates in the Middle East should have been significantly more secure. 9/11 is now a significant Muslim extremist anniversary. In a chaotic nation such as Libya with virtually no established government, the usual reliance on the host nation for security should have been disregarded. We should have either transferred more security to the Consulate or demanded Ambassador Stevens, his staff and any sensitive documents were moved to Tripoli days ahead of 9/11. The Arab Spring has turned out to be a foreign policy nightmare for this administration, to expose Americans to any possible terrorist attacks is irresponsible.

Political correctness--This administration is a disaster when it comes to this ridiculous Liberal feel-good meme. They refuse to define terrorist acts as such but at the same time they run around like children celebrating the death of Osama Porn Laden. They use any other ridiculous term such as "overseas contingency operations", "kinetic military action", "workplace violence" or other convolution for the word terrorism. Did Barrack Hussein really believe that when he and his cabal were dancing on the grave of Bin Laden that the extremists weren't going to notice? Osama Porn Laden was elevated to martyr status, the minute our Navy Seals took his life, in the Muslim extremist community. To be using it as a taunt during the campaign was seen as disrespectful. Of course this administration was too obtuse to realize it.

Deflection--This horrific disaster was a cluster f**k from the outset. But of course the purpose was to deflect any responsibility from Barrack Hussein during an election campaign. Especially when so much bravado was being placed on the death of Osama Porn Laden with the assumption that Al Qaeda was diminished. It wasn't. Terrorism is not a picture on a Most Wanted poster. Al Qaeda and dozens of other extremist groups are alive and doing well. To believe that simply killing Osama and a few of the alleged 1st, 2nd or 3rd in-line surrogates will minimize the growing terrorist influence in the world is ridiculous. As we see today Al Qaeda, Hamas, The Muslim Brotherhood and many others are well organized and effective in their efforts. Iran is mere months away from producing enough weapons-grade uranium to arm a nuclear bomb. The Middle East will remain to be a massive problem. If Benghazi is a precursor of our readiness to deal with these problems, it will be a long time before any substantive progress will be made.

This narrative about some ridiculous video or some mythical spontaneous protest was a lie. When an administration willingly lies for the benefit of an election, a complete and honest investigation must be demanded.

The American people deserve as much.

BigATC,

The report says that it was not known whether it was spontaneous or pre-planned. The report explains why the CIA talking points that they gave to Rice and Obama said what they said. They intelligence officials explain why they didn't want names or al-Qaeda associated with any official remarks until they knew more. The point is the Obama administration told us what they were told by the intelligence community, hence no cover up. Anyone who thinks that there is any evidence of a cover up at this point is grasping at straws and desperately trying to find information to fit a preconceived narrative (like JimSpence up there, who thinks if he just keeps repeating that it was a lie and coverup despite all evidence to the contrary, it will magically come true).

Also, Obama never said they were 100% certain it was the video. In fact, you can find quotes all over the internet of him (and his administration) saying things like (paraphrasing) "we have evidence to believe this was in response the video/spurred by demonstrations in Cairo but this is still under investigation." Almost every official line that came out of the White House was followed with "we'll wait and see what the investigation says." The White House came out with a story given to them by the CIA in an attempt to answer the people's questions until they had more information. Like it or not, the Obama administration saying what they said was the best they could to do to be transparent without affecting the ongoing investigation, not some nefarious cover up. And the intelligence community has confirmed that.

Hilariously, in your same post you complain about how there was almost nothing on this from media (i.e. there wasn't much information on this) while simultaneously complaining that Obama came out with information too early. You can't have it both ways.

DumbFarmBoy,

The parts of this article that I quoted are the reports from high-ranking intelligence officials. It doesn't matter which article it comes from – those reports are the same. The intelligence community didn't know definitively whether it was pre-planned or spontaneous and they gave Obama and his administration talking points that referred to the video and eliminated any mention of al-Qaeda or specific names because they didn't want that information out there until further investigation had been done.. i.e, no cover up.

Also, on a side note, here's the full quote from "Dreams of My Father":

To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets. We smoked cigarettes and wore leather jackets. At night, in the dorms, we discussed necolonialism, Franz Fanon, Eurocentrism, and patriarchy.

Are you also going to accuse Obama of being a punk-rock performance poet? Or how about a Chicano? As usual, a quote taken out of context to fit a preconceived narrative. It's really a tiresome tactic.

(Moderators: Apologize for the repost -- posted it on the wrong thread).

US Military Intervention in Libya Cost At Least $896 Million

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/08/us-military-intervention-in-libya-cost-at-least-896-million/

US deploys 12,000 troops in Libya

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/222317.html

DumbFarmBoy,

The parts of this article that I quoted are the reports from high-ranking intelligence officials. It doesn't matter which article it comes from – those reports are the same. The intelligence community didn't know definitively whether it was pre-planned or spontaneous and they gave Obama and his administration talking points that referred to the video and eliminated any mention of al-Qaeda or specific names because they didn't want that information out there until further investigation had been done.. i.e, no cover up.

Also, on a side note, here's the full quote from "Dreams of My Father":

To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets. We smoked cigarettes and wore leather jackets. At night, in the dorms, we discussed necolonialism, Franz Fanon, Eurocentrism, and patriarchy.

Are you also going to accuse Obama of being a punk-rock performance poet? Or how about a Chicano? As usual, a quote taken out of context to fit a preconceived narrative. It's really a tiresome tactic.

