New Disclosures on Benghazi

Status
Not open for further replies.
16.5 said:
No it was the same number that died! 4! Where was teh outrage?

Sure, 3 of them were the terrorists.

And the suicide bomber? One human being died! Sure he blew himself up, but... Totally equivalent to benghazi! Except the whole lying part, right?

And Greece? A small chunk of concrete was slightly dislodged! Easily a benghazi!

And the bombs in Africa that killed 100s of innocent people! Oh wait, that does sound serious.... Looks at silly fanatical list... I don't see that... Hmmmm.

And the last time that an ambassador died.... Oh wait, don't see that...

And the last time a diplomatic facility was completely over run, I'll agree serious.... Not there either.

Oh wait, those happened under democrats.... Don't count, right?

Hmmm, talk about special pleading.

Protip: it is also missing the several other attacks during the Obama administration, including the other diplomat killed under Obama. Huh, not mentioned either? I'll be damned....
Click to expand...

Do you know what special pleading is? Or are you iust rambling? I kind of looks like rambling.
 
elbe said:
Do you know what special pleading is? Or are you iust rambling? I kind of looks like rambling.
Click to expand...

Actually, I'm mocking a partisan article that calls an attack where no one was hurt, or where the only people that were hurt were the terrorists a "Benghazi."

I cannot imagine that type of contempt one must have for the actual victims of the attack, and the people reading the article.

Further it ignores vastly more serious attacks under democrats, and the several attacks under Obama. Sounds like special pleading, doesn't it?

But pointing out grossly insulting special pleading is itself special pleading? I'll make a note.

Because I'm special pleading the **** out of that special pleading, yo!
 
16.5 said:
Further it ignores vastly more serious attacks under democrats...
Click to expand...
You mean like 9/11? What the hell are you talking about?

diplomaticattacks4.png
 
16.5 said:
Oh wait, those happened under democrats.... Don't count, right?
Click to expand...
I think we are all happy to acknowledge the attacks that happened under Democrats.

I don't think you would be willing to admit that thousands died in 9/11 under Bush's watch. I don't think you would be willing to admit that thousands died during Katrina as a direct result of the incompetence and lies of George Bush. I don't think you would be willing to admit that thousands of Americans died and many thousands more had their lives ruined for the lies of Bush in Iraq. There was no WMD.

  • I'm happy to compare body counts.
  • I'm happy to compare honesty.
  • I'm happy to compare competency.
You?

diplomaticattacks4.png


I guess when it's Republicans it doesn't count, right? Did Bush lie about WMD in Iraq? Did Bush appoint an incompetent and inexperienced director to head FEMA? Did he lie and say no one could expect such a disaster even though it was high on the list of FEMA?

Yeah, I'm not a democrat but we can have that debate.
 
Last edited:
Mmmm, tu quoque spam.

threadjacking.

tsk tsk tsk.... such an independent skeptic.

Pickering is on tap today!
 
16.5 said:
Mmmm, tu quoque spam.

threadjacking.

tsk tsk tsk.... such an independent skeptic.

Pickering is on tap today!
Click to expand...

Yet another failure of you to respond to my challenge for you to substantiate or retract the two claims you have made in this thread. You said 100 people were killed in the Benghazi attack, and you said the Obama administration overtly lied to deflect responsibility for the deaths.

My challenge is not "threadjacking". Your unwillingness to substantiate or retract these claims indicates to me what this thread is really about.
 
16.5 said:
Mmmm, tu quoque spam.

threadjacking.

tsk tsk tsk.... such an independent skeptic.

Pickering is on tap today!
Click to expand...
I've explaine why it's neither tu quoque or spam. You will need to do better.
 
In keeping with the spirit and purpose of the thread, the latest:

Fans of this thread know that we have been anticipating significant developments this week, but in the meantime, it appears that fans of the USA Politics sub-forum can look ahead even further, namely to the 2016 Presidential Election. I thought I'd mention this in passing, but it appears that erstwhile candidate Hillary Clinton is taking a bath over Benghazi; the latest poll numbers here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/31/hillary-clinton-favorability_n_3368208.html
 
16.5 said:
In keeping with the spirit and purpose of the thread, the latest:
Click to expand...

Ok, sounds like new information is coming and that colon suggests that the following is from that new information. Yummy.

Fans of this thread know that we have been anticipating significant developments this week, but in the meantime, it appears that fans of the USA Politics sub-forum can look ahead even further, namely to the 2016 Presidential Election. I thought I'd mention this in passing, but it appears that erstwhile candidate Hillary Clinton is taking a bath over Benghazi; the latest poll numbers here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/31/hillary-clinton-favorability_n_3368208.html
Click to expand...

The new information at that link explicitly talks about this forum? Well that's kind of weird. It's like meta-reporting or something.
 
elbe said:
Ok, sounds like new information is coming and that colon suggests that the following is from that new information.
Click to expand...

It also, like so much of 16.5's supposed "new information", isn't actually anything new. We've long known that one of the motivations for Issa's non-investigation into Benghazi is to try and hurt Clinton's chances at a 2016 election run.

I guess it is kind of new that 16.5 is so open about it, though...
 
Huh, kind of an anticlimactic day. I don't see any confirmation that Pickering gave the interview today.

Of course, Holder lying to Congress is kind of dominating the news cycle!

On another note, I wanted to note that his thread has more posts than any other thread in USA politics!

Keep on checking back for breaking developments.

/and probably more tu quoque spam.... Ya take the good, you take the bad.
 
16.5 said:
Huh, kind of an anticlimactic day. I don't see any confirmation that Pickering gave the interview today.

Of course, Holder lying to Congress is kind of dominating the news cycle!

On another note, I wanted to note that his thread has more posts than any other thread in USA politics!

Keep on checking back for breaking developments.

/and probably more tu quoque spam.... Ya take the good, you take the bad.
Click to expand...

/unsub
 
In keeping with the spirit and purpose of the thread, the latest:

http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2013/06/03/Post-Office-cited-for-overgrown-grass/UPI-94601370289607/

Fans of this thread know that we have been anticipating significant developments this week: and the discovery that a Post Office in Virginia has overgrown grass is certainly significant. In the mean time, the thread has grown several pages since I last posted, and still no new developments on Benghazi. Since we are currently at 54 pages (on my current settings) hopefully there will be a development on that part soon. But I doubt it.
 
16.5 said:
Huh, kind of an anticlimactic day. I don't see any confirmation that Pickering gave the interview today.

Of course, Holder lying to Congress is kind of dominating the news cycle!

On another note, I wanted to note that his thread has more posts than any other thread in USA politics!

Keep on checking back for breaking developments.

/and probably more tu quoque spam.... Ya take the good, you take the bad.
Click to expand...
No one is using the lying and malfeasance of Bush to justify any action. You are lying when you claim "tu quoque". Further you made a comparison between Democrat and Republican action to terrorism. When shown that you are wrong you retreat back to your hackneyed and wrong claim of tu quoque.

And let's not forget, unlike Katrina where we can easily demonstrate what was known, you have not a single material fact that the CIA or State Department knew that this was a coordinated attack that had nothing to do with the video.

You are dishonestly casting aspersions with not a single material fact that demonstrates criminality or ethical breach since the thread started.

No one takes the deaths of these Americans lightly. It's sad that the same can't be said of the deaths of those who died as a direct result of lies and malfeasance of Bush.

You can't talk your way out of this.
 
TellyKNeasuss said:
Appartently just like the minutes from the Congressional investigation committees.
Click to expand...
There are no knew developments because the causes were understood months ago. If your goal is to bring down Obama then there is hope that this rumor and innuendo will have a lasting affect. Otherwise it is small potatoes compared with the deception and malfeasance of the Bush administration.

We are supposed to get mad that people died in this incident and ignore the attacks under Conservatives.

diplomaticattacks4.png



It turns out that "tu quoque" are magic words that mean there is no personal responsibility to the truth.
 
16.5 said:
/and probably more tu quoque spam.... Ya take the good, you take the bad.
Click to expand...

RandFan said:
It turns out that "tu quoque" are magic words that mean there is no personal responsibility to the truth.
Click to expand...

Bwhahahah! Called it!

The post count of this stupid grossly misleading, and completely out of date tu quoque is certainly going up!

The funny thing is the actual attacks under discussion and in fact most of the other attacks under Obama are not even listed, including TWO separate fatal attacks on US Diplomats.

Updating that idiotic graphic is more than its spammer feels you deserve folks.

But Spam it three times in 24 hours anyway? Some call that "Skeptical Independence."
 
16.5 said:
Bwhahahah! Called it!

The post count of this stupid grossly misleading, and completely out of date tu quoque is certainly going up!

The funny thing is the actual attacks under discussion and in fact most of the other attacks under Obama are not even listed, including TWO separate fatal attacks on US Diplomats.

Updating that idiotic graphic is more than its spammer feels you deserve folks.

But Spam it three times in 24 hours anyway? Some call that "Skeptical Independence."
Click to expand...
Childish rhetoric. This is not a logically valid argument but a fallacious and empty response.

Do you have a substantive and serious response? Thousands died as a result of the lies and malfeasance of George W. Bush. Do you care? Or is this all a political witch hunt to get a black man you think should not be president?

How about some honesty for once?
 
16.5, are you still unwilling either to substantiate or retract the two specific claims you have made in this thread?

1. That 100 people were killed in the Benghazi attack.

2. That the Obama administration overtly lied to deflect responsibility for the deaths.

What "new developments" led you to make these claims?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom