E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe attack of Sept. 11, 2001, has been so pervasive a theme in American politics in the years since that at times we scarcely notice its influence even though it explains so much of what came after that day.
Gary Cameron / Reuters
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) questions Senator John Kerry (Not Pictured) during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirmation hearing on Kerry's nomination to be secretary of state, on Capitol Hill in Washington, January 24, 2013.
Sometimes almost forgotten, 9/11 is an experience some Americans may recall only when they travel and must undergo screening from a select few of the army of 45,000 screeners that was created by the actions of 19 suicidal hijackers.
So it was remarkable that three times in the space of two Senate hearings on Wednesday and Thursday, the 9/11 attack percolated through the discussion.
Testifying Thursday morning at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to be secretary of state, Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., voiced his regret that one effect of that fateful day has been to make people abroad see American policy simply in terms of killing individual al Qaida leaders and pre-empting terrorist threats.
America’s foreign policy must not be “defined by drones and deployments alone,” Kerry warned. “We cannot allow the extraordinary good we do to save and change lives to be eclipsed entirely by the (counterterrorism) role we have had to play since September 11th, a role that was thrust upon us.”
A day before, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in her testimony about the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. diplomatic facility in Benghazi, used the 2001 attack to make the case for continued robust American involvement in North Africa.
She warned of the risks of a 9/11-style attack from the group Al Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM).
“People say to me all the time, well, AQIM hasn't attacked the United States. Well, before 9/11, 2001, we hadn't been attacked on our homeland since, I guess, the War of 1812 and Pearl Harbor. So you can't say, well, because they haven't done something they're not going to do it,” she said.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton tells the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that Mali's "progress on democracy" was disrupted by the Kaddafi-supported militant and al-Qaeda loyalists, warning that we must not let the region become a haven for terrorists.
But a bit later Clinton came under assault from Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who used 9/11 as his rhetorical theme.
“Ultimately with your leaving (the State Department), you accept the culpability for the worst tragedy since 9/11, and I really mean that,” Paul told Clinton. Democrats on the committee recoiled in anger at what they saw as a cheap exploitation of 9/11.
Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., told Clinton, “I think if some people on this committee want to call the tragedy in Benghazi the worst since 9/11, it misunderstands the nature of 4,000 Americans-plus lost over 10 years of war in Iraq, fought under false pretenses. It was fought under false pretenses, but it was also fought, I think, because we had a misunderstanding of what we could do and what we could manage in that region for what was under our control.”
Murphy, first elected to the House in 2006 as part of the voter backlash against the Iraq war, didn’t mention that Clinton herself, serving in the Senate in 2002, voted for the congressional resolution authorizing President George W. Bush to invade Iraq.
Her vote was one liability during her bid for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination – a liability which Barack Obama, a state senator when Congress voted on the Iraq invasion, didn’t have.
The 9/11 attack created the political environment which made possible, and perhaps even inevitable, the congressional vote authorizing Bush to use military force against Iraq.
In his Oct. 7, 2002, speech making the case for using force, Bush repeatedly invoked 9/11. To those American who wondered “why do we need to confront it (the threat of Saddam Hussein) now?” Bush said, “There’s a reason. We have experienced the horror of Sept. 11. We have seen that those who hate America are willing to crash airplanes into buildings full of innocent people.” And America’s enemies would be eager “to use a biological or chemical, or a nuclear weapon.”
Four days later, the Senate voted for the Iraq war authorization, with Kerry, Clinton and then-Sen. Joe Biden among the 77 voting for it.
Just as Murphy had argued at Wednesday’s Senate hearing that Iraq was “fought under false pretenses,” so, too, Democrats back in 2004 argued that Kerry, Clinton, Biden, then-Sen. Chuck Hagel and the other members of Congress who’d voted for the Iraq war resolution had been deceived.
But some antiwar Democrats argued that – deception or not – their party could never beat Bush in 2004 with a candidate who was compromised by having voted for the Iraq war resolution.
It’s impossible to know the answer to that question – would Howard Dean or Sen. Bob Graham (who voted “no” on the Iraq war resolution) have defeated Bush in 2004?
We do know that Bush held his party’s 2004 convention in New York City, a target of the 9/11 attack and defeated Kerry in the election.
His second term was an unhappy one for many reasons, but it was Bush – not Kerry – who got to the fill the next two vacancies on the Supreme Court.
And 9/11’s effect is also still directly felt in the current wrestling over fiscal policy. As Obama and congressional leaders try to figure out how to pay for ever-growing entitlement programs and reduce budget deficits, Republicans in Congress, but many Democrats, too, are reluctant to significantly reduce a $630 billion Defense Department budget that grew massively in the years after Sept. 11, 2001.
Leave a Comment:
Amazing.....still targeting the DOD for cuts (last paragraph in the article) when the problem is the PROGRESSIVE SPENDING.
You can't spend what you don't have !!!!!
BTW: Mrs. Clinton's testimony did NOT provide the true Benghazi story. Guess she had other things to do on Sunday(s) and.....like she said, America should just get over the killing of an American Ambassador and three other Americans. Some potential Presidential candidate for 2016.
Lets get all those rich-good-for-nothings to pay more.
Don't - ever - allow terrorists (domestic or foreign) to win ...
Hate to tell you this but the House approves all spending, so talk to Mr. Boehner about your concerns.
Please tell us the true Benghazi story since you were obviously either there or are privy to State Dept. communications. Any links to the truth that you can provide would also be appreciated.
BTW: Links to Drudge, the Blaze and FAUX don't count... I mean credible links, not psycho blogs or entertainment sites.
ldo
What exactly is the Benghazi story? I am sure from your vast years of government service and extremely knowledge on foreign affairs, you can tell us (with great detail) what the "EXACT" story is here.
OneOfTheSane
woops, sorry friend.. I guess you beat me to it!
As for 9/11, its something that is going to linger in America forever. TERRORIST attack us regardless of who sits in the WH. I am in quite certain they are enjoying watching us tear at each other, instead of remaining FOCUSED On the real problem...
Actually, when you look at the grand scheme of the illegal war Bush got us involved in, in Iraq, the 4 deaths in Benghazi are miniscule, so, to enlighten you even more, I too have said, as far as Benghazi, get over it. In wars and conflicts, death is inevitable, and as a Retired Infantry NCO, I've never put one death of one of my Soldiers above another when it came to war and conflicts.
I've lost Soldiers in combat, and it wasn't the rank that bothered me, it was their ages of 19,20,21,22,23,24,......etc
Credible...like MSDNC perhaps? What a joke.
At least use some critical thought of your own. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand the Administration played with the truth. You can see it too; sadly you can't admit it
Moshuluu, from one retired NCO to another. You ought to be ashamed of yourself. You don't put one death above another you say? Funny, because the rest of your statement exhibits that you just did.
Negative!! The article did, I explained what happened in Benghazi is no more important than my 21 year old Privates dying on the battle field. IF you were a Retired Combat NCO you would know what I mean.
So true, but the MSM only reports it one way. All spending blame was on Bush and the GOP from 2007-2011. The spending problem goes both ways...and we have a GIANT spending problem.
Brian-2822589... the offer to provide credible links is extended to you as well.
ItsAboutTime... Hello my friend. Sane minds think alike. :)
ldo... Where did you run off to?
Still waiting for Rand Paul and IDO to investigate Bush/Cheney and their renowned group of thugs for lying the nation and world into war in Iraq. All the thousands of deaths from all the countries, Trillions spent.....all to give Cheney war profits for his company Haliburton and to satisfy Bush's dream to be knwn as a "War president, because War presidents are remembered."
Bush Cheney should be tried for war crimes throughout the world because of the deaths they caused. Bush Cheney and Condoleeza should all been impeached and removed from office for their ignoring 911 warnings, then sent to Iraq front lines!
I stand corrected. I thought you had stated that the 4 deaths were "miniscule". Oh wait, you did.
And you might not want to stand to high on the I'm-a-combat-vet high horse of yours. You aren't alone in that regard and it doesn't make you anymore qualified to spout off than anyone else.
Now this weekend Clinton and Obama will be on 60 minutes to back up their lies. We the people will still not know the truth at the end of the interview. Because Steve Kroft will ask the questions that Obama and Hillary want to answer. This country will never know the real story of Benghazi .
King Fish... the real story is that Obama ordered the hit on Benghazi and Clinton lied for him so FOX would have something else to piss and moan about besides the election results.
There... happy now? lol
Ok Brian, I see you're not a Combat NCO. In combat we need to use "real-time" critical thinking of advanced situations to come to a logical conclusion. Saying that to say...
How many American Military deaths in Iraq compared to the 4 American deaths in Benghazi on the day in question?
See how easy that is when you think.
Sorry, didn't think it had to be spelled out for you!!
Once again you're not making sense, Combat is a lot different than pushing papers off a desk. Hell, I don't even consider flying drones from half way around the world combat. Do you?
Don't - ever - use WMD to invade Iraq ... again, unless ... it's credible and Iraq becomes the enemy again.
Shame on you, Bush.
Moshuluu, You're kind of funny and kind of annoying. You seem to feel so strongly about thumping your chest as a "Combat NCO" (love the way you capitalized C-ombat BTW. I suppose to make you sound superior or something). Even better that you've decided in just a few minutes what type of soldier you think I was. Must be some of that "real-time" critical thinking of yours. But if it makes you feel better, I'll play your silly little game. 19D 1SG. And before you jump to anymore idiotic conclusions, yes I've been on several combat deployments.
So what?
I wonder how the families of those 4 dead Americans feel about this miniscule little issue
Bush found no WMD but I believe he actually thought they were there. I also believe he could hide his own Easter Eggs.......
STARSAILNG we would have to charge the congress that voted for the war in Iraq as well. Bush couldnt do it without congresses approval. As far as Wmds are concerred anybody who was a member of the 82nd airborne and other units as well can tell you for a fact he did have them because we were there when we blew up a ammo depot that had them. Thousands of troops were exposed to low levels of radiation. My guess would be he got rid of them maybe sent them to Syria but make no mistake aboput he did have them in Desert Storm. So when the cia said he had them again we had to take that seriously.
You lost this a long while back, no need trying to build yourself up now, If you were what you claim to be, you would have presented your credentials in the beginning, 19D...LOL, I was just an Infantry NCO, but you had to go to the top huh, "Calvary Scout..." LOL.... so who's playing the silly game besides you, but either way, here's an answer to your last question.
I suppose the families of those 4 dead Americans, feel as bad as the families of the 4k+ dead American Soldiers, and the 10's of thousands of wounded/injured American Soldiers.
I'm supposed to show you credentials? What on earth does it matter what rank I held, or what my MOS was? What an idiot.
But since this is so important to you, I must admit that I am grateful that you realize a scout "tops" an infantry NCO. I've been saying it for years, but you guys were never smart enough to get it.
Amazing, why didn't Bush have to go though this type of persecution for his 9/11 ? Papers on his desk, on vacation.. amazing..
Sergeant Moshuluu, as for your statement, " I explained what happened in Benghazi is no more important than my 21 year old Privates dying on the battle field...." As a matter of fact, it IS more important than 1 or 10 or 100 or even 1000 of "your" privates dying on the battlefield. The reason is simple: the AMBASSADOR was killed in the act of our embassy being overrun. Last time I checked, the US flag flew over that embassy before it was overrun, and the reason the US flag flies over that, or any other US embassy, is that we consider our embassies to be SOVEREIGN US SOIL, just the same as if it were your precious private's own mother's backyard. In that regard, the pillaging and plundering and murder that took place at the US Embassy in Benghazi is of INFINTE importance, and we should hunt down and annihilate the sons of dogs that did this, unto the ends of the earth and until the end of time. If you can't grasp the importance of "SOVEREIGN US SOIL," that's your problem. (Hint: It, and the flag which flies over it, and the constitution which governs it, are what you were supposed to be fighting for, sergeant.)
Hello folks, everyone on the planet knows what happened to America that day except Americans!
Even the Generals are speaking out now!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=T2XV3Edd2dc
I watched 9/11 happen live. It pissed me off to no end. I joined the Marines out of high school because I was a patriot, wanted to defend my country, and I even wanted revenge. I've done tours in Iraq and Afganistan (and going back). I was pissed obviously when we didn't find any WMDs. But I look back, I see a some what free people who can breathe a little easier and kids can smile. The fact that we relieved these people from a pimp dictator who used chemical weapons and beheaded his own, I believe it was worth it just as I believe the Civil War was worth free African Americans, even if we didn't find any WMDs.
