Benghazi attack - Terrorists or unruly crowd?

[d-ray657]

So it appears that Fox and its masters have done significant harm to national security by forcing intelligence information to be released. The CIA involvement certainly explains much about sketchy official discussion of the details on the attacks on the consulate. Fox has engaged in conduct that, had it been engaged in by others, Fox would have been calling treason.

Regards,

D-Ray

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by finnbow

As this thing unfolds, what appears clear is that the GOP and its noise machine will jeopardize national security by helping to reveal the nature of CIA covert operations in Libya to score some cheap points. Bravo, patriots.

Great minds . . .

Regards,

D-Ray

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

So it appears that Fox and its masters have done significant harm to national security by forcing intelligence information to be released. The CIA involvement certainly explains much about sketchy official discussion of the details on the attacks on the consulate. Fox has engaged in conduct that, had it been engaged in by others, Fox would have been calling treason.Regards,

D-Ray

...and not a peep about Romney's surrogate Darryl Issa and his buddy outing national security info on CSPAN in that bogus hearing. All to try and provide cover for Romney's wretched "news" extravaganza at 10:30pm on 9/11...I hope that anyone considering voting for this idjit remembers that come election day.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Do a Google search on this test string "When the bodies of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans killed in Benghazi, Libya, arrived at Andrews Air Force Base after the Sept. 11 attack" and link from Google into the article.

BTW, Faux's report on the whole stand-down, lasers and AC-130 seems to have also been fabricated. Shocking.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...6a24_blog.html

Relying on blogs again.

By the way, I'll see your Ignatius and raise you a whole editorial board:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...d93_print.html

[d-ray657]

Isn't is amazing that the administration was not willing to discuss the details of the operations of an intelligence agency while that agency was in the course of securing sensitive documents pertaining to national security. Why, I think it was the responsibility of the president to sit right down with a Fox news interviewer and describe in intimate detail all of the operations of an intelligence agency.

Regards,

D-Ray

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by whell

Relying on blogs again.

By the way, I'll see your Ignatius and raise you a whole editorial board:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...d93_print.html

"scurrilous commentary" was the description of Fox's reporting from your link, Whell.

Just in case you don't have a dictionary....heh.
scur·ril·ous/ˈskərələs/Adjective: 1.Making or spreading scandalous claims about someone with the intention of damaging their reputation: "a scurrilous attack".
from Google dictionary.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

So it appears that Fox and its masters have done significant harm to national security by forcing intelligence information to be released. The CIA involvement certainly explains much about sketchy official discussion of the details on the attacks on the consulate. Fox has engaged in conduct that, had it been engaged in by others, Fox would have been calling treason.

Regards,

D-Ray

Treason? Laying it on kind of thick,aren't you?

If what I understand is correct, had I have been Stevens, I would have loaded up all of my people and come home.

And told everybody to kiss my ass.

But I was never someone who would do something stupid because I was told to.

Chas

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by bobabode

"scurrilous commentary" was the description of Fox's reporting from your link, Whell.

Just in case you don't have a dictionary....heh.
scur·ril·ous/ˈskərələs/Adjective: 1.Making or spreading scandalous claims about someone with the intention of damaging their reputation: "a scurrilous attack".
from Google dictionary.

I have to echo John, your guys are despicable. In addition, to displaying some 20/20 hindsight, your whole house of cards is simply an attempt to provide cover for Romney stepping on his putz on 9/11 at that news conference. Don't you remember the Repub leadership lambasting Romney the next morning over that gaffe? Maybe you've been infected with Romnesia, too? Don't worry it's covered under Obamacare's safety net, it won't cost you a dime for the cure.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by Charles

Treason? Laying it on kind of thick,aren't you?

If what I understand is correct, had I have been Stevens, I would have loaded up all of my people and come home

And told everybody to kiss my ass.

But I was never someone who would do something stupid because I was told to.

Chas

I've heard all of the conspiracy theories spouted by the armchair quarterbacks on TV and I've never given much credence to their bullcrap. I didn't think you went for that crap either, Charlie. Rep. Darryl Issa is one of those punks who doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. Compared to those punks at least Steven's had the stones to do what he believed in. There were failures but who doesn't screw up, now and then? IMO Fox, Drudge and these other self entitled partisan hacks can kiss my ass until the investigation is done. No matter where the chips fall it isn't some fatal flaw to this President or any President. Just my 2 rubles...

[Charles]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Do a Google search on this test string "When the bodies of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans killed in Benghazi, Libya, arrived at Andrews Air Force Base after the Sept. 11 attack" and link from Google into the article.

BTW, Faux's report on the whole stand-down, lasers and AC-130 seems to have also been fabricated. Shocking.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...6a24_blog.html

Eric Wemple is your source???

If you're not embarrassed, you should be.

Chas