Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumRachel Maddow Tears Apart Benghazi Outrage In Epic Segment On GOP Conspiracy-Mongering
VIDEO here: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/rachel-maddow-tears-apart-benghazi-outrage-in-epic-segment-on-gop-conspiracy-mongering/
-snip-
Response to Tx4obama (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Archae
(46,345 posts)Oops, those are republicans, they get a pass!
What about all the embassies attacked while Smirky the Codpiece was president?
Oh that's different!
dennis4868
(9,774 posts)said there were mistakes but nothing major...sometimes there is not much you can do. People seem to forget that at the time of Benghazi all of our embassies were being threatened and our resources were low because of the budget cuts. Libya is also a sovereign foreign country...not so easy to just sweep in there and save our people. Honestly, there was nothing that could have been done save the 4 Americans who were killed. It's a shame but it's the truth. I would not believe anything you hear at a partisan GOP hearing. Read the independent report that was released a few months ago.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)and guide the narrative. Go back to freeperville, please.
Response to Ed Suspicious (Reply #4)
Name removed Message auto-removed
dballance
(5,756 posts)Since you watched the hearings and I didn't I'm curious as to who owes us an apology and why.
Response to dballance (Reply #6)
Name removed Message auto-removed
dballance
(5,756 posts)Last edited Thu May 9, 2013, 12:59 AM - Edit history (1)
Your reply is this:
"I really can't tell you whom needs to apologize" and "I do think mistakes were made AND I don't think there is anything wrong admitting it and apologizing." Don't ask 'cause I can't tell and "I think" followed with no evidence or support for what you think.
I don't think there's anything wrong with admitting a mistake and apologizing either. So why don't you set an example and admit your post
"1. Did any of you actually..." with the text:
Last edited Wed May 8, 2013, 08:03 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1)
watch the hearings yourselves, or are we just relying on "what the media says"?
Edit...I did (watch the hearings) and while there may not be a "smoking gun that will bring down the administration", I think some people in the government owes us some apologies."
was a mistake to post because all you really did was throw out there the I watched the hearings (so trust me on what I say) then threw out there "I think some people in the government owes us some apologies." Which now that you're questioned on you have no better answer than the Republicans who can't answer the simple question "what is the cover up?" with respect to Benghazi. So yes, I think you should apologize for your implied denigration of unnamed government officials for things for which they should apologize yet you can't identify those things.
ON EDIT:
You said "There were orders to stand down and it's still unclear whether or not they could have sent rescue help out in time" This is not accurate. It is not at all unclear and even today's testimony by Mr. Hicks didn't change that or seriously challenge it. Here is the relevant part of the hearing from a CNN article. http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/08/politics/benghazi-hearing/index.html?hpt=hp_t2 I'm sure it can found in the transcript as well.
"Hicks also argued the U.S. military could have blunted the attack by scrambling intimidating military aircraft from Italy's Aviano Air Base -- an assertion denied by Joint Chiefs Chairman Martin Dempsey when he testified before Congress in February.
Dempsey told Congress it would take up to 20 hours to scramble the aircraft to get to Benghazi; Hicks said he believed it would take two to three hours.
'I was speaking from my perspective ... on the ground in Tripoli based on what the defense attache told me,' Hicks said; when asked by Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland, the top Democrat on the Oversight panel, asked Hicks if he had any reason to question Dempsey's assertion." Later in the article "Pentagon officials insist the members of the military in question were told not to go to Benghazi because they were not equipped for combat, and were needed in Tripoli to care for wounded headed their way."
So there's really no lack of clarity. The civilian diplomat believes that jets could have been there faster than the actual Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The highest ranking military officer in the entire US military with actual knowledge of the capabilities of his forces and not just speculation by a civilian. The other forces were told to stand down to help at the US Embassy instead. Since, at the time, there was no reason not to think the embassy might be attacked next it seems rather wise to keep forces there just in case.
As for "Telling us it was the because of the video I think now its pretty obvious that they knew from the getgo that the video wasn't the cause, yet it was repeated for nearly two weeks." You are so mistaken. Yes, it is obvious now it was terrorism given our 20/20 hindsight. Repeated for two weeks? I guess you missed the Presidential Debates where Candy Crowley put that BS to rest when she corrected Romeny and pointed out the President had been calling it a terrorist attack since the day after the initial news broke. It didn't take Obama two weeks to call it a terrorist attack and not a protest gone wild.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)the compound. That did not look like a spontaneous demonstration. Then, the next day, in the Rose Garden, Clinton and Obama addressed the demonstrations in other places that related to the movie plus the Benghazi attacks. If you had watched first the video of the Benghazi attack and then the Rose Garden interviews, you would have known that there was uncertainty about exactly what happened in Benghazi but never any attempt to make people believe that the Benghazi attack was because of the movie.
If you are watching Fox News, you might want to change your viewing habits and watch a network that tells the truth. If you didn't see that original video back in September 2012, you might ask yourself why you missed it. I posted it a number of times on DU.
There was confusion about what had happened, but that is normal in those kinds of situations. There wasn't any obfuscation about the events or the cause of the events. The Dayton, Ohio newspaper had full reports with interviews of the staff of the consulate in Benghazi.
The only people who think the Obama administration hid the nature of the attack are people who were not paying attention then and are watching Fox now.
I do have questions about why the Turkish and American ambassadors met in a consulate in Benghazi so far from their embassies in Tripoli. But the reason I don't know the answer is probably that it is some sort of secret.
Because I have questions about the reasons for that meeting, I am not drawing conclusions about whether we know the WHOLE truth. We probably don't and probably never will.
The claim that the Obama administration lied is due to statements by the Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, following the Benghazi attack. She was simply misinformed, and I believe that both she and those who gave her the mistaken information have apologized.
Susan Rice was not someone who had first-hand knowledge of the situation. She relied on others. That was a minor mistake and not some attempt to mislead people. Let's be intelligent about this.
sheshe2
(83,898 posts)Iraq, Afghanistan, the Bush administration, Apologies? NO not a one!
Horrors in the Rear-View Mirror: Ten Years of Iraq
Follow
Video , Abu Ghraib , Condoleezza Rice And Iraq , Dick Cheney And Iraq , Donald Rumsfeld And Iraq , George Bush And Iraq , Iraq Invasion , IRAQ 10 YEARS ON - WAS IT WORTH IT? , Iraq Casualties , Paul Wolfowitz And Iraq , Saddam Hussein , Iraq Weapons Of Mass Destruction , Operation Iraqi Freedom , Weapons Of Mass Destruction , Politics News
"Why look back?" some of them say. Here's why.
Benghazi? Give me a fuggin Break!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rick-horowitz/horrors-in-the-rear-view_b_2938919.html
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)lets investigate further because there was some serious fuck ups by the Cheney, sorry Bush Adm.