Petraeus on Benghazi

johno · Post by **johno** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 4:37 pm

Petraeus in the hot seat on the Hill: Ex-CIA chief to testify about Benghazi attack

Posted by
CNN Wire Staff
Washington (CNN) - Former CIA Director David Petraeus is expected to testify Friday before congressional lawmakers that he knew "almost immediately" the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, was the work of a loosely-formed militia with members sympathetic to al Qaeda.

Kazuya Mishima · Post by **Kazuya Mishima** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 5:13 pm

Separatist fringe group within Congress immediately plays the "you ain't right to criticize a nigger or someone with a vagina" card.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/ ... 6-11-05-32

Grandpa's Spells · Post by **Grandpa's Spells** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 5:41 pm

The theory I am reading from the conspiracy theorists is that the administration lied in their initial assessment of this coming out of a riot or not. I don't see what the administration gains by telling such a lie, or why such a distinction would make a difference. Anybody know what the deal is?

Obviously the attack was a very bad thing, but we've had terrorist attacks during nearly every administration since the 70's.

Lewis Medlock · Post by **Lewis Medlock** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 5:50 pm

Grandpa's Spells wrote:The theory I am reading from the conspiracy theorists is that the administration lied in their initial assessment of this coming out of a riot or not. I don't see what the administration gains by telling such a lie, or why such a distinction would make a difference. Anybody know what the deal is?

Obviously the attack was a very bad thing, but we've had terrorist attacks during nearly every administration since the 70's.

I think the deal is going to be did he go to Vegas, knowing we were under attack.

DARTH · Post by **DARTH** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 6:17 pm

Because this administration, who lives by the liberal truth that perception is reality had painted a perception that after killing OBL and plans to leave Afghanistan, that Al Quada was on the decline and we were safer and more respected under Obama's tenure. Oh and that the CIA no longer interogates prisoners.

Al Quada going buck wild has reality shitting on perceptions face, for all to see.

Grandpa's Spells · Post by **Grandpa's Spells** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 6:26 pm

DARTH wrote:Because this administration, who lives by the liberal truth that perception is reality had painted a perception that after killing OBL and plans to leave Afghanistan, that Al Quada was on the decline and we were safer and more respected under Obama's tenure. Oh and we the CIA no longer interogates prisoners.

Al Quada going buck wild has reality shitting on perceptions face, for all to see.

Nah. Terrorist attacks happen. Nobody would bet their reputation on a complete absence of terrorist attacks anywhere.

Plus, Americans rally around their president after a terrorist attack. If anything, a few weeks before an election he would have had incentives to over-play the Al Queda angle, not underplay it.

Pinky · Post by **Pinky** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 6:37 pm

If they lied, as opposed to simply talking without knowing wtf actually happened, they might have been afraid of people thinking the administration used American resources to help Libyan rebels just to have those same Libyans turn around and attack our consulate.

DARTH · Post by **DARTH** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 6:43 pm

Grandpa's Spells wrote:
DARTH wrote:Because this administration, who lives by the liberal truth that perception is reality had painted a perception that after killing OBL and plans to leave Afghanistan, that Al Quada was on the decline and we were safer and more respected under Obama's tenure. Oh and we the CIA no longer interogates prisoners.

Al Quada going buck wild has reality shitting on perceptions face, for all to see.
Nah. Terrorist attacks happen. Nobody would bet their reputation on a complete absence of terrorist attacks anywhere.

Plus, Americans rally around their president after a terrorist attack. If anything, a few weeks before an election he would have had incentives to over-play the Al Queda angle, not underplay it.

Not with him. He realises that Libya made him lok hypocritical on his pledge of "No more wars of choice." He wanted as far the fuck from it as he can get. A random reaction to a video fit his then current narrative much better than the fact his administration was flipant about security concerns voiced by Stevens and others. Might of yet again been doing something the Obamanixon claimed we no longer did. Add watching the action on drone (and probably satilite) TV and maybe standing down and even releaving officers who are set to go in and try to save american lives.

The Left is not ready to be a pro war party, only the diehard commies and radicals want that, most lefties really are paeceniks and don't sit with aggression.

Nothing is going to upset his plans.
Nothing was going to stop him getting on that plane and going to Vegas, Jay Z and Beyonce and all that money and image.
Nothing was going to stop him winning the election.
Not even brutal truths.

Obamnixon is going down.

DARTH · Post by **DARTH** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 6:46 pm

Pinky wrote:If they lied, as opposed to simply talking without knowing wtf actually happened, they might have been afraid of people thinking the administration used American resources to help Libyan rebels just to have those same Libyans turn around and attack our consulate.

Yep, good point.

Quaddafi was in our pocket. We got what we wanted in a way that you would think the left likes,without killing anyone. His past crimes were moot, there was no reason to use our air power (and damn well SOF), money and politicol pull to overthrow him and create the situation Chris Stevens found himself in in the first place.

This was blowback like a bitch in a porno spitting the money shot back in the dude's face.

Grandpa's Spells · Post by **Grandpa's Spells** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 7:01 pm

Pinky wrote:If they lied, as opposed to simply talking without knowing wtf actually happened, they might have been afraid of people thinking the administration used American resources to help Libyan rebels just to have those same Libyans turn around and attack our consulate.

But that would be all the more reason to blame Al Queda right off the bat.

Lewis Medlock · Post by **Lewis Medlock** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 7:30 pm

Think of the fall out if he was watching the attack in real time and went to bed early so he could be ready for Vegas. He had to lie.

cleaner464 · Post by **cleaner464** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 7:31 pm

I had a really upset stomach this morning. I think Obama was responsible.

DrDonkeyLove · Post by **DrDonkeyLove** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 7:37 pm

Grandpa's Spells wrote:
Pinky wrote:If they lied, as opposed to simply talking without knowing wtf actually happened, they might have been afraid of people thinking the administration used American resources to help Libyan rebels just to have those same Libyans turn around and attack our consulate.
But that would be all the more reason to blame Al Queda right off the bat.

How about, that there was what was considered a very close election going on and they didn't want to acknowledge the 800 lb. terrorist gorilla in the room, with it's attendant uncomfortable questions, until after the election. From what I saw on the news, the memes of their convention were: AQ is on the run, OBL is dead, and GM is alive. This didn't fit that narrative.

One might reasonably say that the media would never ask O uncomfortable questions, and that would be mostly right but they couldn't be sure so they just circled the wagons and blamed it on an anomaly.....like a lightening strike. I could see Axelrod saying, "Now let's get back to the war on women and win this thing. We've got a nation to divide!".

Grandpa's Spells · Post by **Grandpa's Spells** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 7:50 pm

DrDonkeyLove wrote:
Grandpa's Spells wrote:
Pinky wrote:If they lied, as opposed to simply talking without knowing wtf actually happened, they might have been afraid of people thinking the administration used American resources to help Libyan rebels just to have those same Libyans turn around and attack our consulate.
But that would be all the more reason to blame Al Queda right off the bat.
How about, that there was what was considered a very close election going on and they didn't want to acknowledge the 800 lb. terrorist gorilla in the room, with it's attendant uncomfortable questions, until after the election.

What uncomfortable questions? It's hard to argue Obama has been soft on terrorism. Paul Ryan trotted out the "unraveling foreign policy" nonsense, but nobody bought it, because it was bullshit. It was a terrorist attack. You can't stop every one.

From what I saw on the news, the memes of their convention were: AQ is on the run, OBL is dead, and GM is alive. This didn't fit that narrative.

It's a great narrative. "The world is still dangerous. Rally around me, and don't ask too many questions about all those drone strikes."

One might reasonably say that the media would never ask O uncomfortable questions, and that would be mostly right but they couldn't be sure so they just circled the wagons and blamed it on an anomaly.....like a lightening strike. I could see Axelrod saying, "Now let's get back to the war on women and win this thing. We've got a nation to divide!".

It's been pretty well documented that Obama's treatment by the press has not been soft by historical standards.

This looks like the GOP begging for a scandal to stick, and really really not wanting to talk about the beating they just took and the subsequent conversation that was started.

Freki · Post by **Freki** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 7:59 pm

Grandpa's Spells wrote: This looks like the GOP begging for a scandal to stick, and really really not wanting to talk about the beating they just took and the subsequent conversation that was started.

Beating? The popular vote and # of states won was closer than 2008. Even electoral college was closer. Now the electoral college can look like a large gap depending which states go which way and that was pretty wide. But beating's a stretch.

Grandpa's Spells · Post by **Grandpa's Spells** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 8:07 pm

Freki wrote:
Grandpa's Spells wrote: This looks like the GOP begging for a scandal to stick, and really really not wanting to talk about the beating they just took and the subsequent conversation that was started.
Beating? The popular vote and # of states won was closer than 2008. Even electoral college was closer. Now the electoral college can look like a large gap depending which states go which way and that was pretty wide. But beating's a stretch.

LOL. Yes, the electoral college, which is the sole deciding metric for elections, can indeed look large or small depending on which states you win or lose. And 2012 was indeed slightly closer than 2008, but both of them represented very decisive defeats for the GOP.

DARTH · Post by **DARTH** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 8:09 pm

When you look at it by territory, there are far more red counties than blue and far more that grow food. And enough manufactuing in red counties to soften blue county superiority there.

30 Republican Govenors.
Republicans get the Senate as well as the House in 2 years, while scandals rage surrounding the Obamanixon administration.

Pinky · Post by **Pinky** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 8:09 pm

Grandpa's Spells wrote:
Pinky wrote:If they lied, as opposed to simply talking without knowing wtf actually happened, they might have been afraid of people thinking the administration used American resources to help Libyan rebels just to have those same Libyans turn around and attack our consulate.
But that would be all the more reason to blame Al Queda right off the bat.

Not if you were afraid of being blamed for giving Al Qaeda an opening in a country that been under the control of a safe (for us) dictator.

But I don't really know what they were thinking, or how much of this was thought out at all.

cleaner464 · Post by **cleaner464** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 8:20 pm

Obama is a secret Muslim. He never graduated from Harvard. He didn't pass the bar either.

Freki · Post by **Freki** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 8:22 pm

Grandpa's Spells wrote:
Freki wrote:
Grandpa's Spells wrote: This looks like the GOP begging for a scandal to stick, and really really not wanting to talk about the beating they just took and the subsequent conversation that was started.
Beating? The popular vote and # of states won was closer than 2008. Even electoral college was closer. Now the electoral college can look like a large gap depending which states go which way and that was pretty wide. But beating's a stretch.
LOL. Yes, the electoral college, which is the sole deciding metric for elections, can indeed look large or small depending on which states you win or lose. And 2012 was indeed slightly closer than 2008, but both of them represented very decisive defeats for the GOP.

Yes, I'm familiar, but that's a rather legalistic, cherry picking of the data way to look at it. A 9.5% decline for the President in the popular vote and barely a majority (50.6%) hardly represents a mandate or a beating. If you want to focus on the EC solely, go right ahead. All I'm saying is that it doesn't represent the total story. Conversely, if I were to focus solely on the pop vote (or the info Darth laid out), I'd be as guilty.

johno · Post by **johno** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 8:25 pm

cleaner464 wrote:Obama is a secret Muslim. He never graduated from Harvard. He didn't pass the bar either.

Here's another one for your collection: Obama & Co. told the truth on Benghazi.

cleaner464 · Post by **cleaner464** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 8:28 pm

Obama cheated to win. The seats in the senate and house that the Dems picked up are fictions as well. He didn't win Iowa either.

cleaner464 · Post by **cleaner464** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 8:31 pm

johno wrote:
cleaner464 wrote:Obama is a secret Muslim. He never graduated from Harvard. He didn't pass the bar either.
Here's another one for your collection: Obama & Co. told the truth on Benghazi.

You remind me of a chimp in a zoo flinging crap. It won't stick though.

DrDonkeyLove · Post by **DrDonkeyLove** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 9:27 pm

Grandpa's Spells wrote:
DrDonkeyLove wrote:
Grandpa's Spells wrote:
Pinky wrote:If they lied, as opposed to simply talking without knowing wtf actually happened, they might have been afraid of people thinking the administration used American resources to help Libyan rebels just to have those same Libyans turn around and attack our consulate.
But that would be all the more reason to blame Al Queda right off the bat.
How about, that there was what was considered a very close election going on and they didn't want to acknowledge the 800 lb. terrorist gorilla in the room, with it's attendant uncomfortable questions, until after the election.
What uncomfortable questions? It's hard to argue Obama has been soft on terrorism. Paul Ryan trotted out the "unraveling foreign policy" nonsense, but nobody bought it, because it was bullshit. It was a terrorist attack. You can't stop every one.
From what I saw on the news, the memes of their convention were: AQ is on the run, OBL is dead, and GM is alive. This didn't fit that narrative.
It's a great narrative. "The world is still dangerous. Rally around me, and don't ask too many questions about all those drone strikes."
One might reasonably say that the media would never ask O uncomfortable questions, and that would be mostly right but they couldn't be sure so they just circled the wagons and blamed it on an anomaly.....like a lightening strike. I could see Axelrod saying, "Now let's get back to the war on women and win this thing. We've got a nation to divide!".
It's been pretty well documented that Obama's treatment by the press has not been soft by historical standards.

This looks like the GOP begging for a scandal to stick, and really really not wanting to talk about the beating they just took and the subsequent conversation that was started.

I'm sure you've seen info supporting that and my perceptions could be wrong, but saying that his treatment by the press hasn't been soft feels like it's coming from an alternate universe to me.

And, the GOP is begging for a scandal. The party out of the white house always is. Personally, I think Fast & Furious and Benghazi are huge scandals for which the administration has so far been held to zero accountability. I expect that they won't ever be held accountable. Obama makes Teflon look like sandpaper.

Regarding the GOP taking a beating, they did well enough to have the house for at least two more years and have enough senators to make a difference so, unlike in 2008, the Sun King will have to do some negotiating in the first two years of this term. Let's hope that divided government works this time.

cleaner464 · Post by **cleaner464** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 9:57 pm

Obama secretly bathes in the blood of Virgins.

IGX

Petraeus on Benghazi

Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi

Re: Petraeus on Benghazi