Well, it is like I said, even if you watch or read several news reports your are only going to end up with half the story any way. I just happened to be watching Rachel Maddow (now if people are still saying
MSNBC isn't left-wing...) anyway, it was that evening I believe, perhaps the next, and she was reporting definitively that is was an Al-Qaeda like, planned attack. She also, much to her credit, was emphasizing this was not in relation to the video. She was the first I believe to report that one of those killed (not sure which one, but the avid gamer) was online with his buddies and reported the "Guard" taking pictures of the compound.
So, you tell me, if SHE knew about it that soon...but hey let's not jump to conclusions.

But my biggest beef isn't with the aftermath (although this still smells to high heaven), it is what happened or more specifically, what didn't happen, before and during the attack. Defend that.

I have lost count of how many times the opportunity to avoid this tragedy were voided by people in the White House. (but then again, I do not have the whole story, and never will, the are all in CTA mode, which would be true of a Republican Admin, too)

Finally, someone noticed this quote was taken out of context. You get a cookie. ;-) (but I already had the full quote)

However, to me it exposes more questions. How shallow, and insecure does one have to be, to be concerned with being thought of as a "sell out"? Sound like a cop out. I am an atheist, and that doesn't sell well in a conservative crowd. But it is what I believe, and I stand by that belief.

Also, given the company he keeps, his upbringing and the company that he associated with during his college days, just what type of conversations do you think he had while discussing neocolonialism,
Franz Fanon, Euro-Centrism, and patriarchy? Do you think it might have had an anti-imperialism, pro-communist slant to it? Or do you think the were pointing out the errors of Fanon and the strengths of
Capitalism?

Judging by the response he had to the revelations about his grandfather, I would venture a guess they were of an anti-imperialism, pro-communist nature. A guess for sure, but an educated one.

So the full quote doesn't really change anything does it?

I don't, nor have I ever, defended what occurred beforehand. Four people died, security was denied and I supported an investigation into that. There are some convoluted reasons that have been offered -- having to do with Stevens change of plans, issues with private security being in Libya, so forth. Not that any of that excuses it -- it was a clusterf--k and four people died when, perhaps they wouldn't have had to if more security had been there. Though, some argue that it wouldn't have changed what happened and more would have died. Hard to speculate and hindsight is 20/20. Do I think anyone wanted Stevens to die? Of course not. Do I think it was a major screw up? Absolutely. And, we definitively need to do something about security abroad to prevent things like this from happening again.

However, not even the congressional committee is focusing on that, too busy trying to catch Obama in a cover up that doesn't exist. What disturbs is how obviously this is being politicized. If it weren't, we'd still be discussing what happened beforehand, not mincing words in an attempt to crucify Obama, Rice and the State Department because they didn't reveal classified information.

As for the Obama quote -- it was a story from when he was an undergraduate about who he hung out with. I hardly think his late night discussions in his dorm about "the man" while smoking cigarettes are indicative or proof of some communist agenda. The communist thing is a cooked up story people have used based on misquotes and conspiracy theories. I put it about on the level of those who believe Obama has a secret Muslim agenda and he's going to turn America into an Islamic nation.

@ Siobhan

I agree, it was a cluster f**k, and a Bohemian one at that. And I agree, I am unaware of the details surrounding Stevens plans or the stipulations imposed by Libya. But I do know help was available, and offered on several occasions. Some one dropped the ball. And it was either in H. Clinton's court or Obama's. some one should be fired, but they are far enough up the food chain, not to be bothered with petty criminal charges, someone lower down will fall on that sword. (as is the case with most admins, it is truly disgusting)

No, I do not believe he is a closet Muslim, although, I do believe he is a Muslim sympathizer, but not for Religious reasons. It has more to do with the oppression of said Muslims, by you guessed it, the British (and their descendant) Nor do I believe he was born in Kenya, I have enough faith in the Secret Service to call him if he is not a born citizen. (or least I hope I do)

And I don't know how you can call the "communist thing" a cooked up conspiracy. Have you seen the list of cabinet appointees? It is a who's who of Socialist/Communist activists. Google it yourself. And though he distances himself from them now, he had tight ties to Dorn and Ayres. Study this man's history and his actions recently. It will tell you who is today.

jeff-674209

pigotry isn`t anybody i`d want in my foxhoe . your comment is pathetic and weak . not a vet

absolutely no courage when you lie and no leadership when you place people`s lives in peril

You speak as though you are a veteran. If indeed you are then you know the government (We the People) place Americans lives in peril every day, 24 hr/day, 365 days/year. And let's be realistic (something I learned from 20 years in the military), no government is completely truthful...I say again, no government is completely truthful.

@ ol_Doc

I say again, no government is completely truthful.

Amen to that. It is like I said, you can get ALL the news, but you'll only get half the story.

lol...not so dumb "FarmBoy"

DumbFarmBoy

@ Siobhan

I agree, it was a cluster f**k, and a Bohemian one at that. And I agree, I am unaware of the details surrounding Stevens plans or the stipulations imposed by Libya. But I do know help was available, and offered on several occasions. Some one dropped the ball. And it was either in H. Clinton's court or Obama's. some one should be fired, but they are far enough up the food chain, not to be bothered with petty criminal charges, someone lower down will fall on that sword. (as is the case with most admins, it is truly disgusting)

No, I do not believe he is a closet Muslim, although, I do believe he is a Muslim sympathizer, but not for Religious reasons. It has more to do with the oppression of said Muslims, by you guessed it, the British (and their descendant) Nor do I believe he was born in Kenya, I have enough faith in the Secret Service to call him if he is not a born citizen. (or least I hope I do)

And I don't know how you can call the "communist thing" a cooked up conspiracy. Have you seen the list of cabinet appointees? It is a who's who of Socialist/Communist activists. Google it yourself. And though he distances himself from them now, he had tight ties to Dorn and Ayres. Study this man's history and his actions recently. It will tell you who is today.

Sorry, I spoke too soon...all of this is pretty dumb. So you think Obama is a Muslim sympathizing, Socialist/Communist...damn man, get off the farm now and then! By the way, is FOX all you get down-home?

@ Ol Doc

Sorry, I spoke too soon...all of this is pretty dumb. So you think Obama is a Muslim sympathizing, Socialist/Communist...damn man, get off the farm now and then! By the way, is FOX all you get down-home?

I no longer live on a farm, hence the "Dumb" part. The worst thing I ever did was get a Degree in Mechanical Engineering, move to the City and have to live in and amongst bigoted, myopic, inane morons.

How else do explain the "Apology Tour"? Why would he bow to the Saudi King? Why else would he return "a gift to the United States" a bust of Churchill to England?

How about you show me evidence contrary to what I posted instead of the lame "this is pretty dumb" defense?

And I try desperately to get news and info from several sources, not just FOX. And I do try to independently verify these stories and facts. But sometimes you have to have faith in the people reporting it.

DumbFarmBoy

@ Ol Doc

Sorry, I spoke too soon...all of this is pretty dumb. So you think Obama is a Muslim sympathizing, Socialist/Communist...damn man, get off the farm now and then! By the way, is FOX all you get down-home?

I no longer live on a farm, hence the "Dumb" part. The worst thing I ever did was get a Degree in Mechanical Engineering, move to the City and have to live in and amongst bigoted, myopic, inane morons.

How else do explain the "Apology Tour"? Why would he bow to the Saudi King? Why else would he return "a gift to the United States" a bust of Churchill to England?

OK...the claim Obama apologized has been proven a Republican lie for over 3 years... and yet you still repeat it? ...why is that? Ah, a new lie "the bust of Churchill" lie. You can google that one and find that they did not return the gift, they placed it in a more prominent location in the WH.

And I try desperately to get news and info from several sources, not just FOX. And I do try to independently verify these stories and facts. But sometimes you have to have faith in the people reporting it.

I don't buy it...it's not that difficult. Try BBC, at least they don't lie. And NO! you definitely don't have to have faith in people who work at a network that admits they are "entertainment" ...not real news.

@Ol Doc

OK...the claim Obama apologized has been proven a Republican lie for over 3 years... and yet you still repeat it?

Well, maybe it wasn't an "Apology Tour" to your ears, but I heard the speeches. And a lot of the comments he made sure made it sound like America was problem and he was going to change it.

He did in fact return "A" bust of Churchill, the second one remains on display. Now, I will admit that act could have been spun by conservative pundits, and there is more to the story than was reported. But I have not been able to find a source that states the British people requested its return.

And NO! you definitely don't have to have faith in people who work at a network that admits they are "entertainment" ...not real news.

Were you referring to NBC or MSNBC? I was in fact referring to Dinesh D'Souza among others, I have not been able to verify some of the quotes he used in his movie. (But given the fact that the rest of his information has been verifiable, I would venture a guess(faith), that what I could not verify is also true, if not fact)

correction - National security is always a special case...you can't use conventional judgment on such issues

Of course Obama and Rice lied, but it's OK, the election is over now.

Some Commander-in-Chief.

Conventional judgement would dictate to NOT lie about something re national security and/or terrorist attacks. Say, if you have to, it's classified information..but make up lies and then in addition try to justify the lies for heavens sake!! When failure and wrong doing happens across the board, ulitmately it's the head that's to blame, this time that being the President. Regardless of how and why you want to dress it up.... Presidents have been impeached for trying to cover up the truth in the past. Does not speak well for his character...

This does not pass the smell test. If the perpetrators were unknown, then you say "We don't know yet who was behind th attack." If you don't know if the attack was spontaneous or planned, then you say "We don't know yet if the attack was spontaneous or planned." But that's not what the administration did. They told a story, at worst a lie, at best a fabrication, that had no facts behind it at all. So I'm supposed to believe that this not-a-lie story told to satisfy journalists just happened to also protect the President, during a close re-election campaign, from charges that we were caught with our pants down by a planned terrorist attack? That the story just happened to maintain the "Al Qaeda on the run" party line? Sorry, not believable.

People died, Obama lied.

Baloney Dave.

And Al-Qaeda isn't on the run? Because they've been so successful so many other times we've killed all their dudes when they tried to do something and made their plans blow up in their faces... LITERALLY.

They got lucky, they are bound to do that once in a while during asymmetrical warfare.

Also, there is absolutely no evidence that anyone lied about anything. There is an accusation, but changing your mind during an investigation of a criminal act isn't LYING. You should worry if nobody ever changes their mind during or after an investigation.

You know what you get then? The Iraq War.

Lemme guess, an 8 year war that killed thousands of americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people is no BFD to you because of the WMD's that nobody ever found and nobody but the Bush administration said were in existence.

They were wrong for a few days. Big freaking deal. If it really was a grand conspiracy to hide the truth, then they would have kept lying about it.

They're the freaking CIA, they can do that whenever and however they want to.

This GOP lead witch hunt has been a farce from day 1 and the only people who think it isn't also think Obama is a secretly gay, muslim, serial killer who plotted to illegal assume the presidency during his 3rd trimester of gestation

According to Petraeus, there was nothing in his memo that couldn't be said out loud. Nothing so classified as to not be able to be spoken. These people lied and you know it. You can't justify the cowardly way they have handled this thing. It took how many days for the intelligence community to come forward? How many days? They knew this all along. They lied, and they lied some more, and you have sided with liars. How does that feel. There is no earthly reason for the lie.

Hey... brenda1964 ... who writes -

Kevin, change your diaper and stop crying.

that's so funny..even the Letterman monologue is not that funny.... I can't stop giggling

For months all you heard Obama say was. Bin Laden is dead Al Qaeda is on their heels.

See the Al Qadea attack on our soil in Libya contradicts those very statements. Thats why the CIA talking points were changed. All Al Quadea and terrorist references were removed?

One other little thing. If you don't know what happened why when meeting the coffins and parents of the dead Americans did Clinton say to the father of Ty Woods, we will arrest and prosecute the maker of this film?

Pigotry: Obama and everyone else lied their a___'s off and covered this thing up till the election was over and you very well know it. You try to come off as some know-it-all wise orator (writer) and you are not good at it. You're just taking up for your Messiah knowing all along this thing is much worse than Watergate and also realizing the creeps will get away with it because the Senate will let Obama off (if it gets that far) like they did Clinton because there's a majority of dumocrats. Sleaze bags, all of them.

DaveGinOly:

I've got a question:

Does an attack on American personnel in the middle East, by al Qaeda forces or any other extremist groups, indicate to you that we were 'caught with our pants down?'

Just what view do you think we have of our enemies in this 'war on terror' we're fighting? That they're retards? That they don't have opposable thumbs? Do you think there is a significant number of Americans naive enough to think that in a war, we will never get hit?

Petraeus said they knew almost immediately the names of the people behind this attack. Had they decided that the mission of finding them and killing them was less important than the immediate and complete satisfaction of public curiosity, they could have named names without paying a political price, and they knew it.

They chose to protect the mission. That makes me like them more.

and you really think Al Qadea is the only Islamist terror group that want to kill all Americans. So what...one word was left out. Is that a conspiracy? Al Qadea is on there heels but it's like a hydra with so many offshoots and sleeper cells.

Only 4 Americans killed by terrorist in 4 years that is a miracle or is it just great intelligence. If you think there will be no more successful terrorist attacks you are just as stupid as the Republicans to think you will stop all...especially if an American wants to do their own thing in a foreign country.

It's tragic ...but lets not forget that Amb. Stevens could have left if he wanted to. The President didn't force him to be there anymore than he wanted to be there. Stevens loved that country.

And thank God he wasn't a minority (black or whatever) He would have been called stupid for being there. To ignorant to heed all the warnings. I guarantee the Republicans and these trolls here would have ridiculed a black Amb. Stevens. This case would have been closed before the election. You think Fox would have made this much of an uproar...No!!They would have suspected he was a Islamist pacifier or harboring some kind of deadly secret that he was killed for.

Susan Rice was told to say what she said by the Obama administration and I am sure Obama was involved. She lied. Get a clue folks.

They need to get her butt on the stand, under oath, to tell them who told her to say what she said. For them to drag this out two months after it happened is deplorable.

@Kevin Bitz

Not like the Bush lie (the guy who you never saw during the campaign) about weapons of mass destruction... .seems the GOP has short memories.... move on..... who the heck cares except Fox News who has to find something to complain about regarding Obama....

ROTFLMAO!!! Well apparently you still haven't gotten over Bush and his WMD's from 10 years ago but here you are telling people to just forget about what your guy lied about 10 weeks ago. That's pretty much the definition of hypocrisy.

Little Georgie Porgie Bushie Pie. He is what his name implies. Daddie got hit by some Iraqi chit, and little Georgie Porgie Pie cooked up some fake yellow cake to make his mark, where Daddy Bushie couldn't abide. They hate us for our free-dumbs.

Roosterboy all you can beat is your meat and there isn't much of that. Change that tampon in your ass you're stinking out the site.

Pigotry- why is it you can never stick to the issue at hand? You say the election is over. Who really cares anymore? This is not about the election or Bush. It is about a President who lied to the American public about what happened. Nothing more and nothing less. You Democrats are such idiots because you can not stick to the facts. You want to say" the elections are over and we won, get over it and move on." No Body is talking about the election!!!!! Get a clue and stick to the issue. Did the President of the United States lie to the public? The answer is YES.

Rice didn't lie because she didn't know, she released all the information she was given.

Now you can say the CIA lied, and that would be a half truth. The CIA is constantly speaking partial truths, part of it is to obfuscate the Intel source / methods of collection, the other part is to confuse the enemy and prevent them from knowing what the CIA knows.

Face it people, whatever is released to Congress is immediately released to the press soon after. The GOP would of used any information to attack the President during the elections, the Democrats would of used it to attack the Republicans and Governor Romney. Neither side would of stopped to think whether them blasting what the CIA knew to the public world would of hurt National Security. Anything spoken to the press is immediately picked up by everyone in the world, including the people who would be responsible for these attacks and others. You mind as well hand them a CIA Intel brief while your at it.

Kevin Bitz - Not like the Bush lie (the guy who you never saw during the campaign) about weapons of mass destruction...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSkv_29Rncg

President Clinton's 1998 State of the Union Address:

Together we must also confront the new hazards of chemical and biological weapons, and the outlaw states, terrorists and organized criminals seeking to acquire them. Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade, and much of his nation's wealth, not on providing for the Iraqi people, but on developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. The United Nations weapons inspectors have done a truly remarkable job, finding and destroying more of Iraq's arsenal than was destroyed during the entire gulf war. Now, Saddam Hussein wants to stop them from completing their mission. I know I speak for everyone in this chamber, Republicans and Democrats, when I say to Saddam Hussein, "You cannot defy the will of the world", and when I say to him, "You have used WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION before; we are determined to deny you the capacity to use them again.

2003 Operation Iraqis Freedom in accordance with President Clinton's US Law, H.R.4655, "Iraqis Liberation Act of 1998" Justification, Section 2 WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, Section 3 US Policy Overthrow of President Hussein, with US Congressional Appropriations. President Clinton's Failed attempt 1998 US Military Operation Desert Fox with the result being the Islamic World Declaring the US the Great Satan.

How old are you Kevin Bitzand all the uneducated that keep cry babying about Bush and WMDs, must have been born way after 1998 (not cognisant adults during 1998, the above was all over the Newspapers, TV, Magazines, etc., including the Demoncraps jumping up and down like the Warmongering Gorillas of the Planet of the Apes, rah, rah War).

Liars Liars Pants On Fire. Sick of the lies. Where did the integrity go with these whack jobs?

theotherguy1234 - Rice didn't lie because she didn't know, she released all the information she was given.

Ok, then admit it that you and UN Ambassador Susan Rice are Obama Arse Puppets.

Burning Brightly - Where did the integrity go with these whack jobs?

Now or previously.

It is the Duty of US Military Officers to Inform the US Citizens pertaining to those matters concerning the unnecessary deaths of US Citizens of the US Military; after informing their Chain of Command, all the way up to the President as US Military Commander In Chief.

Previously, Commander of the UN Mission Afghanistan, General McKiernan developed his General McKiernan War Plan to Win Afghanistan, his War Plan required 90,000 US Military. He requests 90,000 US Military. US Congress and President Obama refuse. General McKiernan wants Afghanistan over with so he and the US Military can go home. General McKiernan attempts to inform the US Public thru a CBS News interview with Katie Couric. President Obama is outraged and demands General McKiernan's Letter of Resignation. With no Legal Reasons President Obama is forced to make a Deal with General McKiernan to get his Letter of Resignation to shut him up. General McKiernan accepts, as a losing situation (Democratic President and Democratic Congress that does not have his back and refuses to listen) and retires as a Four Star General instead of a Three Star Lieutenant General.

President Obama grabs General McKiernan's War Plan to Win Afghanistan and renamed this the Obama War Plan to Win Afghanistan. President Obama with no US Military Experience (that even an O-1 would know) does not realize that the General McKiernan War Plan to Win Afghanistan is useless without General McKiernan's Commander's Intent (General McKiernan's Leadership and Thought Processes).

President Obama appoints his Registered Democrat General McChrystal to replace General McKiernan. General McChrystal finds out just how much President Obama as Commander In Chief and his Administration do not know. President Obama states that anything that General McChrystal needs he will get. President Obama demands that General McChrystal accomplish General McKiernan's War Plan to Win Afghanistan, plagiarized as the Obama War Plan to Win Afghanistan. General McChrystal requests 90,000 US Military. President Obama refuses and demands General McChrystal do the War Plan anyway. President Obama as Commander In Chief Orders his April 2009 Defense Budget Cuts during Two Wars (Iraq, Afghanistan), and President Obama's Secret Wars, resulting in the US Military lacking Maintenance Funds (Aircraft, Weapons, Vehicles, Ships, Repair Parts, etc.) and Sustainment Funds (Ammunition, Food, Water, Fuel). General McChrystal does President Obama's War Plan and this turned into a Failure to end Afghanistan (Karl Forsberg, Afghanistan Reports, Institute for the Study of War, 2009) resulting in many unnecessary deaths of NATO Military. General McChrystal starts to believe the President Obama Political Appointees on his High Level Staff, that "This Administration Does Not Know What It Is Doing". President Obama with no Legal Leg to Stand on as "Insubordination" makes a Deal with General McChrystal to Retire as a Four Star General instead of a Three Star Lieutenant General so that General McChrystal does not demand a Public US Congressional Hearing that would make Public all of the "This Administration Does Not Know What It Is Doing" that would destroy President Obama's Political Career.

The Relief of Command of Two US Military (Experienced) Generals in a Row by President Obama basically shut the US Military Integrity (Duty to Inform the US Public) down.

US Secretary of Defense Gates informs the US Military at Afghanistan during his last visit, that he will be Tendering his Letter of Resignation, as President Obama as Commander In Chief is Ordering the US Military to be chopped down to half it's current size, with half being RIF'ed (Unemployed), while retaining most of the (non combatant) US Civilians employed by the US Military (the majority of the cost of the US Military Budget).

There went your US (Expert and Experienced) Civilian Control of the US Military, Integrity.

Does that answer your question, Burning Brightly.

david, you have NO IDEA what you are talking about. The US military is NOT obligated to inform the US citizens about ANYTHING. In fact, for Secret or Top Secret or otherwise Classified information, if any member of the US Military releases information they can be relieved of duty, JAILED or even tried for espionage and treason. Their ENTIRE FAMILY is subject to security clearance investigations for the duration of the Military (or Intelligence for that matter) person's term of duty and even beyond until such time as the information is no longer deemed sensitive or classified. You probably will ask me how I know this ... my father was a Commissioned Officer in the Air Force who had better than a Top Secret security clearance for the better part of his 24 year career in the Air Force and then went on to work DoD contracts after his retirement where he continued his security clearance. My older brother went to work on DoD contracts after his graduation from college and HE also had a Top Secret security clearance. My mail was delayed and I was aware in other ways when either one had their security clearance up for review and renewal - all without them telling me. You can BET that neither one released all the information that they knew about DoD operations or intel to me. My father has been retired for over 20 YEARS and I still don't know what information he was privy to. If you think YOU'RE entitled to know everything about Intelligence or Military secrets then you've got another think coming.

WMDs. Bush. The campaign ran on "Forward", but so many of you are still stuck in "Reverse". Just can't let go of the past and move forward.

But while we're dwelling on the past:

WikiLeaks Show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq – With Surprising Results

By Noah Shachtman - October 23, 2010

(http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/10/wikileaks-show-wmd-hunt-continued-in-iraq-with-surprising-results/)

“But WikiLeaks’ newly-released Iraq war documents reveal that for years afterward, U.S. troops continued to find chemical weapons labs, encounter insurgent specialists in toxins and uncover weapons of mass destruction.”

Also here: US did find Iraq WMD

By DON KAPLAN - Last Updated: 8:57 AM, October 25, 2010

(Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/us_did_find_iraq_wmd_AYiLgNbw7pDf7AZ3RO9qnM)

Jane?Doe

For months all you heard Obama say was. Bin Laden is dead Al Qaeda is on their heels.

See the Al Qadea attack on our soil in Libya contradicts those very statements. Thats why the CIA talking points were changed. All Al Quadea and terrorist references were removed?

I find it sooooo funny, all you posters that want to "LABEL" this a terrorist attack, I have one question for you --- when there is a terrorist attack upon a target doesn't the group that attacked take credit for their endeavor? Of course -- so I want to know what group has claimed responsibility for the attack? Ahhhhh thats right it was Mr. Nobody. Nobody has claimed responsibility. So claiming it was a terrorist attack, is premature, could it actually have been an act of convenience by some very sick individuals? Until the investigation is over STFU.

The president, Barack Obama was obviously clueless or is lying

Either situation speaks of incompetence at the highest level or intergrity dissolve

Susan Rice was a tool - took one for the team of corruption

Now that the Republicans have failed they are looking for revenge, we as Americans got to get this party out of our life's, we don't need this kind of trash in this Nation !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Outzider said:

It's tragic ...but lets not forget that Amb. Stevens could have left if he wanted to. The President didn't force him to be there anymore than he wanted to be there. Stevens loved that country.

THANK YOU!!!!

The tragedies of this situation simply compound one another. For a forthcoming book about the Libyan revolution, I have interviewed scores of current and former Western officials, many of whom were either pessimistic about or indifferent to Libya’s growing pains. In their eyes, Libya continues to be a sideshow of the broader Arab Spring.

Ambassador Stevens did not agree. I discussed Libya’s future with him last spring in a Washington cafe, as he awaited confirmation as ambassador. He had already been the deputy chief of mission in Libya, and he had been the United States envoy to Benghazi during the dangerous early days of the revolution. So he knew Libya, and he believed that it could become one of the first full success stories of the Arab Spring — that Islamic radicalism there could be nipped in the bud if Western governments acted decisively to put the country on a path to stability and social progress.

Now, his death may derail the very processes he championed.

Mr. Stevens understood that Libyans had suffered under Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, and that conflict and post-revolutionary instability were to be expected. He also understood that some, if not all, of the hatred that had pushed some of Libya’s youths to join radical factions in Afghanistan and Iraq had sprung from years of neglect and oppression. Now, he felt, new opportunities needed to be created to wean these people away from ideologies rooted in hate.

No doubt that was one reason he made a point, as ambassador, of continuing to visit Benghazi, the East’s largest city, despite the clear risks; there had been attacks on other high-level diplomats there in the previous months. It is a mystery at this point why the consulate compound was so lightly fortified, but I would not be surprised if Mr. Stevens had decided to stay overnight in Benghazi simply because his list of planned meetings with Libyans there was too long to be accomplished in one afternoon.

The morning after the attack on the consulate, my colleagues and I returned to the medical center, where we witnessed an outpouring of sadness and, as one physician put it, shame. The emergency room staff members who worked to save Mr. Stevens broke down in tears, as did the physician in charge. Some knew or had met Mr. Stevens; some had not. But all were aware that he had been a champion of Libya, and of Benghazi in particular, and that his death may have rolled back Benghazi’s stupendous revolutionary accomplishments by months — even if it does not set off a period of heightened instability in eastern Libya. Many Libyans outside the hospital also offered condolences and expressed profound regret for America’s loss.

--Ethan Chorin, New York Times, an article titled 'What Libya Lost'.

The simple fact that any of Roosterboy's posts got more than just his own vote speaks volumes for the mentality of your average Lib.

Does the phrase "the inmates are running the asylum" pop into anyone else's head lately?

So according to liberal morons, if a president lied 100 years ago, it's ok for Obama to lie now? And if he did, so what, he's black, so you're a racist? WTF are you idiots smoking? Pull your heads out of your butts. No president, democrat or republican should be allowed to lie to the American people. They work for us, you dumb asses!! Wake the F*** up!!

We can find out in a hurry what the Obama administration actually knew about the attack in Libya. All they need to do is release the minutes of the security briefings Obama received following the attack. But of course that will never happen when his supporters are so willing to turn a blind eye to anything he does. Then again it is under investigation, and will be until the end of his second term.

Just reading the comments in here makes me disgusted. So much hate for Obama. And to suggest that he lied or anyone else lied.. the lack of understanding and hypocrisy is sickening. If you truly love America you wouldn't behave this way. Let the insults fly...

Sometimes it is prudent NOT to tell the Public exactly what happened UNTIL all of the facts are known and verified.

Take 911. If only one plane had crashed into one Tower and there was no second plane, or a Pentagon, nothing would be attributed to Terrorism until an investigation was completed. That "accident" would have appeared to be just that, an "accident". However, there were four such events instead of a single event and the "Acts of Terrorism" were evident to everyone shortly after the first plane hit when the second plane hit.

Another example was the downing of the Passenger Plane off the East Coast a few years ago. From first accounts, that "accident" was deemed a result of Terrorists prior to the investigation that was conducted. The result of that investigation was that the plane blew up from a faulty component, not an "Act of Terrorism".

I wouldn't want to spend 5 mins with most of you. Some of the most hateful people on the planet. Yet in your mind you're right and that's all that matters. You criticize the same behavior that you and the people you support exhibit. You behave in a way that's shameful. Hypocrisy times 1000. At least admit it.

President Obama bows (subservient) or "ties shoe" (bad judgement) in front of Saudi King = makes America look at best weak, at worst stupid = terrorist benefit

President Obama praised Egypt during its rebel uprising + Muslim Brotherhood joins rebel uprising = terrorist benefit

Tell the world Osama is dead within 24 hours = valuable intel loss = terrorist benefit

Dont admit to the U.S. public until weeks later that they knew Benghazi wasnt related to anti-Islam movie = Liberal opinion cools to Benghazi attack = terrorist benefit

We actually bombed Libya for less than Benghazi = Gaddafi dies during a bomb stike aftermath = terrorist benefit

Can we do something that doesnt benefit the terrorists?

Kevin Bitz - Not like the Bush lie (the guy who you never saw during the campaign) about weapons of mass destruction... .seems the GOP has short memories

Short memories indeed. As in the idiots like the above who continuously post the "Bush lied, people died" nonsense, who can't seem to remember that our intelligence community (and Europe's, and Russia's) all said Saddam most likely still had some of the WMD's from the Iran - Iraq war that he used on the Kurds AND the fact that the DEMOCRATS VOTED TO AUTHORIZE THE USE OF FORCE IN IRAQ.

Once it became an unpopular war, the Democrats backed away from it and started to blame it on Bush, and the left-wing pundits joined in...and the brainless sheeple forgot all about reality.

That's not liberal at all, that's idiocy!

Proud 2B Liberal - the source of a lot of the intelligence on Iraq has now been found to be a bad one. Colin Powell seems haunted by his part in pushing the Bush admins agenda. Furthermore, a British weapons expert (David Kelley) who had the temerity to go against what the US and UK governments were saying about Iraqs WMD's died under very strange circumstances. Imagine the reaction if something similar had happened here!

Bringing up the Bush Administration during a discussion about Benghazi isnt a big deal. We see this in nature all the time.

It's like an octopus using ink to get away from a valid threat.

Anderson-656479

I find it sooooo funny, all you posters that want to "LABEL" this a terrorist attack, I have one question for you --- when there is a terrorist attack upon a target doesn't the group that attacked take credit for their endeavor? Of course -- so I want to know what group has claimed responsibility for the attack? Ahhhhh thats right it was Mr. Nobody. Nobody has claimed responsibility. So claiming it was a terrorist attack, is premature, could it actually have been an act of convenience by some very sick individuals? Until the investigation is over STFU.

_________________

Poor little Anderson. Let me start by saying I don't think any of this is funny and I find it sad that you do. I'd also suggest you find some better news sources.

Obama, at the Presidential Debate claimed he called it a terrorist attack the very next day in the rose garden.

Reuters) - Officials at the White House and State Department were advised two hours after attackers assaulted the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya on September 11 that an Islamic militant group called Ansar al-Sharia had claimed credit for the attack, official emails show.

President Obama and other U.S. officials ultimately acknowledged it was a "terrorist" attack carried out by militants with suspected links to al Qaeda affiliates or sympathizers.

While officials did mention the possible involvement of "extremists," they did not lay blame on any specific militant groups or possible links to al Qaeda or its affiliates until intelligence officials publicly alleged that on September 28.

So Anderson I come back to this Question for you.

When Obama and Clinton were meeting the coffins and parents of the dead Americans why did they say to the father of Ty Woods, we will arrest and prosecute the maker of this film?

DaveGinOly said:

They told a story, at worst a lie, at best a fabrication, that had no facts behind it at all.

Yes, it did.

Libyans interviewed after the attack said they saw a few of the militants responsible trying to gather a crowd at the consulate gates to protest the film. At that time (since the militants weren't wearing uniforms that said 'I'm a militant and I'm planning to attack this consulate in a couple of hours' a reasonable assumption could be made that the rabble-rousers were just troublemakers trying to start trouble.

Don-313038

Pigotry- why is it you can never stick to the issue at hand? You say the election is over. Who really cares anymore? This is not about the election or Bush. It is about a President who lied to the American public about what happened. Nothing more and nothing less. You Democrats are such idiots because you can not stick to the facts. You want to say" the elections are over and we won, get over it and move on." No Body is talking about the election!!!!! Get a clue and stick to the issue. Did the President of the United States lie to the public? The answer is YES.

Don... Are you stupid or something? Been drinking too much of that Rush juice?? Of course this is about the election. If it wasn't then Bush would have been convicted of war crimes for going into a Sovereign country called Iraq under a lie of weapons of mass destruction. Instead you Republicans cover that one up with a oops, sorry, bad intelligence that killed over 3000 USA soldiers and over 12000 Iraq citizens. Then when President Obama's team mistakes it for a video reprisal and 4 USA citizens die, you guys want to all the sudden rake them across the coals. HEY FRYING PAN, CALL THE KETTLE BLACK MUCH? To quote President Clinton, " Gotta have some brass." So Republicans kill thousands, Democrats 4..... Whoops there goes the Math 101 thing again that Republicans can't seem to grasp. So when a group of GOP's get together and say they will screw the American people just to make President Obama a one term President, then lose to him again, then of course this is about the election. Especially since McCain lost to him 4 years ago.

Oct 10th and 11th, 2002

The Us House of Representatives and the US Senate voted on HJRes 114.

It was passed by 70% of House and Senate.

House count 296 ayes - 133 nays

Senate count 77 ayes (including Biden) - 23 nays

To all the whiny republicans: If you have a problem with the talking points put out by intelligence agencies, take it up with them. This is NOT an Obama scandal, this is a desperate attempt by republicans to gin one up. Have you ever thought that maybe, just maybe the reason they put out these talking points was because of national security? It isn't all about YOU and what you want to know. But if you have problems with it, go to the source, don't make up bull@!$%# about Rice and Obama.

BigATC,

The report says that it was not known whether it was spontaneous or pre-planned. The report explains why the CIA talking points that they gave to Rice and Obama said what they said. They intelligence officials explain why they didn't want names or al-Qaeda associated with any official remarks until they knew more. The point is the Obama administration told us what they were told by the intelligence community, hence no cover up. Anyone who thinks that there is any evidence of a cover up at this point is grasping at straws and desperately trying to find information to fit a preconceived narrative.

Also, Obama never said they were 100% certain it was the video. In fact, you can find quotes all over the internet of him (and his administration) saying things like (paraphrasing) "we have evidence to believe this was in response the video/spurred by demonstrations in Cairo but this is still under investigation." Almost every official line that came out of the White House was followed with "we'll wait and see what the investigation says." The White House came out with a story given to them by the CIA in an attempt to answer the people's questions until they had more information. Like it or not, the Obama administration saying what they said was the best they could to do to be transparent without affecting the ongoing investigation, not some nefarious cover up. And the intelligence community has confirmed that.

Hilariously, in your same post you complain about how there was almost nothing on this from media (i.e. there wasn't much information on this) while simultaneously complaining that Obama came out with information too early. You can't have it both ways.

DumbFarmBoy,

The parts of this article that I quoted are the reports from high-ranking intelligence officials. It doesn't matter which article it comes from – those reports are the same. The intelligence community didn't know definitively whether it was pre-planned or spontaneous and they gave Obama and his administration talking points that referred to the video and eliminated any mention of al-Qaeda or specific names because they didn't want that information out there until further investigation had been done.. i.e, no cover up.

Also, on a side note, here's the full quote from "Dreams of My Father":

To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets. We smoked cigarettes and wore leather jackets. At night, in the dorms, we discussed necolonialism, Franz Fanon, Eurocentrism, and patriarchy.

Are you also going to accuse Obama of being a punk-rock performance poet? Or how about a Chicano? As usual, a quote taken out of context to fit a preconceived narrative. It's really a tiresome tactic.

Bush lied and thousands died. The Niger document was a forgery and a lie. The weapons of mass destruction was a lie. The war in Iraq based on repub lies and false pretenses caused much chaos and a massive increase in terrorism in the region that is still going on today. Thousands died in the US after Bush and the repubs in charge of Washington ignored all the warnings and did not step up security to stop 9/11 terror attacks. These lies and errors have cost our country trillions and trillions of dollars and new debt and deficits that helped lead to a massive recession. The fiscal cliff is rapidly approaching, and all the repubs want is to impeach the president, but can only find some comparatively extremely minor incident to use. Repubs care not one iota about the well being of their country. Repubs only care about power, and they will stoop to any dark, corrupt and underhanded method to get it.

Bi Partisan

Oct 10th and 11th, 2002

The Us House of Representatives and the US Senate voted on HJRes 114.

It was passed by 70% of House and Senate.

House count 296 ayes - 133 nays

Senate count 77 ayes (including Biden) - 23 nays

Kevin C-752389

Of course Obama and Rice lied, but it's OK, the election is over now.

Some Commander-in-Chief.

"So why were those unclassified talking points created in the first place?

Officials say they were produced in response to requests from the House Select Committee on Intelligence for language that could be used in media interviews."

The House Select Committee on Intelligence is chaired by a Republican. I guess you learned nothing from the "Fast and Furious" phony Republican outrage.

Republican lies, false outrage, obstructionism and exclusion will insure your party goes extinct within the next 3 cycles.

@Lib50

If you have a problem with the talking points put out by intelligence agencies, take it up with them. This is NOT an Obama scandal...

Thats what we've been saying about Iraq for 8 years. But, did you Democrats listen?

You whined about President Bush's second election. You blamed President Bush for single handedly walking us into Iraq.

No, No...now its time for some of your own medicine.

SabotAndHeat

@Lib50

If you have a problem with the talking points put out by intelligence agencies, take it up with them. This is NOT an Obama scandal...

Thats what we've been saying about Iraq for 8 years. But, did you Democrats listen?

You whined about President Bush's second election. You blamed President Bush for single handedly walking us into Iraq.

No, No...now its time for some of your own medicine.

What's the deal man...can't tell the difference between the legislative branch and the executive branch? The questionable intelligence regarding the Iraq war came from the executive branch, specifically the President's Intelligence Advisory Board (you know, the folks who cooked up the "yellow cake uranium" lie). The members of the Board were Republicans.

The Talking Points we're talking about that were presented by Ms. Rice were dictated by the Select Committee on Intelligence (Chaired by a Republican). Do you see the pattern?

@ Ol Doc

Whats the deal man...can't tell the difference between one President and another?

President Clinton era intelligence (and other countries intel agencys) pointed to the exact same WMD intelligence that led us into Iraq. Across three Presidentional terms....thats called a pattern too! Are we having fun yet?