New Disclosures on Benghazi

Status
Not open for further replies.
16.5 said:
OK, you ignored the other evidence again, and are now backtracking.
Click to expand...

Backtracking? How? I was responding to a specific topic. I made that very clear. Just because you can't actually defend your claims regarding that topic doesn't mean I have to do anything else.

say lets talk about respect. Lets look at a quote:

"That would be what we call a "lie", or a severely faulty ability to read, either or. "

You wrote that.
Click to expand...

It was the honest truth, for I couldn't see another option available to such clearly written text.

I remember being very civil for the entire thread until, in my naive attempt to actually get you to answer a straight question, you called me a troll for trying to understand the issue. It's been decidedly downhill since then, insulting posters who didn't agree with you left and right. Have you noticed that there are no other defenders visiting this thread? I am mostly astounded Ant is still reading this, I know I do out of morbid curiosity, but little is to be gained in such single sighted "investigation" as this thread has become over it's many, many pages.
 
Last edited:
elbe said:
Backtracking? How? I was responding to a specific topic. I made that very clear. Just because you can't actually defend your claims regarding that topic doesn't mean I have to do anything else.



It was the honest truth, for I couldn't see another option available to such clearly written text.

I remember being very civil for the entire thread until, in my naive attempt to actually get you to answer a straight question, you called me a troll for trying to understand the issue. It's been decidedly downhill since then, insulting posters who didn't agree with you left and right. Have you noticed that there are no other defenders visiting this thread? I am mostly astounded Ant is still reading this, I know I do out of morbid curiosity, but little is to be gained in such single sighted "investigation" as this thread has become over it's many, many pages.
Click to expand...

Cool story bro.
 
elbe said:
Backtracking? How? I was responding to a specific topic. I made that very clear. Just because you can't actually defend your claims regarding that topic doesn't mean I have to do anything else.



It was the honest truth, for I couldn't see another option available to such clearly written text.

I remember being very civil for the entire thread until, in my naive attempt to actually get you to answer a straight question, you called me a troll for trying to understand the issue. It's been decidedly downhill since then, insulting posters who didn't agree with you left and right. Have you noticed that there are no other defenders visiting this thread? I am mostly astounded Ant is still reading this, I know I do out of morbid curiosity, but little is to be gained in such single sighted "investigation" as this thread has become over it's many, many pages.
Click to expand...


Why would anyone else need to show up to rub your face in a few obvious and widely reported facts? Get a grip.
 
balrog666 said:
Why would anyone else need to show up to rub your face in a few obvious and widely reported facts? Get a grip.
Click to expand...

Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize this was the "everyone already knows everything about Benghazi already" hand slapping thread so no one would ever even bother talking about the topic. Silly me for thinking people participating in a thread would actually want to talk about a topic, it's pretty clear you don't.
 
elbe said:
Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize this was the "everyone already knows everything about Benghazi already" hand slapping thread so no one would ever even bother talking about the topic. Silly me for thinking people participating in a thread would actually want to talk about a topic, it's pretty clear you don't.
Click to expand...

You do? Why the last post was mostly about how mean I was.

Great! The CIA identified ansar al sharia as the perptrators on the morning of 9-12 libya time, and as the result rerouted the team from tripoli to the annex rather than go to the hospital. Therefore, you would agree that ANT's myopic focus on the utterly worthless talking points is misleading, would you not?
 
16.5 said:
You do? Why the last post was mostly about how mean I was.

Great! The CIA identified ansar al sharia as the perptrators on the morning of 9-12 libya time, and as the result rerouted the team from tripoli to the annex rather than go to the hospital. Therefore, you would agree that ANT's myopic focus on the utterly worthless talking points is misleading, would you not?
Click to expand...



Wait, wait, did they report that to Valerie Jarrett? If not, it doesn't count!! :eek:
 
In a sobering interview on 60 Minutes

In a sobering interview scheduled for Sunday Night, 60 Minutes interviews one of the first western witnesses to the terror attack on the facility in Benghazi.

He states that the Libyan Guards were told "We are not here to kill Libyans. We're here to kill Americans."

A preview is here:

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50157811n
 
16.5 said:
Should I make this really big? I mean you called me a liar right! LETS DO IT!!!!!

you are ignoring the the CIA time line, the State Department, The FBI, and The Administration, again.

here is an actual quote from 9/12/2012:

'I told him that the group that conducted the attacks, Ansar al-Sharia, is affiliated with Islamic terrorists.'