The fact that liberals opposed the surge and wouldn't let us do our f*cking job, we could of been out of Iraq sooner. Obama ended the war in which he drastic measures to accredit himself. Anybody can end a war, but win it? When we were leaving we were all saying, "These guys (Iraqis) aren't ready to take control." Sure enough the whole country is going back up into chaos. NOW THAT IS A REAL WASTE OF AMERICAN LIFE!
When Bin Laden was killed Obama gave himself all the credit in his speech and in his campaign ("I ordered...I did this...I said...I...I...I") and hardly gave any credit to our SEALs! The guy talked sh*t like actualy pulled the trigger! And that for a fact pisses offed a ton of us. Then when it came down to Benghazi, nobody wanted to take credit for that one. 1st they lied about the situation, 2nd they shifted the blame back and forth, and 3rd they still don't know what the hell happend. What is painful enough is that they did not send help. Yeah you could argue that it would have never reached them on time but for Christ's sake you could have tried. If Obama said he did at least try and help the Americans down there he would have said so long ago. It sends a bad message as well, if your government didn't do anything to help our ambassador, they won't do anything for you if you got stuck.
The fact that Americans died in Iraq was fighting a dictaitor and restoring a country has good merit to it even if that was not our original intention. The fact that 4 Americans died because of the neglagence and iresponsiblity of this administration is terrible. The worse part is that they don't even seem to care about these people, they were almost like expendable assits.
And Moshuluu if Iraq pissed you off so much you should have just left. Because if there is one thing that pisses off people in the military so bad, and you probably do know, are for people to b*tch about what orders they had to follow (even after service and use militaristic terminology most civilians can't understand). I don't know how long you were contracted to serve, but long enough to earn some rankings...long enough that you could have left, but you choose not to. Respectfully I harbor no grudge with you and I thank you for your service.
Credible links ? Who in this day and age is credit worthy ? You cant trust anyone any more, and surely not trust people in office in our government.
The entire Benghazi incident has a lot more going on than we know. I still find it amazing that such a place is not on lock down after the attacks, that a news crew can just role up in there and take documents and journals from the place .. Sounds really fishy to me.
New emails show that the White House knew Al Qaeda-affiliated terrorists were responsible for the 9/11 attacks on our consulate in Libya within hours of the attack.
Reuters reports that the White House, including the Situation Room and the Executive Office of the President, and the State Department received information within two hours of the attack that a radical Islamic terrorist group claimed responsibility for the attack on our consulate in Libya that ultimately resulted in the murder of our ambassador and three other Americans. Fox News reports that this Islamic terrorist group, “Ansar al-Sharia has been declared by the State Department to be an Al Qaeda-affiliated group.”
The series of three emails spanned between about a half hour after the attack began and a little over two hours after it began. CBS News reports:
At 4:05 p.m. Eastern time, on September 11, an alert from the State Department Operations Center was issued to a number government and intelligence agencies. Included were the White House Situation Room, the office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the FBI.
"US Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack" -- "approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well. Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four COM (Chief of Mission/embassy) personnel are in the compound safe haven."
At 4:54 p.m., less than an hour later, another alert: "the firing... in Benghazi...has stopped...A response team is on site attempting to locate COM (embassy) personnel."
Then, at 6:07 p.m., State sent out another alert saying the embassy in Tripoli reported the Islamic military group "Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack"... "on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli."
The bottom line is that the White House knew within two hours that Al Qaeda-affiliated terrorist group Ansar al-Sharia publicly claimed responsibility for the attack. Yet, it continued for days to claim the attack was the result of spontaneous protests over an Internet video.
It is time for President Obama to tell the truth about what he knew and why he misled the American people for weeks about this terrorist attack that killed four Americans. Sign the ACLJ’s petition demanding the truth from President Obama.
Also
http://aclj.org/coverup-surrounding-the-benghazi-attack-sekulow
http://aclj.org/why-coverup-benghazi-attack
Benghazi is in the history books. This is how it is for ALL time for our children to read.
It was NEVER anything more than unhonorable desperate REPUBLICAN political theater from the beginning. ANY idiot could see that!
Victoria, justify it any way that helps you get through the night! If your sergeant told you to take out a school, mosque or church and wipe out a neighborhood would you do it?
Marmaduke... I hope you can understand the following.
Immediate information can be and usually is confusing after an attack. Details take hours or days or weeks to confirm. While that process is happening, naturally the press and the public want immediate answers. Making accusations that cannot be founded too soon after an attack is neither wise nor prudent.
Smart leaders take the time to assess all details before divulging information that might cause yet further breeches of security. In a cloak and dagger world, initial public responses often give less than full disclosure. It is the way the world works.
This administration follows these same rules of disclosure as those before it. Nothing new about this. Move along.
This sounds great. Until of course, you realize the Administration did not follow this logic. Had the whole fog of war argument been valid, then that is what they would have said up front. "We don't know yet" Simple words. Easy to say, and easy for most to understand. Instead the Administration chose to tell the American people that they did know what happened. The story about the video did not come out of thin air. It was pushed as as a basis for the attack. It was pushed on Day 1. Pushed on Day 5 and pushed two weeks later at the UN.
Contrary to everything that came out in hours and days after the attack, the video was pushed as the reason.
Why?
I actually sleep very well thank you for your consideration! And of course I have no idea what you are talking about in, "If your sergeant told you to take out a school, mosque or church and wipe out a neighborhood would you do it?" and I fail to see any meaning in you question other than stupidity. Either that or you are just sick minded kid.
I am a woman after all and all though I don't directly fight in combat (or kill civilians as you might think we do) I have engaged hostiles before. Yes, I've dealt with and seen death up close. Can't exactly confirm killing insurgents because we don't run over to the dead body, check it out, and say, "I got one!" but I know they didn't get up.
Hillary kicked ass and Rand Paul mead himself into an ass. The fool needs to stop bringing anything Glen Beck says int any senate discussion.
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=521060981247467&set=vb.62507427296&type=2&theater
Brian... I have NEVER seen or heard ANY administration say "We don't know yet". If you have, please quote an example. Again, it is simply not the way governments respond to crises.
Bigger
I'm pretty sure the facility in Benghazi was a Consulate, not an Embassy. Consulates are much smaller, deal with entirely different affairs than an Embassy, and are not necessarily permanent. And as for the idea that Embassies are considered sovereign, from wiki:
Contrary to popular belief, diplomatic missions do not enjoy full extraterritorial status and are not sovereign territory of the represented state.[5][6] Rather, the premises of diplomatic missions remain under the jurisdiction of the host state while being afforded special privileges (such as immunity from most local laws) by the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. Diplomats themselves still retain full diplomatic immunity, and (as an adherent to the Vienna Convention) the host country may not enter the premises of the mission without permission of the represented country. The term "extraterritoriality" is often applied to diplomatic missions, but only in this broader sense.
Since it took a US subcontractor years to incinerate all the chemical weapons that were secured during interdiction assaults on weapons depots I am confused at the no WMD's thing.. We know he had them because he bragged about using them on the Kurds.. Seems a whole lot of uranium was spirited out of the war zone as well.. Could be someone covering up a trillion dollar heist perpetuated on the people of Iraq.. And you thought we went there for the oil?? Ha Ha Ha ....
The compound where the Ambassador was killed was being used by the CIA to distribute weapons to Islamists rebels.. Seems they were handing out Russian made man portable anti aircraft rockets from the captured Libyan ammo dumps.. I just can't wait till some jihadist decides to use one on a US airliner or military aircraft.. Bet the government will have a great story to tell and a new war to get us into.. Politicians lie and the CIA lies but when they do it to the American people it is called treason.. It is always about the money.. I think the question of a White House cover up seemed fair since they threw a blanket over Fast and Furious and called it a Presidential privilege.. If I was in the $hit I would be pissed to find out our government was giving squish heads like these jihadists weapons and money.. Remember Osama was a CIA spook before they made him a big time bad guy.. Look at the photos of the WTC steel pillars glowing with molten metal like someone used thermite on them..
The cover story of the insulting film even had Obama saying we should not say insulting things about Muslims and there was talk of making a law against it.. Although I am not sure what Obama said about that but I think it came thru the UN..
Since Hillary blames lack of funds and oversight we know no denied requests were made to the host country or they would have spewed that fact in a second.. It is all deflection and the Patomic 2 step because we do no deserve the real truth.. Oh wait lies like that would be treason I keep forgetting that fact..
Quote - Dick Cheney
YashBudini - Thank you for reminding us about Dick "Who, Me?" Cheney...
By the way, the voters of Kentucky must be right proud of the dolt they elected U.S. Senator.
Every day, Senator Rand Paul makes the choice to wear quite possibly the world's worst comb-over, or, he just combs his hair like some sort of squirrel or rat nest. Either way, it definitely is a sign of very impaired reasoning. Therefore, he has zero credibility.
9-11 will always be on our minds. An attack of such magnitude will not be forgotten. I think we handled it poorly. We did better with Pearl Harbor. At least we went after the right country. Iraq was not the ones who did it. We took forever to go after Afghanistan. Many of the hijackers were Saudis, if I recall. We never went after them. If it had been the 1940's we'd have handled it much better.
For all you ignorant posters on this blog when it comes to WMDs in Iraq...Simply do search on....Bush lies nation into Iraq war......see hundreds of websites debunking and showing proof how Bush Cheney and team lied about WMDs to start the war....YES the nation bought the lies ....Yes the wrld bought the lies....until they investigated....so posting there were WMDs in Iraq that Bush was trying to protect us from ...has been totally debunked as lies....Deliberate lies......Anyone who says different is either totally ignorant...or lying.....
Go ahead, show which one you are if you post anything but Bush Cheney lied nation into Iraq war and are responsible for thousands of needless deaths.....
Victoria...sorry you were one of the duped people because of Bush lies nation into Iraq war....but you need to quit watching Fox news on everything. Obama did not take credit...his speeches thanks all of those involved...and over and over......Change your damned news source and get educated on everything you posted.
starsailing
I am still waiting for Obama to live up to his promises. As far as your comment on Bushwack and party, in the words of Hilary, "get over it". You talk about lies all the time in your post but never mention the ones that your lord and savior the Great Obama Lincoln has made.
As far as WMD's in Iraq there were at one time, be cause we GAVE them to them. This is what is called BLOW-BACK and it is from all parties and goes back to the 50's. The result of all your Kings drone attacks will be more blow-back from pissed off Muslims.
Let's keep things in perspective. The Benghazi attack was just one of 13 U.S. embassy and consulate attacks that have have happened since 2002.
When G.W. Bush and Dick Cheney sat in the White House, there were 9 attacks on U.S. Embassies and U.S. Consulates abroad. Out of 39 total recorded attacks on U.S. embassies and U.S. consulates since 1926 to the present day, that's the most amount of attacks that have occurred with the most amount of Americans killed during just one Administration.
2002 US consulate bombing in Karachi, 10 died.
2004 Tashkent embassy bombings, 2 dead, 9 injured.
2004 Jeddah consulate attack, 8 dead.
2006 Damascus terrorist attacks, 1 dead.
2007 Embassy of the United States in Athens, grenade thrown.
2007 Foiled attack on U.S. Embassy in Austria
2008 2008 Serbia protests, Embassy set on fire.
2008 United States consulate in Istanbul attack, 3 perps dead with 3 policemen dead.
2008 American Embassy attack in Yemen, 10 dead.
During the Obama Administration (so far):
2011 Syrian uprising, rioters blocked by Marines.
2011 Kabul Attacks, 7 allies dead with 19 wounded, 9 insurgents dead.
2012 U.S. Consulate attack in Benghazi, 4 dead.
2012 Attack on the American Embassies in Yemen and Egypt, 28 rioters wounded.
...so why are members of the GOP and their Tea Party brethren making such a nationwide, conspiracy theory fuss, blaming Americans, over this one tragedy at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi that was attacked by Middle Eastern terrorists?
What about the rest of the overseas attacks against our consulates, embassies and barracks that claimed the lives of a lot more Americans and our allies, that happened under the Republican Administrations of Reagan, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr.?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_attacks_on_diplomatic_missions
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/13333916-number-of-embassies-attacked-during-the-bush-years-before-benghazi-many
When it comes to Benghazi I think we will find (if the classified briefs are released to the public), that this was a vey active CIA operation and that the small embassy staff should not have come in until after the reassessment of the operation was done. But because the CIA doesn't have to communicate all that well with the State Department during an active operation (it falls under the DOD) the State Department could not give fair warning not to go in.
We, the US, have in the past, and to some extent today, used the CIA to go into these countries and start/ support these uprisings to advance our interests.
I would have liked to have heard from the CIA director and the DOD more over the State Department about what was actually happening when all of this went down, and why they didn't warn the State Department of their activity so that the message could have gotten to the embassy staff.
I see what Mrs. Clinton did as taking one for the team so that the DOD & CIA didn't have to come out from behind the cloak.
Obama's Latinos
Comments reported as inflammatory & No value
I guess they want you to IGNORE the Mexicans that are taking over American neighborhoods.
When the media reports stories. They should include relevant facts like Desert Storm. This was a prior attack on Iraq before 9/11. The borders have never been secured and more people have crossed the border in record numbers since 9/11. Why haven't Homeland Security not been able to prevent attacks in public places and schools? That was the stated purpose when it was formed. None of the laws and agencies created would stop terrorists from commiting acts evidently. The bigger question is how have they stopped all terrorist attacks in US have they or do they know who they are?
bob-2476682
They haven't been able to stop all...But they are doing a pretty good job of identifying those people that would do terrorist activities....Recently the shoe bomber, Portland Oregon plot, under-ware bomber, plot to blow up the federal reserve bank.
I think they have a pretty good idea of who to watch, as we haven't seen any large terrorist activities take place in the US thus far.
As far as Desert Storm...That was nothing more than trying to prevent Iraq from slant drilling and taking over Kuwait as well as keeping a dictator in line, which I might add should have been taken out long before he was.
BS debate on 911. You need to ask WHY 911 happened. The answer was and is very simple - these were people who believed their land is occupied and they did what they thought was "attacked back". So what did neocons and far right did? They went and occupied another country - Iraq - that had nothing to do with 911.
Brilliant!! Now wait for another 911 at some point of time. It's all good business for war industry though because then they will sell more bombs, planes, guns and what not.
Stupid Americans don't understand Obama actually did a favor to this country by getting out of Iraq ASAP. This way he is not only saving good money going after bad - he is actually reducing the risk of another 911.
All those concerned about Ben Gazi - why don't you hold another hearing on 911 and Iraq invasion. All these far right neocons are the real terrorists.
I think this falls under the ATF not Homeland Security.
Victoria
If that's what you see, you're hallucinating, lady.
You better take another look, with the blinders off.
When is the Republican party going to stop with all their dog and pony shows ("Witch hunts") and start with a real investigation, starting with GWB and slick cheney going before congress and lying to get us into the Iraq war that killed thousands !!!
I'm more concerned about the Blacks, Jews, Irish and Italians taking over American neighborhoods. Oh, I'm sorry that news article was written some years ago. I'll try to be more current with the national monopolization of neighborhoods.
seaskip
I think the better question is when will Bush & Cheney go to the Hague and face the war crimes charges.
@Dick - very wise comment. Many readers - I am afraid - may miss the subtlety of it though. At different points of time - there always have been fears that XYZ is taking over American neighborhoods and every new immigrant group becomes that XYZ at some point of time!
A little bit of poetic license:
"Ultimately with your leaving (the White House), you accept the culpability for the worst tragedy [9/11] since Pearl Harbor, and I really mean that,” Paul told G W Bush"
Of course Paul didn't say that, but would he have had he been in the Senate at the end of Bush's 2nd term, I sincerely doubt it? Paul is symbolic of the hypocrisy of today's new, improved GOP/TP, they accuse others of being divisive when their own rhetoric borders on incendiary bullcrap. The GOP, if it is to survive, needs more reasonable, moderate leaders like Huntsman, Brown and Christie, and fewer dipsticks like Paul, Cantor and Ryan.
Good post! Looks like the GOP was not only masters of distraction of 9/11 but these too.
Paul Rand is an idiot saying Benghazi is the worst tragedy since 9/11. He may as well say a sore toe is the next worse thing to breast cancer. I never understood why people believed Bush II and now they are soaking up Rand's BS.
All this talk about Ben Gaze where 4 American deaths took place. Why? I keep asking myself "Why" when it comes to 9/11 as well! (4deaths compared to 3,200) The bushwhacker was sent many security concerns about foreigners getting pilot training and warnings from the Internet. He, It, whatever you want to call GW Bush, ignored them all. Funds hadn't been cut like they were by Congress for Security at our embassies like it was in Libya. I hope it never goes away and that bush get arrested for his War Crimes by the Hague! The arrant is already out there and that is why the coward hides in Crawford, Texas! Use the arrest warrant darn it!
9/11 will never be forgotten by the politicians. It was the event that turned the minds of our people to mulch. The only way that they will let go of the thing will be when the people here awaken from the nightmare and stop the garbage they are doing in Washington.
Bush's Stupidity and 9/11 will always be burnt into our minds!
All this talk about the Benghazi attack misses one important point. The Ambassador and entire embassy staff accepted a position in a foreign country known to have groups hostile to the United States. The risk of attack is a constant in such an environment. Having a great sense of duty, they were aware of and accepted this risk. Not so with the children and teachers in Sandy Hook Elementary School. They were guaranteed a safe environment to learn about the wonders this world offers. Which is the bigger tragedy? It's time we learn to work together to advance, not only America, but the world to a place where we can live together and work as a team.
clwyd, that is complete BULLSPIT!!
The Bush Administration only had vague, undefined information that Al Qaeda wanted to strike inside the United States.
The CIA did have some prior knowledge that a couple of the 19 terrorists involved in the first 9/11 attack had overstayed their visas. However, since the CIA can't operate inside the United States, it would have been up to the FBI and Immigration to investigate and take action.
Unfortunately the CIA wasn't ALLOWED to share information with the FBI and the other government agencies.
You see, during the Clinton Administration, the Justice Department, under Janet Reno, had instituted a "wall of separation" between the agencies because they didn't want any possible CRIMINAL prosecutions of terrorists to be "tainted" by association with the CIA. So, no sharing of intelligence was possible.
BTW, the AUTHOR of that bit of insanity was the number two guy at the Justice Department and present Obama butt-buddy, Eric Holder.
GWB Jr. had all the information on his desk from the CIA that Aeroplanes would be used as bombs by Al Qaeda in the U.S.A., sometime around 9/11, the rest is history !!!
So basically some of you are saying that because the CIA did not communicate some information and that the National Security was not clear that It was terrible for BenGaze to take place, but OK for 9/11???? the same d2mn things took place in both cases, but in one 4 people died and int he to her 3,200. Which was worse? That is B. S. right back at you!
Bush will always be a war criminal and scum to me!
Brian, the more you talk, the deeper that hole you're standing in gets.
The terrorists win if we keep up this charade of paranoia and continue to limit our own freedoms. We'd do best to pull back from the international seen a bit.
clwyd-2621393
Your right on point......This is why their party is in shambles...lie, cheat and try to rewrite history & above all distort facts.
"GWB Jr. had all the information on his desk from the CIA that Aeroplanes would be used as bombs by Al Qaeda in the U.S.A., sometime around 9/11"
Sometime around 9/11 huh? What's your source on that? This story just gets more and more embellished with each retelling.
TheDman113
excerpts from 9/11 report
He is correct.
DOD MUST be targeted for spending cuts. There is no reason, no reason at all that we need to spend the amount we do. No reason to spend almost 5 times the amount of the next country and more than the next 20 some countries combined, no reason at all. Defense equals over 1/5 of our total spending, and unlike any other programs, it seems to go up year after year automatically.
There is no money to be made in this modern version of war, none at all. Think of the people that could get back to work if we cut that defense budget in half (which would still have us spending over twice as much as the next country and more than the next 10 countries combined). Imagine if that was money was used in infrastructure improvements, energy generation (nuclear, wind etc), and of course social programs and scientific research. 350+ billion dollars would go a LONG ways to make us a great country again. OR, it could just go to paying down our countries debt...
CUT DEFENSE SPENDING AND BRING IT HOME!
Are all these folks so upset about Benghazi the sames ones who were so upset when all those Marines in Beirut were killed under Reagan's watch? Or maybe because Australian Murdoch didn't own FOX news there wasn't such a fuss. But Reagan was a Republican (switch-hitter) and FOX doesn't point out GOP disasters so it wouldn't have mattered. Benghazi was terrible. But just a short walk down memory lane will expose much worse that was investigated less.
Thank you Steve,
I doubt theDman will read it or believe it! FOX viewing propaganda does that to you you know!
nonPar, Remember FOX"s claim to being "Fair and Balanced!" LOL!
nonPar, Remember FOX"s claim to being "Fair and Balanced!" LOL!
They need to give it a rest, cancel the Patriot Act and disband Homeland Security.
If they were truly concerned about another 9/11 type attack here on our soil they would not leave the Southern border wide open.
Either we have a concern about security, or we don't. Fish or cut bait, Washington. This half assed "security" you're claiming you are doing for the sake of American citizens is nothing but a choke hold on the lives of the people live here, and do nothing to hinder those who don't.
Steve, I didn't see in your excerpt where it said the warning mentioned an attack would occur sometime around 9/11. Could you please highlight it for me?
The ATF is a part of and under the umbrella Homeland Security as is every other department. Public law 107-296; 116 stat.2139.Read the Homeland security law and you will understand all information, technologies, and every aspect of your life can be controlled and monitored with out your consent. It is 187 pages long and the introduction of the right to protest bill HR347 amended to make it easier to curtail dissension by protesters. The one and only thing Homeland security does is in paragraph 5 of 116 stat. 2146. They work for the elite and gather information, what they do with that information is another story. Do a little research into the capability of the GRID system. Start in England, that is an Island country. NOTE: I do not believe you can copy file from US government site.
http://www.dhs.gov/homeland-security-act-2002
P.S. Also all those men in that embassy are eligible for the Johnny Micheal Spann Patriot Trust benefit.
I'm a registered Republican but even I am willing to accept the fact that the Bush family orchestrated the 9/11 attacks to kill several birds with one stone.
1. The owner of the buildings was about to have to remove all the asbestos from all the WTC buildings and the job would have cost more than the buildings were worth to him. (And I find it incredibly interesting how the owner had taken out a $7billion insurance policy earlier in 2001 protecting against terrorist attacks, of all things, as well as the other, standard, coverages)
2. In WTC Bldg.#7 the Ernst&Young accounting records for Enron were stored. The same accounting records that had just been subpoenaed by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. The same records that would have implicated many in that present administration of complicity. And Bldg.#7 was not hit by an aircraft nor did either of the 2 towers fall on it. (Many first responders reported seeing explosive blasts from both towers and bldg.#7 inconsistent with a simple collapse)
3. The Bush family needed reason to escalate US military involvement in Iraq to secure their oil interests in the Middle-East. Remember the explosion in the parking garage basement of the WTC in February of 1993? Though that happened during the Clinton administration do not forget that GHW Bush was still fuming mad because Clinton made him a 1 termer and disrupted his NWO plans. Do not forget that GHW Bush was also head of the CIA under Reagan, at a time when the CIA established the Al Qaeda and enlisted the son of a long-time family friend to the Bushes, Tim Osman, AKA Osama Bin Laden.
4. Remember the first action in Iraq under GHW Bush. He gave Saddam Hussien the nod to invade Kuwait and when Saddam did, he turned on him and initiated a police action against Saddam and his Imperial Guard and their military, because war was never declared. Ron Paul exposed that lie on the floor congress how Saddam asked April Glaspie, US Ambassador to Iraq, for permission to take his war prize that had been promised him had he defeated Iran. Glaspie gave him the nod as she had been instructed to do. GHW Bush, never expecting that Saddam and Iraq would succeed against Iran, then reneged on his agreement.
5. The Bush family and their business associates, especially those involved with Halliburton, saw this as an excellent opportunity to broaden their scope and line their pockets.
Bottom line is the entire Bush family and Cheney and Rumsfeld and a few others, should all be in prison right now.
On a final note, I find it very convenient that Cheney was in command of NORAD the day of September 11th, 2001, running "wargames", and had issued a "stand down" order of all military aircraft across the entire United States.
Latinos, Thank you for the "History According to Fox News" First, Desert Storm was BEFORE Bill Clinton was President. 9/11 may have been retaliation for Desterst Storm, but to claim that Bill Clinton was President before GHWB shows how ignorant you are about the subject you claim to know so much about.
1. Only one building had asbestos, and only 1/3 of the way up. And he wasn't going to have to remove any of it.
2. Yes, the best way to get rid of documents is to blow up the building that they are in. Makes sense.
3. Insane (and incorrect) rambling.
4. See number 3.
Final note: also incorrect.
Mr. Starsailing,
1st I did mention, "I was pissed obviously when we didn't find any WMDs." ergo I'm not trying to cover a mistake or lie. (maybe I didn't stress that part hard enough)
2nd a) I don't watch Fox News or much less any other news media solely because they all have thier own baises and so full of their own BS (conservative or liberal). b) in the millitary we don't watch news...although we do try and keep up with the sports :) c) I don't need the media to tell what is going on on the ground simply because I am already there fighting. And yes I am educated, not because I watch TV like you and believe everything I hear and see, but because I have spent the past 7 yrs in the field. (Its like I'm a doctor and your telling me I don't know what surgery is.)
3rd Please don't make the assumption that I am a right wing extemist or something because I simply am not.
4th Yes, Obama gave himself way too much credit for the death of Bin Laden "and over and over" like you say. And I am not saying this because I don't like him.
Mr. Patter123,
"But I look back, I see a some what free people who can breathe a little easier and kids can smile. The fact that we relieved these people from a pimp dictator who used chemical weapons and beheaded his own..."
I did stress that they are some "somewhat free" pointing out free from a dictator. Ofcourse I can't say that are totally free. They're whole government is in shambles, sunni and shiite muslim are killing eachother, terrorism is still at an all time high, etc. I also think you fail to see any good in helping people.
And maybe you didn't bother to read a little further (or you had your blinders on unfortunately) but I also said:
"When we were leaving we were all saying, "These guys (Iraqis) aren't ready to take control." Sure enough the whole country is going back up into chaos."
So...please read right the first time so I don't have to be repetative.
Thank you sirs!
Lynard can't deal with facts about Bush/Cheney so he does the usual name calling.....NO THERE WERE NO WMD"S IN IRAQ WHEN BUSH TEAM MADE UP THE LIE INTO WAR...Too tough to do Bush lies nation into war search huh ....LYNNIE!!!!! Try doing a search on Colin Powell then...he had a lot to say about being lied to......still does.....BUSH THE WAR criminal......still loved by lyn....even though Bush killed thouands of our troops and wounded thousands more...for glory and war profits......great morals Lyn!!!!!
Hey Hillary Babette, what are you doing with that Morsi Muslim Garbage in Egypt? Waiting that the Arab/Idiot spring turns into summer or just waiting to get away from that hot potato?
I'd like to correct my only mistake in my earlier post. GHW Bush was Director of the CIA under Ford and then briefly under Carter and advised Carter on setting up the Al Qaeda, and was Reagans VP, my bad. Everything else is irrefutable regardless of what DMAN says is "Righter". :D
But in all reality, Obama is just a Bush family lackey through the Skull and Bones affiliation, a brotherhood that only ends with death.
No Todd, bush is just scum! Plain and simple!
Different day, same damn liars
So glad to see the future death of the republican party is mirrored in the Rassmussen Poll that Teabuggers now are only 8% of voters, down from 24%. Also, that only 30% now look on the teabuggers favorable. They are the uncompromising and non-negotiating part of the republican party. In their own words, "Tread On Them!"
Todd - I already refuted it all. Sorry. Screaming that it's irrefutable doesn't make it any righter.
The Daman113, Your refute sucked!!!!!!!!!
Moshuluu, isn't it amazing how the usual suspects around here will attack you and denigrate your service simply because you don't tow the GOP line and think Obama's a Muslim dictator? You mean a person can be a military veteran AND think Obama's doing a fine job as President? You don't say...
A heartfelt "Thank you" for your service, and thank you for your posts. Keep up the good work...
Foolishness abounds wrote:
The Bush Administration only had vague, undefined information that Al Qaeda wanted to strike inside the United States.
The CIA did have some prior knowledge that a couple of the 19 terrorists involved in the first 9/11 attack had overstayed their visas. However, since the CIA can't operate inside the United States, it would have been up to the FBI and Immigration to investigate and take action.
Unfortunately the CIA wasn't ALLOWED to share information with the FBI and the other government agencies.
Your post is total bs. How do you know what Bush knew before 9/11? You don't know squat. Do you think Bush would admit that Russia gave him specific information on how, when, and where 9/11 would take place? All you think you know, you got from listening to Fox and Rush.
The CIA not being allowed to share that kind of information is patently ridiculous. Again, too much Fox. Do you think if you had such information that America was about to be attacked, you would lose your job if you shared your knowledge with the FBI? Even if I though i would lose my job and be thrown in prison, I would make sure the FBI knew what I did.
The FBI had Zacarias Moussaoui, the alledged 20th hi jacker in custody. He was taking flying lessons in Minnasota. The agent in charge, Colleen Rowley, pleaded with her superiors, including FBI director, Robert Mueller, in Washington to look in his computer. The permission was denied. She also delivered a copy of the letter to Mueller, to Richard Shelby R and Diane Feinstein D. Same type of information, still no action. No one was reprimanded. An edited version was printed in Time magazine.
The CIA had all kinds of surveillance on those guys, including wire taps and human. Our government is monitoring the posts on these forums. They sure as hell didn't miss the hi jackers. The Mossad was living next door to them where ever they went. The hi jackers were not brain surgeons. They were the same type of clowns we have been catching all the time since 9/11. Without the US intentionally looking the other way and ignoring people like Agent Rowley, they would have been caught long before 9/11.
Makes sense to me. Considering that Benghazi happened on...9/11 perhaps?
But really, just a coincidence. Nothing to see here folks. Just a spontaneous mob reacting to a video (three months after the video was posted, I might add).
Besides, what difference at this point does it make?
Gosh, I don't remember Bush or Cheney falling on their swords after their MASSIVE FAIL to stop the original 9/11. GOP demagoguery, pure & simple, that's the difference.
"President Bush's daily intelligence briefings in the weeks leading up to the September 11 terror attacks included a warning of the possibility that Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network would attempt to hijack a U.S.-based airliner, senior administration officials said Wednesday."
Maybe, But at least Bush did something about it. Here we are 4 months after the fact and nothing has been done except to twist the truth, stall and hope to ignore.
4 months after 9/11, we had overthrown the Taliban.
Bush sat on his ass reading "My Pet Goat" while the nation was under attack....deer in the headlights...talk about revising history....Then the first action he takes is to get all of Bin Laden's family out of the United states without any intel done on them or their phones etc......Ya brian ...Bush did something and that something was everything wrong that could go wrong!!!!
Then Romney hires the same band of criminals to run his office.....DOH! Heaven help us if he became president with Bush's war criminals.....
I thought that was Clinton wasnt he the first one who could have got OBL? I happen to think Bush not running out of the classroom scaring the hell out of those children was a smooth move. There was no need for him to cause a panic there.
and our PREZ (bush43) said let me alone I have only 3 more pages to read, then I'll listen to you.....the wars he got us into were revenge for his fathers blunders at war
It's called FEARMONGERING!!! And you people are the SHEEP that get HERDED around by the REP/DEM song and dance while they pick your pockets CLEAN until you VOTE THEM ALL OUT! Wake up people....
Keep in mind the dems voted for that war he couldnt have done it without them. That would have been unconstitutional.
"President Bush's daily intelligence briefings in the weeks leading up to the September 11 terror attacks included a warning of the possibility that Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network would attempt to hijack a U.S.-based airliner, senior administration officials said Wednesday."
What he was presented with was a mass of unrelated, unconnected dots. So you're suggesting having security checks at every boarding gate at every airport every day at that time.
Considering that you piratically have that now, it seems quite possible you could have had it then. Specifically since we have no imminent threats now, but we did have one then.
But then we would not be closer to a police state with Homeland Security armed with machine guns and a few million rounds of ammo.. Since the Patriot act gave them the freedom to operate without a search warrant and to detain with out protection of the Miranda act guess we are there now.. The President can turn off the Internet and broadcast TV and radio.. He also can control food and fuel and transportation and medical.. Wow are we screwed if he says there is a homeland emergency..
"talk about revising history....Then the first action he takes is to get all of Bin Laden's family out of the United states without any intel done on them or their phones etc."
Revising history indeed! All of Bin Laden's people left on commercial flights, after the flight ban had been lifted, and voluntarily submitting to interviews from the FBI.
DMNAN...you don't know your history do you!!!
Bin Ladens were friends of the Bush family......lot of photo ops out there showing it......frienemies huh? Bush gets intel on Bin laden trying to crash planes in America and here the family is all over the U.S.....then they get to leave.....if innocent...why did they leave the U.S.?
None of us know the true history of 9/11/2001, because it has never been properly investigated. No subpoena power, no witness protection program power, and no security clearances for investigators, means NO TRUTH can be arrived at or obtained.
9/11/2001 has become a national Rorschach ink blot blood trail test. Because it was never allowed to be properly investigated, people who don't know much about it, see what they believe to be the "right" Patriotic answer, as reality.
9/11/2001 should never have devolved into a matter of FAITH, it should have evolved into a matter of FACTS and TRUTHS.
Patriot, another question that has tortured me since I saw the attack on the news. With four jet liners flying around the busiest air corridor in the world off their transponders, why were no fighter jets scrambled to at least escort them away from the city? I know the argument. What Air Force pilot would shoot at a commercial jet? After seeing the first tower in flames and another jet lining up on the other one, the question should be, "what pilot wouldn't shoot it down?"
Dman, I think you had better read that about bin Laden's family again. After the attacks, a jet flying bin Laden family members out of the United States was the ONLY non military aircraft allowed aloft, and that was BEFORE bin Laden was publicly connected with the attack. Also, it's amazing that the ID's of all the hijackers was known long before the passenger lists were available. Much more reason to question government implication in the Trade Center and Pentagon attacks than Benghazi.
No, maybe you better read about Bin Laden's family again and quit believing stuff you see in Youtube videos:
snopes dot com slash rumors slash flights dot asp
Here it is because I know you guys aren't smart enough to type that URL:
"At least 13 relatives of Osama bin Laden, accompanied by bodyguards and associates, left the United States on a chartered flight with Ryan International Airlines (Ryan International Flight 441) eight days after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, according to a passenger manifest released on July 21, 2004. The passenger list was made public by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), who obtained the manifest from officials at Boston's Logan International Airport. None of the flights, domestic or international, took place before the reopening of national airspace on the morning of Sept. 13 and the 9/11 Commission found "no evidence of a political intervention".
"The 9/11 Commission found that the "FBI conducted a satisfactory screening of Saudi nationals who left the United States on charter flights. The Saudi government was advised of and agreed to the FBI's requirements that passengers be identified and checked against various databases before the flights departed. The Federal Aviation Administration representative working in the FBI operations center made sure that the FBI was aware of the flights of Saudi nationals and was able to screen the passengers before they were allowed to depart."
JOHN,much more reason? then benghazi? much more reason FOR looking at benghazi,our government LIES people,dem or repub(you're in fantasy land if you think they don't) and tired of this fox news @!$%# anytime someone disagrees with your(leftist) views. i don't have faux news(as i will not pay for cable) and ONLY have democrat owned news agencies in my area(i can still SEE the AGENDA THOUGH) they did know-clinton did know-they CHOSE not to send steven help,why? 7 months people= clinton KNEW AND LIED,why? why for two weeks were we told that?i even checked out this crappy "movie",why did they LIE? HIGHROLLA-they seem to leave out the fact that their democratic representation(mostly not all) supported this LIE of bushes,but fail to recognize(yet again)they are being LIED to by them about beghazi.
What he was presented with was a mass of unrelated, unconnected dots. So you're suggesting having security checks at every boarding gate at every airport every day at that time.
================================================
Israel has been doing that for a lot of years now, it's very effective.
"why were no fighter jets scrambled"
They were scrambled. They were flying a defensive perimeter around NYC after the initial crashes. Learn to operate Google.
Probably about 6 or 8 at the ready on the east coast. Not sure about the west. How many would you recommend?
the entire official story of 9/11 worries me. It doesn't add up. come on. does our gov't think we're stupid ?? Why does the rst of the world agree that we attacked ourselves that day. they run the story as if it were some law they passed, as if it did not matter who did it, us or them. and when i say them, could be any one of us on the "terrorist watch list"
When were they scrambled? Those planes were in the air as much as 4 hours after the first one went off transponders. Also, wasn't it Bush, when asked about Osama bin Laden, replied "I really don't give him much thought", pretty blase attitude about a person that murdered over 3000 American citizens in the capitol and the largest city in the world. Even the much hated Hillary Clinton never was that dismissive toward an enemy of her country.
"the entire official story of 9/11 worries me. It doesn't add up. come on. does our gov't think we're stupid? "
No, but I do.
"Why does the rst of the world agree that we attacked ourselves that day."
They don't.
"Those planes were in the air as much as 4 hours after the first one went off transponders."
Really? What's your source on this? Considering the Shanksville plane crashed at 10:03, you're saying the planes were in the air with transponders off at 6:00 am.
Rex, Your argument that all they had was unconnected dots makes no sense. When has an intelligence report ever said "so and so is going to attack you at such and such a time on this date", That's not how intel works. It's always made up of unconnected dots, and the job is to connect the dots before the attack happens. Some people are so FREAKING DUMB.
Might not have been four hours, but it was plenty long enough to scramble jets. Did you know that GHWB and a member of the bin Laden family were scheduled to have a business breakfast that morning in the Windows on the World restaurant? For some reason, they cancelled their meeting. Talk about luck.
Jets were scrambled. And I think your note about GHWB is about as correct as everything else you've posted this weekend.
22 of 26 supposedly were questioned by FBI, and 911 commission did not supply any proof of what was said or if really done....When 911 commission was sitting ....questions were not answered ....finally in order not to answer any more questions....Clark ...National Defense for Bush team...out of the blue fell on the sword for Bush several days later saying that he never contacted anyone above himself on the Bin Laden family getting free ride out of the natiuon...no more questions were allowed to be asked....end of story...EVEREYONE IN THE MEDIA KNOWS THE COVERUP.....Imagine. the Bin Ladens...personal friends and business partners of the Bush family...not having anything to do with flying them out of the nation...........aaaahahahahahahahahahha
Wake up people, these guys couldnt fly a Cessna.
starsailing - Ah, it's the typical truther tactic of dismissing any contradictory evidence as simply made up. Sorry, you lose. Aren't you already embarrassed enough that you didn't know they flew out after the flight ban had long been lifted?
"long been lifted" ? That's like saying that 9/11/2001 is "ancient" history. Why do you spend so much time and effort on line attempting to head off the groundswell for a real investigation into 9/11/2001? We will be happy to look into Benghazi and the birth certificate at the same time. All we need is subpoena power, witness protection power, and security clearance for the investigators. The things denied the previous investigators. The white-washers , like Keane and Hamilton and Zelikow.
You mean the GOP is STILL raping the corpses of Americans killed on 9/11, even though the year is different? You don't say....
As Sec Clinton said what difference does it now make if they were a bunch of people walking around and decided to kill some Americans. The most important thing is to find out what went wrong and fix it.
Rand Paul's disgusting comments to Ms. Clinton show that he is nothing more than a two bit misogynistic demagogue. The little prick is no Ron Paul, who at the moment probably wishes his son had a different last name.
Ms. Clinton should have said to Ron Paul "That is something you will not need to worry about Mr. Paul because there is not a chance in hell that you will ever be President."
You know a politician is on the right track when he makes a leftist jerk like "impractical" scream and rant.
Implacable Patriot: I couldn't agree more. "Newbie" idiot tea party jerk with a big mouth wanting to make a name for himself. Whatever happened to respectfully questioning someone, especially someone with the stature of Ms. Clinton. I really, really wanted to smack him upside the head--then give him a "timeout" in the corner for bad behavior so he could think about his actions like the 5-year-old smart alecky boy he really is.
Amused - Love your answer. My husband said the same thing! But you know, she has so much class that she remained dignified and did not even blink an eye. Best response she could have made--ignore him!
Rand Paul, first his father is not PROUD of him neither does he support him, Rand is a man that had to gather his own group of friends to give him conformation to be an optometrist.. his entire life has been a SHAM and one lie after another..had I been president I would have dismissed you immediately.. again showing is tight pink azz..
I don't have a problem with Rand Paul's statement to Hillary Clinton, but I am not carrying a team banner around. I support truth in government - which is an oxymoron, but I hold out hope. I understood Rand Paul's statement in this way:
Imagine your employer holding you accountable for not doing your job - and letting you go because of it. Your employer tells you they don't believe the situation happened because you did it on purpose, or that they felt your intent in any way was to cause harm. However, due to your lack of oversight in doing your job and in light of a terrible and avoidable outcome that transpired, the responsibility was ultimately yours. An independent panel agreed. And you, the employee agree to accept that responsibility. Based on that reasoning the company dismisses you.
That encapsulizes the bulk of Rand Paul's opening comments to Hillary Clinton as to what he would do if he had been the 'employer'.
Clinton's proper response to Rand Paul should have been,
"Senator Paul, no worries. If you were president, I sure as hell would not be your Secretary of State; and since you will never be president, I will not loose sleep over your opinion....."
But, She has much more class in one fingernail than the entire bunch of retard republicans on that committee, so she remained a professional.
Why do people, usually Republicans, keep referring to Bengazi as an embassy? It was not an embassy, it was a consulate. The embassy was in Tripoli. Embassies are protected far more than consulates, because that is where the Ambassador usually resides.
9/11 was a false flag event period! Only stupid people believe Osama Whatever was involved.
Bovine excretment jon.
Absolutely it was another false flag event! And equally laughable in this article is the delusion that it was the USA that was attacked in the War of 1812! I love historical revisionism!
Lets talk about the USS Liberty, The Gulf Of Tonkin, oh and Operation Northwoods... Some people want to believe their government could never do something bad to its own people, but when you look back in history governments do something bad to their own people ALL the time, what makes you thing the gang in Washington are any different?
How about the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments?
The Tuskegee syphilis experiment[1] was an infamous clinical study conducted between 1932 and 1972 in Tuskegee, Alabama by the U.S. Public Health Service to study the natural progression of untreated syphilis in rural black men who thought they were receiving free health care from the U.S. government.
How about the crap they did in Guatemala? These are perfect examples on how your Government feels and cares about you and others. This is what you trust? You trust this enough to turn in your guns? So in conclusion if they can do this to another human being then they can do anything. They have no remorse.
You couldn't be more right LynyrdSky. But most people refuse to belive the truth,they just belive what the goverment tells them. Like no new taxs.
LynyrdSky (great name by the way) - don't confuse people with reality, it confuses them as to what they are being told.
The fact of the matter is - our government is not the government of the "people", it is the government of the money that is behind them.
We have experimented on our own, killed our own, lied about how others died to make it a good story (Pat Tillman...until his parents found the truth), etc...to think that the government of the USA is telling the people of the USA the truth is ridiculous.
You are absolutely right Jon. NORAD just happened to be conducting exercises on 9/11,called OPeration Guardian Vigil, which was simulation a crash on an unnamed building. In addition, they were also conducting exercises with Canadian forces, called Northern Vigil. Quite a coincidence wouldn't you all say. The plane which hit the Pentagon, hit it more than 50 minutes after the hit on the WTCs, yet no intercept. Andrews Air Force Base is only minutes away by F16.
The exercises posted false blips on the screens of air traffic controllers, which made it impossible to distiguish targets.
All the WTCs, including, Bldg 7, which wasn't even hit, fell in controlled demolitions, which used nano thermite. See this video for information on the attacks. Bush and Cheney were definitely involved up to their eyeballs. Video is 43 minutes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_fp5kaVYhk
Here is one of Bldg 7 falling. No one can watch this without determining it was a controlled demolition. If one was rigged, all 3 were rigged. Enjoy, it is only a minute or 2 long!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5A3dW_gUwOg
iz don no boat u,bot iz beleevs eryting ma govmet tells ma iz shud,we heer in mayun lissen wut ar govmet tel uz we do.dey no wuts bets fer me un iz truss dem wid miz liif i does.iz tink mrs.clinton bee tullin uz da truud yessah! she wud nut ly to uz! un dis guy obama he liks uz, hedun sad so! we upeeyah un mayun tink he shud hav ar guns,i don uze dem aneewa,iz gots dose asalt stiks wid da hy pacitee roks iz uz(purtee gud tou!) iz tro a meen rok iz doz. lut dem polees un govmet ave doze, don nede dem do wee? ile till ave ma hy pacitee roks,dey don wan dem rite?
Rex - Your reply to Jon proved you are indeed, one of those st-id people. Only a fool could look at the evidence, which is readily available, all over the internet and in books, such as "Crossing The Rubicon" and not know that people in our government, including Cheney, not only looked the other way at the hi jackers plot, they took advantage by using it to further their own agendas. They used 9/11 to loot America.
To further prove my point, see video, where on the day before 9/11, where a plane hit the Pentagon, destroying records, Donald Rumsfeld in on video saying 2.3 trillion dollars is unaccounted for/missing.
Whoops - there went the evidence! Oh well.
The Pentagon sucks more money out of America than people realize. The Republicans want to continue Defense spending and cut Social Security.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU4GdHLUHwU -- Short video showing Rumsfeld.
I believe if the majority of the American people really knew the truth, especially the military, the people who arranged 9/11 would be dealt with harshly as war criminals and mass murderers (3000 dead in WTCs alone).
Short video Jim Marrs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-TLwK4_0g4&feature=related
No way! A truther wanting people to go watch a Youtube video! This has never happened before.
In the absence of any properly empowered investigative body, the public will do its best to fill in the blanks, (which shouldn't and wouldn't exist if properly investigated) and connect the dots on youtube. What other avenue for intelligent demonstrations and discussions of conflicting video evidence would you suggest? Just because youtube doesn't outlaw quackery, doesn't make everything on it fallacious. A discerning mind would understand that, dman
the fact that they said 9/11 is easily forgotten in this article makes it bull@!$%#.
Paul, you should get your facts straight. There were a dozen or more attacks on US Embassys during the Bush ADmin after 9/11 that killed dozens of people. Paul is an ideologue who neither understands history or the implications of his idiotic ideas. He should be dumped from Congress. If he would spell out his domestic policy beliefs or explain their impacts to his constituency, they would fire him.
Speaking of lying Right Wing pimps: Rand Paul thinks he is setting himself up to be President of these United States. First, he is not fit, nor will ever be fit, to be President of these United States; Second, he is not fit to be a United States Senator. He is a political fraud, religious fraud, moral fraud and fake patriot - and these a few or his "good" points....
One thing you can count on: Republicans of all stripes and at all levels (including Republican voters), projecting Republican incompetence, bigotry, racism, fascism, stupidity, hatred, political and personal deviation, , fake patriotism, fake religion, fake morals, corruption, lunacy, fanaticism (all types), etc, etc - onto the rest of the American population. In other words, their projections are just evidence that Republicans aren't fit to be in business or power.
Will4203 (#9):
You summed it up perfectly.
Bravo!
.
Heloooow. These guys couldnt fly a Cessna. These guys were supposed to be flipped out FUNDAMENTALISTS ?? They spent the night before meeting their maker getting drunk in a strip bar and paying for lap dances?????? WTFU We have been had, of course it was an inside job. 1000s of Architects, engineers and demolition experts said it was CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS. Enough, this country will not be free again until we form and maintain militias in every county in America. Without an organized opposition this will never be over because all these people understand is Absolute Brutal Force.
When is the America people going to say enough with Benghazi witch hunt the republican keep crying about.How many more million they are willing to spend. The security wasn't there cause they wouldn't fund for more security.Now they want to cry about Obama and Clinton when the blame comes right back to them for not providing the funds the was repeated ask for
Rick.... never argue facts with a Republican. It's like talking to a box of rocks.
Wrong!! Clinton herself went on record right after Benghazi stating that budget issues had nothing to do with the cut in security in Libya. She was adamant about that. Look it up. The crux of the Benghazi issue is that no military support was sent for a firefight that went on for hours. Why did our leaders fail to even try to send help to the men screaming for help? Who gave the order to "stand down"? It is ludicrous, pathetic and cowardly. We don't leave our troops at the mercy of the enemy. This is not a complicated issue. Someone gave the order. The order was wrong. The American public have a right to know. If the dough head congressmen would quit preening and posturing for the cameras and get down to the serious questions we might find out something.
The security was not there because Obama and Hillary denied requests for it. Hillary said that at no time was funding an issue.
You have a trip to make to deliver an item by a certain time. You are given money for food and gas. You have a nice dinner, a few drinks and leave a generous tip. You have 5 dollars left for gas. You run out of gas and do not make the delivery. Then you put the blame on not having enough money for gas.
LMAO
One of the Sane...I think the only person here with absolutely no brains is...ENVELOPE PLEASE...YOU!!!!!!!! Congrats!!!!
Actually the government release a report right before Hilary was to talk to the senate that there was no shortage of funds for more security. There was enough money and man power available to give them more security. If you watch Hilary she said she had not read most of the reports about the need for more security. That was when Paul said if he was her boss he would as for her to resign.
And now you're lying. It came out in last week's sworn testimony that funding was NOT adequate because the House was holding back funds - and NO Republican on the committee challenged that.
larajean84... I took a few moments to evaluate what your opinion of me meant to me.
I concluded it meant nothing. However, thank you for taking the time to make an ass of yourself by having no real debate with my assertions.
Why arent you talking about WHY THEY WERE THERE??? I'll tell you why our Ambassador was in the wrong place. He was brokering a gun deal between the US and AL Qaida. We need to WTFU. This aint our country anymore. The only way we're going to get it back is to ignore the left and ORGANIZE ORGANIZE ORGANIZE.
getmadstaymad-i can tell you're mad,and i can see you're right.my cousins and friends are doing that now in maine,anyone under fifty-five.we are practicing(target shooting) and have a "well regulated" militia forming.thank you,we have this end
Add Rand Paul to the growing list of Republicans who will never be President. He suffers from little man syndrome. I agree that Ron Paul and George HW Bush sometimes want to smack their sons in the mouth.
The biggest thing in my view is that we were told it was a reaction to a video. They even went as far as to lock the guy up and paid for ads on foreign tv apoliging for the video. When in fact even Ray Charles knew it was a terroist attack becasue it was on the anniversary of 9/11.
And why is that the biggest thing in your view? What actual difference does it make what the cause was? The administration could have come out and said it was a cover up by invading aliens looking to loot unobtainium from Gaddafi's skull, and the situation would be exactly the same.
At the time, there were several protests across the mideast coinciding with this event. To assume this was linked to those events wasn't a stretch of the imagination.
However, the cause of the event, in the scope of things, is the smallest point of concern.
Jason I personaly dont like being flat out lied to when in fact the adminstration knew the entire time what it was. Thats just my view I personaly didnt like the dems in congess voting for the war in Iraq either buts thats just my view as well. Well I would tend to say it was indeed a streech considering it happened on the anniversary of 9/11. In fact locking the guy up that made the video was a huge stecth in fact hes stll locked up. Another huge strech was paying for an ad in a foregin country to apoliges for the video.
Rolla, whether the film was the cause or not, it was made and distributed for one purpose and one purpose only. To inflame anti American sentiments in the muslim world. The promoters, director, and supporters should be prosecuted and jailed for their involvement, including the "koran burning minister" in Florida. Better still, they should be turned over to the Syrians, then we wouldn't have to deal with them anymore.
John have you forgotten that this American and we have freedoms geese dude we even have the right to choose to kill our own babies.
That's right, in a classroom while they're trying to get an education, which I see you didn't think was necessary.
john- you are advocating things that GO AGAINST our constitution,you are NO REAL AMERICAN if you believe we should give up this film maker, to who? i saw that crappy film and i assure you,noone watched that @!$%# of their own volition. if a muslim got upset at THAT film,they're as loony as you are,prosecute,ha. watch the damn film(don't say you have either or you wouldn't be spouting that crap),this is nothing BUT a cover-up. where are all of ghadafis' weapons? that doesn't concern you? i know the school shooting was bad,think about what these terrorists will be ABLE TO DO WITH GHADAFIS' ARESENAL. planes will be shot out of the sky now,thank obama for helping to overthrow ghadafi(none of OUR BUSINESS).
9/11 is pushed down our throats multiple times a day and will continue to be until the end of time.
That you feel it is "pushed down your throat" says everything that needs to be said about you.
Unknown, if that's how you feel, I will pray to God Almighty that if He allows my country to once again be visited with such an attack as that which occurred at the World Trade Center, may the next person you see jumping in desperation out of a 100-story window be your own mother, sister, or daughter.
If I had my way, every network would show the flaming towers every day as the introduction to the Evening News, with the word "REVENGE!" emblazoned across the screen. Your G.d. throat is not the only bodily orifice I'd like to see this shoved down, up, or into.
Gee Bigger, a total of one person, as I write this, approves of your comment. Is that you?
Don't think you need to pray to God to get it done. Just get yourself some expert Israeli demolition people, then hire some powerful Arab Sheik to drug up some of their ignorant people who wish to become martyrs, pick your group of buildings, and bring 'em all over. After the deeds done lay it on some Arab you don't like. Real simple. You can get away with it. Hell, most Americans will believe anything that looks, sounds, and smells ridiculous. Now, release the hounds of bullsh^t!
And the truth is,,, Iraq is Bush's war,, he ordered it He knew in advance the World trade Center would be bombed,,,, H e wanted it he got it and we have to live with it forever?
@Common Sense Joe#12.5: Long as people believe up is down, and inside out is not really outside in, I'm afraid we will. Damn shame too. Regards
Brian or Bigger - are you also that adament in your search of the truth of 9/11?
If you want to hear about it everyday and get "revenge" - you should want to know the truth and who to get said "revenge" against, cause if you think it's as simple as you've been told, you really don't pay attention.
Also, there were many terrorist attacks around the world before 9/11, but only one country retaliated by attacking a country that had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks, causing thousands of more deaths in an innocent country and made such incredible domestic changes in fear of it.
In case anyone remembers, Bush was looking for ways to justify attacking Iraq BEFORE 9/11. With the improved vision provided by hindsight, was it any wonder that the first thing he did was to attack a country that had 0 to do with the attack? I know the Repugs won't remember, they can't remember what they ate for breakfast.
"In case anyone remembers, Bush was looking for ways to justify attacking Iraq BEFORE 9/11."
Actually you're thinking of Clinton. He sent Madeline Albright on a tour around the country trying to drum up support for military action against Iraq, but she was booed.
Dman, was that from that pillar of knowledge and understanding, The Drudge Report? The Clinton transition team made it a point that Osama bin Laden was a threat and bore watching. The Bush administration ignored these and further warnings about Al qaeda. I know that in your bubble, all things bad come from Democrats, so I just think of the posts I put up here as brushing up on my typing and grammar. Have a nice life in your fantasy world.
No, that was from MSNBC, circa 1999. How do you know the Bush administration ignored him?
NOT IF WE SAY NO.
dman-he musta been "in on it",you do know how us repugs are,right? always putting the blame on dem dare dems. we are not free thinkers like ol' johnboy there. gotta say ol' johnboy ,you been brushing up, but that's about it,how about saying my american friend? or can you not disagree with someone and still regard them at the very least as a PERSON? repug=extreme left wing knucklehead,democrud=extreme right wing knuclehead. you extreme lefties have added ANOTHER REPUBLICAN VOTER TO THE LIST. i wil never vote dem again. seems the repubs are the only ones in congress right now WANTING TO DO OUR BUSINESS.
Bush reduced FBI counter-terrorism funding and priority.
I'm afraid that Rand Paul has a very selective and totally politically-oriented memory. The number of attacks on American diplomats and consulates during the Bush administration and the loss of life as a result of those attacks were considerably more than during the Obama/Clinton watch. I don't recall similar comments ever directed to then Secretary of State Donald Rumsfeld. This job is totally thankless and so open to Monday-Morning Quarterbacking I'm not surprised at Mr. Paul's sudden expertise and authority.
He (Rumsfeld) was Secretary of Defense, just in case you were wondering.
Liberals care little for reality and facts.
Rex... You misspelled Conservatives. However, Rumsfeld was indeed SOD, not SOS.
He was also FOS. You can decipher that acronym for yourself.
Ha, pot meet kettle:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_Channel_controversies
You're right Brian, he was Secretary of Defense. Why? He did serve in the US Navy, as an aviator for less than four years from 1954-1957. That was after receiving an NROTC scholarship. I thought at least six years was the required enlistment from ROTC programs. More important was his private sector history. He was president and CEO of G. D. Searle, a Pharmaceutical company, and was there to take part in the sale to Monsanto, who had gained a bit of notoriety for producing Agent Orange.
The people who carried out the attack on our embassy in Benghazi are some more of the same terrorists the Bush Administration created when they invaded Iraq.... the same terrorists they created that bombed a Madrid train station killing 300 people... the same terrorists they created that bombed a bus in London that killed 30 people.... the same terrorists they created that shot dead 14 soldiers at Fort Hood Texas. The Bush Administration.... the same lying Neocons who presided over 9/11 which was the worst terrorist attack in the history of our country.... the same people who supported the policies that caused our country to be attacked in the first place. The Republicans that supported the Iraq War need look no further than themselves to find who was responsible for the Benghazi.
Exactly, many people don't know, there was no al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), until the American-led invasion and occupation of Iraq. AQI is also known as al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia, is the Iraqi division of the international Salafi jihadi militant organization al-Qaeda. It is part of the Iraqi insurgency, and the group was founded in 2003 as a reaction to the illegal invasion of Iraq.
All of this can be found with a little research.
Yeah, the Middle East was full of nice, friendly people until then.
No, dman, but Saddam, while he was a very bad man, had no ties to A-q, not because he was against terrorism, but because he wouldn't allow any competition in his country. Iraq was his private domain and he didn't allow others to access any of the power that he considered to be his right. Actually, removing Saddam was the most destabilizing thing we could have done. The enemy you know is better than the one that's hidden.
you're right about that "enemy you know" john,too bad obama helped remove ghadafi,now these terrorists have easy access back and forth and a strategic land location opened wide for them,we should thank obama for egypt AND libya. it's not like they were our allies or something,right?
Over 4000 Americans dead, over 30.000 without arms or legs, 500.000 men, women and children murder for oil, over 3 million people displaced and Bush/Chaney still walking free and enjoining the millions of dollars they raked in.....
And the Republicans do not seem to have a problem with any of this ?
Hypocrites !!
Exactly, explain that to Brian-2822589, since he seems to believe the 4 killed in Benghazi are more important than the thousands of Soldiers killed in Iraq, not to mention the Military casualties, and civilian losses.
No need to explain. I didn't realize the State Department was at war with Libya. Thanks for the correction. Certainly Clinton didn't think it was war, or her Assistant Sec State Charlene Lamb would never have been authorized to pull the 16 man security detachment from protecting the Ambassador. Strange considering the DoD was picking up the tab for the security contingent and Amb. Stevens had expressly requested they stay in place. You might want to fire off a memo to Mrs Clinton and let her know one doesn't normally do that during wartime.
All because "Junior" wanted to show Daddy that he was in fact "Presidential Material." Daddy knew best. That is why he stopped at the gates during Desert Storm.
You're losing.
Benghazi (Libya) = Conflict, not War!!!! I understand the two (conflict, war) are interchangeable, but America is not at war with Libya, therefore, any American in a nation at "conflict/revolution," is in danger, Stevens knew that, throughout the Libyan revolution he stayed in country. He knew the dangers. Get over it....
Are you Rand Paul?
No....let's take this slow for the thinking impaired (Here's to you Moshuluu).
I appreciate you making my point. Yes, Libya was a tense conflicted place. If you know that and I know that, I can only assume that the State Department, and Mrs. Clinton knew that as well. Especially since Amb. Stevens sent multiple messages higher to that effect in the days weeks and months leading up to 9/11.
So why then did the State Department reduce the security footprint?
Finally, though Amb. Stevens knew the risks, your implication that he was on his own and that people should get over it, well, that's just stupid.
You're worried about something that is above your pay-grade as a "Calvary Scout."
It does not matter what security was, Stevens was no rookie/virgin to Libya, or Benghazi, he knew the hot-bed it was, he had served in Libya twice before, It was he who chose to go to Benghazi, despite the warning signs.
Get over it..... Quit listening to FOX news, draw your own conclusions, Romney loss also, so get over that.
Seriously...I've had enough of you, so I'll allow you the last word...make it good and insulting!!
JFD have you been under a rock are you just stupid? The dems in congress voted for that same war. Geese people Bush could not declare war without the help of the dems in congress. It would have been unconstitutional for him to do it without the help of the dems in congress.
High rolla,
You're wasting your time. No one wants logic and reason in here. Much better to suck on the narrative as it has been spoon fed to them by the current administration.
Bush-bad
Republicans-worser
uggg.
moshuluu (16.6)
You got that right! Brian & Co. WILL have the last word (incorrect, however) and it will be just as idiotic as all their past words are.......
Where's this oil we killed everyone for? Iraq's oil production dropped like a rock.
You're right dman, where IS the oil? That was the same oil Bush promised would pay for the entire foray into the middle east. Whether you want to admit it or not, Bush's ill-conceived invasion, coupled with massive tax cuts, by the way, the first time in history that taxes have been cut during wartime, have sent our economy into a downward spiral that most people here will not live to see resolved.
If production went down, then the oil is still sitting there in the ground; it's called a "proven" reserve. Duh!
It wasn'r about making the OIL free for the American people, ya dimwit. It was about western oil company access and western usage, for a price paid in American dollars ONLY..Petro-dollars prop up our currency.
John you must have just craweld out from under the rock you been living under. The IRAQ invasion was voted for by the dems in congress. It would have been unconstituition for Bush to have did it. Wow have you not been paying attention Obama has not been able to get things done because of the congress. Geese its not the president it the congress according to the way we think now. So in reality it was the repuks controlled congress that left a surplus to begin with Clinton had nothing to do with it according to our thinking now.
No, what sent our economy into a downward spiral was the subprime mortgage crisis and subsequent housing bust. Are you ever right about anything?
And how profitable was the war? I'm not talking about Halliburton and other companies that got no-bid contracts and, what a coincidence, had numerous ties to administration officials including, but not limited to Vice President Dick Cheney. Every single allegation you can bring up about Obama and corruption, I can match and raise against Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft..... the list goes on and on. I'm right about a lot more than you are. About the Dems voting for the war in Iraq, they were fed cooked intel, and the administration made sure that anyone that voted against the war was labeled as a traitor, therefore in danger of ending their political career.
There you go John it wasnt Bush alone thank you for finaly admitting that. Fact is the dems are just as dirty and if you dont bellieve that you are a f u c in kg idiot.
Democrats did vote t give Bush the authorization to go to war, but it was Bush's war, from the get go.He was the one on television telling us about mobile biological weapons labs, uranium tubes, documents from Niger.
The Biological weapons labs were for filling weather balloons. The aluminum tubes were unsuitable for nukes and the Niger documents were forgeries. Ever wonder who forged them or why?
We had the right wing "think tanks", AIPAC, the Mossad and the media pushing all the bs on our politicians and the public. The neocons who planned the war, sold the war on the premise of WMD and that it would be quick, easy and cheap. Wrong, wrong, wrong!
Zionist warmongers like Ken Adelman and the Zionist Washington Post pushed the war in
an editorial titled, “Cakewalk in Iraq.” Jewish supremacists Richard Perle and
Paul Wolfowitz told you that Iraq would “Welcome us as liberators.” Iraq became
the longest war in American history. Here is a report from USA Today: “Pentagon
officials estimated for the first time Wednesday that up to 360,000 Iraq and
Afghanistan veterans may have suffered traumatic brain injuries.” Now that’s
not counting tens of thousands who have suffered maiming, amputations, or death
in this war based on lies.
Many politicians figured it would end up as the same kind of victory that Bush 41 accomplished. The problem was Bush 43 went into Baghdad and Bush 41 did not.
The hi jackers had been compromised long before 9/11. We had wire taps and all kinds of surveillance on them. Some of these men were CIA assets at one time or another, including Bin Laden. The Bin Ladens were business partners with Bush 41, who had once been a CIA operative. Watch this video and you can see how these people were interconnected. It will blow your mind.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_fp5kaVYhk
Hey dipstick, I never said the Dems were pure and blameless, but until you understand that Republicans are the ones that profit the most from the situation in the middle east AND the mess with our economy you'll never get it.
I just checked on the video I recommended and it seems to have been pulled. The CIA is watching. The video showed Paul Bremer, whose office was on one of the floors hit by a plane, on TV the same day, saying it was Osama Bin laden. Bremer was not in his office that day. What a lucky break.
One of the companies in the WTC had involvement in the production of nano thermite.
Here is an example of anther lucky break. The passport of 9/11
hijacker Satam Al Suqami is reportedly found a few blocks from the World Trade
Center. [ABC News, 9/12/2001; Associated Press, 9/16/2001; ABC News, 9/16/2001] Barry Mawn, the director
of the FBI’s New York office, will say that police and the FBI find it during a
“grid search” of the area. [CNN, 9/18/2001] However a senior counsel
to the 9/11 Commission will later claim the passport is actually discovered by
a passerby and given to a New York City Police Department detective, “shortly
before the World Trade Center towers collapsed.” [9/11 Commission, 1/26/2004] According to FBI agent Dan
Coleman, Al Suqami’s passport is handed to a New York City detective who is
“down there, trying to talk to people as they were coming out of the
buildings.” By the time the detective looks up again after receiving the
passport, the man who handed it to him has run off, “which doesn’t make sense,”
Coleman will say. The passport is then given to a detective on the Joint
Terrorism Task Force. Coleman will say that by this evening, “we realized… that
this was the passport of one of the people that headquarters had identified as
one of the 19 probable hijackers.” [France 5, 3/14/2010] Investigative journalist
Nick Davies will later write that he talked to “senior British sources who said
they believed that the discovery of a terrorist’s passport in the rubble of the
Twin Towers in September 2001 had been ‘a throwdown,’ i.e. it was placed there
by somebody official.” [Davies, 2009, pp. 248] The Guardian will comment,
“The idea that Mohamed Atta’s passport had escaped from that inferno unsinged
[tests] the credulity of the staunchest supporter of the FBI’s crackdown on terrorism.” (Note that, as
in this Guardian account, the passport will frequently be mistakenly referred
to as belonging to Atta, not Al Suqami.)
Typical paranoid truther.
Typical moron with his head in the sand. If you take the time to examine the evidence, even a moron can determine 9/11 was an inside job. I suppose you will just keep watching Fox and listening to Rush Limbaugh.
He's not a moron, per se. He knows 9/11/2001 was an inside job. He is just one of those people without a soul who have sold it to the devil for payoffs here on Earth. He LIES about what he believes, to try to keep any real investigation of 9/11 from ever taking place.
you know! these people like the ones that were murdered in benghazi, choose too be in an area hot bed and known for violance, why is that? i would not choose to stand in the middle of a gang shoot out, nor step into a situation that i know will get me dead, why do they?
Umm, because they were serving the interests of the United States government?
the 9/11 scam really all the evidence out there people still believe tis crap must be the people don't have access to a computer
Oh I see...........you believe all the crap you read on a computer. Boy are you ignorant.
If only everyone would watch the Youtube videos you've seen...
trust me "youpayyouplay" - there are still thousands of Americans who still are under the impression that 9/11 was caused be terrorists. They listen to corporate media and believe all the government sponsored lies, just like the government wanted!
youpay, first you have to have access to a working brain.
Or they understand basic math and physics.
I don't think we needed to lose the freedoms we lost under the Homeland Security Act or the so called Patriot Act since 9-11. Why 10 plus years after the event do they go in and automatically approve those acts or the parts that step all over our rights..nobody reads them or understands what rights the American Citizen lost after 911 or the freedoms you can lose in a so called emergency...The ultimate Big Brother power grap under the pretense of national security...probably why at this time they are going after the guns.
With technology the guns mean little. We are tied into technology now, education, medical & legal records, bank acounts, etc. Your bank records could disappear, you are penniless and there will be nothing you can do, but threaten a bank or gov't employee with a gun. Then you are in jail.
The Patriot Act gave the government the big win and barely any Americans said a thing.
My memory seems to be seeping out of me...... Oh my, I must be becoming a Republican. Remind me, who was the president who passed the Patriot Act?
who gives a @!$%# john? obama signed it,keeping these unconstitutional laws on the books! he be smurt,he a constitutional lawyer he be smurt. methinks he wants to rewrite it because he thinks he knows better how it SHOULD (in his head) be written.
Obama only signed it, so he could get to his second term with the powers in place to change it. He had no hope of doing that in his first term, and our country would suffer another 9/11/2001 false flag attack if had attempted to rescind it.
There has been no additional funding available for security at our embassies across the world because in the last session the Republican controlled Congress vetoed that funding. The Republicans are responsible for this breach in security that cost the live of four Americans.
I believe that more democrats voted against funding then republicans. So what does that do to you theory?
Does it matter to you at all that Charlene Lamb, the Assistant Secretary of State, testified before Congress that money (funding) had ZERO impact on the security provisions in place in Benghazi? Would it matter to you that the Dep of Def. had a 16 man security detachment in place in the months leading to the attack? That the same security team was pulled from Benghazi before the attack by the same Ms. Lamb? That Ambassador Stevens had requested that the team be kept in place because of the volatility of the situation? That he was denied this request even though the funding for the team was in place?
Does it matter to you that you are merely repeating what you hear on MSDNC and not paying attention to what really happened?
Maybe they should be watching Fox News all day so they can hear some real experts on foreign policy - like Hannity, Limbaugh and Beck. Actually, what they're really expert at is making 30 Million a year without being experts. But, I shouldn't be an elitist and point out that they have 0 college degrees among the three of them - maybe they just have more "street smarts" than I do.
They voted to buy hybrid cars for ambassadors
GCCal, The Republicans had such a stranglehold on the House they could have passed it without a single democrat vote. That belongs to the Republicans.
funding? because funds for an organization(overall the org.) can not be used to transfer existing personel from one place to another,right? can't move them guys from a less dangerous embassy assignment,right? funds ARE NOT AND WERE NOT THE PROBLEM!who gave the orders to "stand down"? classified? bull@!$%#,it's not told because of the headhunting that would ensue(nothing to do with classified,not even REMOTELY).
Why does the media let Clinton continue to LIE. Am I jealous,.... hell no, I'm an American citizen, vetran, just plain sick and tired of being lied to by this bitch and NOBODY seems to give a damn. Has anyone asked her if she has yet explained to the Bengazhi victims' families why she lied to them? ? ? ? ? Why not? She is sure as hell not any better than anyone else on this planet. I know the President hasn't, the vice-President hasn't nor has the Secretary of Defense. effing SLOBS. Just the pure sKum that they are.....and their families.
Speaking about apologizing to families, Has Bush or Cheney ever apologized to Pat Tillman's family for their son who's death was not only lied about but was a result of being shot by one of our own troops. I think not. Or did they apologize to the families of the 9/11 attacks for ignoring intel pointing to the attack long before it happened.
John you need to get caught up on the facts. Bush couldnt go to war without the dems voting for it in congress. Geese dude your way behide in education on this matter.
Rollon, read my post above, and if some of the big words scare you, don't worry, they don't bite.
I did thats why I ask you how long you been living under a rock Because you have no facts everything you stated is a factual lie.
Ok mr wizard, tell me, what were the lies?
Let's see, your lies:
1)The Bin Ladens were flown out of the US by the govt after 9/11 before regular flights had resumed
2)Fighters weren't scrambled on 9/11
3)The hijacked planes were in the air for 4 hours
4)The Iraq war caused the recession
And that's just off the top of my head.
Oh, and of course the latest doozy about GHWB having a meeting at Windows of the World on 9/11. Classic. I think you would believe it if someone told you GWB was responsible for the Hindenburg disaster.
So dman, you can dismiss my claim about GHWB because....... you were his appointment secretary? The bin Ladens were flown out early because my brother was waiting to fly home and wondered how they could fly when he couldn't. Fighters were scrambled much too late. If that's the reaction time of our armed forces, we're in a lot more trouble than anybody thought. The aircraft might not have been up four hours, but much longer than they should have. The Iraq war was one big factor in tanking the economy, coupled with tax breaks during wartime. A first in U. S. history. Add the intentional tanking of the housing market. The trashing of Wall Street. By the way, Rand Paul said he'd have asked for Hillary's resignation? If she'd been working on Wall Street, she'd have gotten a huge bonus.
"So dman, you can dismiss my claim about GHWB because....... you were his appointment secretary?"
That or because you have zero proof, and no other claims you've made today have been remotely correct.
"The bin Ladens were flown out early"
What part of "eight days later" didn't you understand?
"Fighters were scrambled much too late."
They sure were.
"If that's the reaction time of our armed forces, we're in a lot more trouble than anybody thought."
Only if you fear commercial airliners.
" The aircraft might not have been up four hours, but much longer than they should have."
So why did you say 4 hours then? Do you just like being wrong?
"Add the intentional tanking of the housing market."
Who intended it?
i was in litchfield,Me. and heard the jets taking off from brunswick,pretty close to the time. shortly after the first tower was hit. do you think they should have shot down every airliner,just to be safe? more then a few of these guys came from flights leaving portland,Me. on another note john,hows obamas war looking? was it necessary?
These guys "TRADE NOTES AHEAD OF TIME" so don't be fooled that there's going to be some revelation in all this!
This committee all but gave Clinton a pass on any responsiblity --What did You Expect--they're thicker then thieves-make Alli Babba look like a saint!
Not one queston about Kerry's Military recors and his self promotions and anti war activity when he returned from Viet Nam he absolutely turn his back on his fellow Veterans---he's a traitor like those he hung out with Jane Fonda -Abbey hoffman and others this guy isn't what you think he is Granyed he knows how to manipulate the Sytem but he doesn't have an honest or committed bone in his body he'll do exactly what is politically expedious and nothing else--gutless idot!
That is stupid. He has been to war and if he wanted to campaign against it when he got home that is his right. You have no right to make rude remarks about his war record period! What does your record say?
eye of America, all that you had to say about Kerry is true and correct, and that is exactly what qualifies him to be "Secretary of State," and all the power and prestige that comes with it, namely, to sit in a corner and wet himself with a water pistol. Just be grateful he is not being considered for Secretary of Defense, and that Obama has chosen a Republican to fill that position.
Eye, he served. That gives him the right. Did you? He was a decorated combat vet. He earned the right with his blood to have an opinion about the war he saw first hand.
Actually, the world trade center was also attacked on Feb. 26,1993 by Islamic terrorists so Mrs. Clinton is wrong about the US not being attacked since the war of 1812. I'm surprised she doesnt remember it since her husband was the president when it happened. Also, during WWll the Japanese occupied the Aleutian Islands which were part of the Alaska territory. Anybody can google these two events. I saw a documentary on the Japanese invasion. You really never hear about it.
Cheryl I'm guessing what Mrs. Clinton meant with her war of 1812 was that our main land hasn't been invaded since 1812. Yes the Japanese did indeed invade and occupy the Aleutian Islands back in WWII but again I believe Mrs. Clinton was talking about our main land.
The 2/26/93 attack on the World Trade Center was an initial attack generally ignored by a number of Republicans including then New York Mayor Guiliani, because it failed to create the destruction desired.
In the hearings McCain claimed to have talked with the Ambassador to Libya long before the attacks. McCain stated the Ambassador wanted more security. As one of our nation's "leaders" why didn't McCain hold press conferences demanding more security?
There were eight embassy attacks during the W. Bush administration. Under Carter three. Under Reagan three. Under H. Bush and Clinton one each. The bigger question beyond the politics is how many of these attacks does it take before we as Americans standardize and pay for the appropriate level of security at all locations? I especailly dislike how Conservatives love to hop up on top of the dead bodies for political points but do little of substance to prevent the next event.
Cheryl, you are right. The WTC was attacked before. That should have prompted Bush to pay closer attention to intel that was received during the weeks prior to the attack. They had a huge dossier on Iraq, but intel about Al qaeda was left unread.
Did that intel say who was going to attack and when? Because if it didn't, it's kind of worthless.
And, Obozo and HillyBilly are doing their best to sweep 9/11/2012 under the rug and hope everyone will forget about the dead Americans in Benghazi before 2016. Like Hell we'll forget. And, HillyBilly doesn't understand what difference it makes. Our government is Liar Central.
I know that there is nothing that will bring the Amabassador back to life, but how and why someone winds up dead makes a big difference as to the proper actions to take in the wake of such an occurrence.
Imagine, if you will, Hillary Clinton as a city's Chief of Police giving a press interview in the wake of an unsolved child abduction/murder, getting frustrated at the reporters' question, throwing up her hands, and exclaiming, "What difference does it make? Just an hour ago, another six-year-old kid fell into the creek and drowned. That child is just as dead. It is our job to figure out what happened and prevent it from ever happening again." Now imagine, on top of that display of arrogance and incompetence, Chief Clinton had been saying for the first couple of weeks after the abduction took place, until it bacame obvious to the contrary, "We think the child accidentally fell into the creek as a result of the parents' negligence."
It DOES "make a difference." People, we have just been treated to the most amazing display of official arrogance since Marie Antoinette gave France her thoughts on nutrition.
The credibility of any opinion is frequently undermined by the selection of sources.
Cut defense by one-half. We're now waging war by proxy (drones) and we have millions of gamers that can man the consoles, just pay them in Cheetos and Red Bull. And, for the millions of service men and women suddenly unemployed, in the spirit of Republicanism, pull yourselves up by the bootstraps and GET A JOB. Contractors? See Morgan Stanley.
Who could forget watching the government implode those three (yes...three) buildings. Heck one of them wasn't even hit by an airplane.
911 was an inside job. We won't forget, only the politicians want to forget it.
Please explainhow 9/11 was an inside job instead of just stating something that you think is fact.
It's been over 10 years since 9/11 and there are many 9/11 websites. First check out the professional 9/11 websites: Pilots, Architects & Engineers, Firemen and Military for 9/11 Truth
There is a great video on the 9/11 Pentagon issues called: 'National Security Alert'
Over 80% of Americans do not believe 9/11 was presented truthfully by the 9/11 Commission or the Bush administration. This poll over 5 years ago; it's probably now in 90% range.
According to the New York Times/CBS News 2006 Poll, only 16% of Americans think the government is telling the truth about 9/11 and the intelligence prior to the attacks:
"Do you think members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth, are mostly telling the truth but hiding something, or are they mostly lying?
Telling the truth 16%
Hiding something 53%
Mostly lying 28%
Not sure 3%"
If only everyone would watch the Youtube videos you guys get all your info from!
In the US it seems that you have to retire before you can speak the truth.
If you speak the truth during your career, your career is over. There are a few exceptions. Daniel Ellsberg (The Pentagon Papers) survived, but most do not.
Since anyone with authority who wants to keep his job avoids the truth like the plague, it is difficult to separate fact from fiction when it comes to anything that the DoD says or does.
In many cases you have to take an oath that you will never reveal the truth under any circumstance or at any time. Period.
There are numerous technological issues associated with the collapse of all three buildings. Some people find it hard to believe that a single aircraft could rattle such a large building at the eighty times the force of gravity necessary to remove all of the insulation so the kerosene fire in a less than stochiometric atmosphere (which limits the temperature of the flame). That is the official explanation. The entire building was subjected to a force that was eighty times the force of gravity. That removed the insulation, and that caused the fire to weaken all of the structural beams, so all three buildings pancaked, even the one that was not struck by an aircraft. Simply Amazing!
Watching the slow motion collapse of the building and seeing the perfectly timed puffs of smoke coming out of the floors below the collapsing building, one can only say how amazing it is that all of the windows would blow out of the floor below at exactly the same time at exactly the same interval floor after floor. One can only wonder why the process was so symmetrical and why gravity did not cause the entire process to accelerate.
I do not believe that it will be possible to determine what happened on 9/11 until all of the parties involved retire and they can reveal the truth.
The fact that 9/11 still dominates US politics is an enormous problem. It was a negative event. Negative on crack. It is as if Bin Laden was able to put a trigger to the temple of the US, and the media insisted on showing the images again and again until the entire country was, literally and figuratively, brainwashed. Now we are dealing with leadership that has lost its way in a War on Terror. The War on Terror will end when the US steps out of it. There is no "victory" in a war on terror, since there is no front line and there is no strategic objective. Terrorists are simply the metastatic cancer cells of the human population. You do not know where they are going to show up, and when they do another country is cancerous and infested with terrorists. Who knows? There could be one living right next door to you.
GCCal - you are in the minority of people who still believe what you heard on the news. Do your research and be like the rest of us, it's simple! By the way, you should learn to question EVERYTHING you hear on corporate media - unless of course you enjoy being blindly led by lies ?
"the eighty times the force of gravity necessary to remove all of the insulation"
You can peel the stuff off with your fingers. I'm pretty sure a plane can knock some off.
"one can only say how amazing it is that all of the windows would blow out of the floor below at exactly the same time at exactly the same interval floor after floor."
They don't. The compressed air blew out windows completely randomly.
"so all three buildings pancaked, even the one that was not struck by an aircraft."
None of them did. But you keep watching Youtube, I'm sure the answers are there somewhere!
GCCal, You think 9/11 happened exactly the way it was spun, but are probably one of the "truthers" that claim Sandy Hook was a staged event. Your hatred of anything Democratic isn't conducive to logical arguments.
"Some people find it hard to believe that a single aircraft could rattle such a large building at the eighty times the force of gravity "
Those people would be unaware then that a typical hit in the NFL produces around 100 times the force of gravity. I guess you're saying that a plane crashing into you at 450mph isn't as bad as getting hit by Ray Lewis! LOL!
TheDman113,
A large difference in the weight of the two objects colliding limits the acceleration of the larger object.
A mouse can run into a lion and the lion will not notice, no matter how fast the mouse runs.
Perhaps you can provide the math to show that the Boeing 767 had enough momentum to accelerate the entire World Trade Center with 80 times the force of gravity. Good luck with that.
Why the entire WTC? Why not just the impact floors? After all, that's where the collapses initiated in both buildings.
gallons and gallons of JET FUEL BURNING, weakened the steel,look back at where the building was hit,how many floors above it and ,what is the weight of concrete per cubic foot? without the water it is approx. 80lbs for a 2500lb mix. and those floors were probably a 4500 lb mix. what about the weight of steel? 1/4" steel weight is approx 25lbs per square ft(i'm purty shur it was bigger then 1/4" steel). and that "coating" was already peeling off,before the hit. that gave it NO PROTECTION from the jet fuel burning(you ever see steel in a hot fire? don't they use heat to form steel? at what temp?) it took a while for them to fall(maybe the weight of the floors collapsing had something to do with it?)both jets were full of fuel,no? the middle part weakened,will bring a building down like that,ask someone who takes buildings down in inner cities where the larger of the charges set are placed.
@you,
The temperature of the fire in a building is controlled by the stochiometric ratio. If the stochietric ratio is 1, the flame temperature can be as high as 3,800 degrees F. If the stochiometic is more or less than 1, the flame temperature drops dramatically. The huge plume of smoke coming out of the building indicated that the stochiometric ratio was not even close to 1.
Firemen walk around in flaming buildings all of the time. That is their job. As long as they have a source of oxygen the temperatures are manageable. The inside of a burning building is not a raging inferno. It is a dark smoke filled space with oxygen starved flames giving off huge clouds of extremely toxic smoke. Almost all of the deaths in building fires are smoke inhalation, not heat.
There is even a photograph of an individual standing in one of the openings in the side of the World Trade center. If the building was a "Towering Inferno", how an that be possible?
No one will know the answers about 9/11 for at least 30 years (a typical bureaucrat career duration) after the event. That is way the US has operated since 12/7/41.
TheDman113,
You cannot accelerate one part of an object without accelerating the entire object. The airplane would have had to rattle the ENTIRE World Trade Center with EIGHTY times the force of gravity to remove the insulation. I have yet to see the momentum calculation, much less the transfer function. How could an aircraft that was disintegrating transfer so much force into the object that was making it disintegrate? The momentum of the aircraft was absorbed by the aluminum structure as it disintegrated. There can be no doubt that there was an area where the insulation was removed by the disintegrating aircraft, but it would not be the entire floor or multiple floors.
Buildings are pretty tough. They do not collapse, even when they burn for days.
Why did Building 7 collapse? Other steel buildings have burned for days, and no steel building (other than the World Trade Center Buildings, all three of them) have ever collapsed because of a fire.
Only time will tell.
Why do feel the need to guess about the structural integrity of the buildings when the architects and engineers who built it have already told you that they built them to withstand the impact and fire from airliners? Which they indeed did easily withstand. The fires, which were never hot enough to weaken the steel, let alone melt any of it, were almost out when they '"collapsed" from the detonations and D.E.W.