Looking forward to your next post actually, you know, discussing these facts.
Click to expand...

 
16.5 said:
In a sobering interview scheduled for Sunday Night, 60 Minutes interviews one of the first western witnesses to the terror attack on the facility in Benghazi.

He states that the Libyan Guards were told "We are not here to kill Libyans. We're here to kill Americans."

A preview is here:

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50157811n
Click to expand...

Extremely powerful and well done piece on 60 minutes. I strongly encourage anyone who still has the chance to do so to watch the piece on 60 Minutes tonight.

tomorrow I'll dig up a link/transcript, and we can discus in detail.

The primary take away is that security was woefully inadequate and the State Department knew it. Couple of distinguished service crosses were awarded to two of the Delta Force. I didn't even know they were there.

Lots of information still to be uncovered.
 
16.5 said:
Extremely powerful and well done piece on 60 minutes. I strongly encourage anyone who still has the chance to do so to watch the piece on 60 Minutes tonight.

tomorrow I'll dig up a link/transcript, and we can discus in detail.

The primary take away is that security was woefully inadequate and the State Department knew it. Couple of distinguished service crosses were awarded to two of the Delta Force. I didn't even know they were there.

Lots of information still to be uncovered.
Click to expand...

Here is the link to the entire segment:

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50157981n

here is a very small sample of the transcript we were talking about last night:

We have learned there were two Delta Force operators who fought at the Annex and they’ve since been awarded the Distinguished Service Cross and the Navy Cross — two of the military’s highest honors. The Americans who rushed to help that night went without asking for permission and the lingering question is why no larger military response ever crossed the border into Libya — something Greg Hicks realized wasn’t going to happen just an hour into the attack.

Lara Logan: You have this conversation with the defense attache. You ask him what military assets are on their way. And he says–

Greg Hicks: Effectively, they’re not. And I — for a moment, I just felt lost. I just couldn’t believe the answer. And then I made the call to the Annex chief, and I told him, “Listen, you’ve gotta tell those guys there may not be any help coming.”

Lara Logan: That’s a tough thing to understand. Why?

Greg Hicks: It just is. We — for us, for the people that go out onto the edge, to represent our country, we believe that if we get in trouble, they’re coming to get us. That our back is covered. To hear that it’s not, it’s a terrible, terrible experience.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Unabogie said:
Apparently your dude asked Fox News for money.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/art..._Benghazi_Eyewitness_Asked_Fox_News_for_Money

Which, you know, just screams credibility.
Click to expand...

Classic ad hominem. Well done.

/interestingly, i note that the quote is based on "Media Matters," an organization devoted to responding to the "conservative press." Conservative press like "60 Minutes." :rolleyes: "For more on conservative media myths about the September 2012 attack...." They are not even trying to hide the fact that they are shills for their preferred democratic candidates.
 
Last edited:
16.5 said:
Classic ad hominem. Well done.

/interestingly, i note that the quote is based on "Media Matters," an organization devoted to responding to the "conservative press." Conservative press like "60 Minutes." :rolleyes: "For more on conservative media myths about the September 2012 attack...." They are not even trying to hide the fact that they are shills for their preferred democratic candidates.
Click to expand...

You complain about ad hominem and them proceed to engage in an ad hominem? Too funny. In case you missed it, the link was to a Fox News segment, which as far as I can tell, is not a shill for their preferred democratic candidates.

And to address your point, even Fox News dropped the guy when he started asking for money. That's pretty much the poster child warning sign that a person isn't credible.
 
Unabogie said:
You complain about ad hominem and them proceed to engage in an ad hominem? Too funny. In case you missed it, the link was to a Fox News segment, which as far as I can tell, is not a shill for their preferred democratic candidates.

And to address your point, even Fox News dropped the guy when he started asking for money. That's pretty much the poster child warning sign that a person isn't credible.
Click to expand...

So you concede that your post was an ad hominem. Anything about the substance of the 60 minutes piece?

/What is "too funny" is media matters quoting FOX News as authoritative when it suits them.

// by the way, let us all recall the accusations that I was posting "right wing blogs" and lolz together.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom