13 Benghazis That Occurred on Bush's Watch Without a Peep from Fox News

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2013 5:44 PM GMT
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/13-benghazis-that-occurre_b_3246847.html

    "The Benghazi attacks (the consulate and the CIA compound) are absolutely not unprecedented even though they're being treated that way by Republicans who are deliberately ignoring anything that happened prior to Inauguration Day, January 20, 2009.

    January 22, 2002. Calcutta, India. Gunmen associated with Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami attack the U.S. Consulate. Five people are killed.

    June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. Suicide bomber connected with al Qaeda attacks the U.S. Consulate, killing 12 and injuring 51.

    October 12, 2002. Denpasar, Indonesia. U.S. diplomatic offices bombed as part of a string of "Bali Bombings." No fatalities.

    February 28, 2003. Islamabad, Pakistan. Several gunmen fire upon the U.S. Embassy. Two people are killed.

    May 12, 2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Armed al Qaeda terrorists storm the diplomatic compound, killing 36 people including nine Americans. The assailants committed suicide by detonating a truck bomb.

    July 30, 2004. Tashkent, Uzbekistan. A suicide bomber from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan attacks the U.S. Embassy, killing two people.

    December 6, 2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate and occupy the perimeter wall. Nine people are killed.

    March 2, 2006. Karachi, Pakistan again. Suicide bomber attacks the U.S. Consulate killing four people, including U.S. diplomat David Foy who was directly targeted by the attackers. (I wonder if Lindsey Graham or Fox News would even recognize the name "David Foy." This is the third Karachi terrorist attack in four years on what's considered American soil.)

    September 12, 2006. Damascus, Syria. Four armed gunmen shouting "Allahu akbar" storm the U.S. Embassy using grenades, automatic weapons, a car bomb and a truck bomb. Four people are killed, 13 are wounded.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2013 5:45 PM GMT
    and the list continues:

    "January 12, 2007. Athens, Greece. Members of a Greek terrorist group called the Revolutionary Struggle fire a rocket-propelled grenade at the U.S. Embassy. No fatalities.

    March 18, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Members of the al-Qaeda-linked Islamic Jihad of Yemen fire a mortar at the U.S. Embassy. The shot misses the embassy, but hits nearby school killing two.

    July 9, 2008. Istanbul, Turkey. Four armed terrorists attack the U.S. Consulate. Six people are killed.

    September 17, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Terrorists dressed as military officials attack the U.S. Embassy with an arsenal of weapons including RPGs and detonate two car bombs. Sixteen people are killed, including an American student and her husband (they had been married for three weeks when the attack occurred). This is the second attack on this embassy in seven months."
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    May 11, 2013 8:29 PM GMT
    topathlete saidDid the administrations involved at those times engage in cover-ups....



    Does anyone recall Congressional hearings and unrelenting Fox Feaux News Coverage of any of the above listed 13 events.....or were they all hidden by "cover-ups" icon_question.gif


    (topathlete pwned by his own reply!)
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    May 11, 2013 9:36 PM GMT
    topathlete said
    rnch said
    topathlete saidDid the administrations involved at those times engage in cover-ups....



    Does anyone recall Congressional hearings and unrelenting Fox Feaux News Coverage of any of the above listed 13 events.....or were they all hidden by "cover-ups" icon_question.gif


    (topathlete pwned by his own reply!)

    Not quite.
    Investigating and exposing cover-ups is what generates news coverage. Forget Fox - the problem now is an increasing number of other sources are covering the scandal. Blame ABC for their investigative reporting. Your typical excuses don't matter.




    Don't try to side step the question.

    I ask AGAIN.....Does ANYONE recall Congressional hearings and unrelenting Fox Feaux News Coverage of any of the above listed 13 events...or were they all hidden by "cover ups" icon_question.gif

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2013 9:41 PM GMT
    topathlete saidForget Fox - the problem now is an increasing number of other sources are covering the scandal. Blame ABC for their investigative reporting. Your typical excuses don't matter.

    The news eventually becomes the news, and that's what's now being covered by outlets other than the Right Wing mouthpiece Fox News.

    But you still fail to explain how Fox News and Congressional Republicans can obsess on a situation that is relatively minor in the history of attacks on US embassies & missions, while having ignored worse and much more numerous incidents during the previous Bush Administration.

    Until you can answer that one, your posts are mere political spam. Which are what most of your posts here are. icon_razz.gif
  • TroyAthlete

    Posts: 4269

    May 11, 2013 9:50 PM GMT
    ART_DECO saidBut you still fail to explain how Fox News and Congressional Republicans can obsess on a situation that is relatively minor in the history of attacks on US embassies & missions, while having ignored worse and much more numerous incidents during the previous Bush Administration.


    Because they're desperate, crazy, paranoid, angry partisan liars, conspiracy theorists, and hypocrites, who exploit tragedy for political purposes. Even conservative Republican Senator Bob Corker said this week that the Benghazi incident has been investigated enough, the problems fixed, the right people disciplined, and the lesson learned applied -- and that House Republicans are running off the rails with their lame and desperate witch hunt.

    The entire country is looking at them like they look at people in an insane asylum. Republicans are bloodthirsty nuts -- I hope they keep it up.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2013 10:31 PM GMT
    topathlete said
    You fail to see the fundamental point. Is it deliberate or are there some other issues with you? It's about a cover-up not about attacks. And much to your chagrin, it is a serious matter as ABC News has uncovered. Watergate - What brought Nixon down was not the break-in but the cover-up. And lying about a video right in the faces of the victim next of kin only feet away from the coffins. Disgraceful behavior that has nothing to do with Fox except they called it out while your favorite sites kept it quiet.

    The "coverup" being sent to you by your Right Wing talking point sources is nothing more than typical revising of a situation in flux as additional information became available, across half the planet from Washington. The situation on the ground was unclear. Do you really think the Secretary of State was right there observing the attack?

    But you continue to sidestep the question of many more attacks on US embassies & consulates during the Bush Administration. Why didn't they become an obsession with Fox News? Why didn't the Republican Congress hold redundant hearings about them?

    I'll give you a hint: politics.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2013 10:31 PM GMT
    Yeah. Except nothing that you describe happened.

    This Benghazi obsession is the point in the fight where the right-wing is out of bullets and starts throwing the gun at Obama.
  • TroyAthlete

    Posts: 4269

    May 11, 2013 10:42 PM GMT
    ART_DECO saidThe "coverup" being sent to you by your Right Wing talking point sources is nothing more than typical revising of a situation in flux as additional information became available, across half the planet from Washington. The situation on the ground was unclear. Do you really think the Secretary of State was right there observing the attack.


    This is obvious to every American who is not a frothing-at-the-mouth delusional Republican nut seeting with hatred for the Clintons and the Obamas. Republicans jumped the shark with their "Unskewed polls, Romney in a landslide" craziness and at this point they're just drowning. Their attempt to manufacture a conspiracy out of the dead bodies of four Americans just shows that the GOP is a desperate party in its death throes.
  • TroyAthlete

    Posts: 4269

    May 11, 2013 11:34 PM GMT
    topathlete said
    The attacks were covered. This is a cover-up situation which gets more intense coverage, as did Watergate. When a president and secy of state may have made bare face lies, that is news.Take your complaint to ABC News.

    Amusing how the left is in such damage control mode now that the shit is starting to hit the fan. Your position is laughably weak. A cover-up is different than an attack, and all your attempts to conflate the two and obscure the differences are weak.


    More Republican lies. The ABC report didn't say a damn thing about a cover-up. It noted that the CIA draft was circulated to the White House and to State for suggestions and comments, and then redrafted. Big whoop. What was supposedly covered-up? Republicans have no answer. What lies did Hillary Clinton tell? Republicans have no answer. They just want to screech and swak "cover-up cover-up cover-up" over and over again and hope nobody notices they have no clue what they're babbling about.

    Illiterate Republicans clearly didn't read the ABC report (reading comprehension is not a conservative strong suit) they just read the title and ran with it to fuel their crazy, nutty Benghazi conspiracy theories and witch hunts. Republicans will keep bullshitting because they simply don't care about facts. And Americans will keep ignoring them and laughing at them.
  • TroyAthlete

    Posts: 4269

    May 12, 2013 12:07 AM GMT
    topathlete said
    For obvious reasons, I normally don't respond to you, but the BBC source sees from the ABC report clear evidence of a cover-up.


    Yes, you obviously never respond to me because you and the rest of the conservanuts know I can eviscerate your Republican claptrap better than just about anyone.

    So the Republican line is now this: since its obvious the ABC report itself shows no evidence of a cover-up, but the random opinion of one guy in the United Kingdom about the ABC report demonstrates evidence of a cover-up.

    Random BBC guy clearly has reading comprehension skills on par with those of right-wing Republicans. Unfortunately for him, the CIA talking points never included the word "terrorism". He made that up. Both the first CIA draft and the final CIA draft after Obama administration revisions said the incident originated from spontaneous protests. These were the changes made:

    1. The first draft said that "Islamic extremists" were responsible, but the White House suggested a change to "extremists" for diplomatic reasons.

    2. The first draft named a specific al-Qaeda link group. The State Department objected to this because they did not want the responsible parties to realize they'd been identified before they could be arrested.

    3. The first draft linked the attack to previous attacks across Libya. This was changed due to lack of evidence at the time.

    Ooooh -- what a cover-up! Cue Republican whining crybaby screaming. If Republicans want to argue that Obama and Clinton (?) were trying to "cover-up" that it was "terrorism" let them do so and look like fools: every American heard the President call the incident "terror" the very next day and knows that after details emerged in subsequent weeks he and the administration continued calling it terror -- and have to this day.

    If the "terror" issue is not what Republicans are terming "cover-up" -- then where's the cover-up? *crickets* There was no cover-up. Republican are a bunch of paranoid legally retarded liars who apparently can't read. The facts are on the Democrats' size, so let the GOP continue to lie. Democrats will continue telling the truth.

    Presenting the talking point revisions that GOPers hope will destroy Hillary (spoiler: they won't)
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/05/10/1208214/-Presenting-the-talking-point-revisions-that-GOPers-hope-will-destroy-Hillary-spoiler-they-won-t

    What ABC Left Out Of Its Report On Benghazi Talking Points
    http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/05/10/1994781/abc-benghazi-editing/
  • TroyAthlete

    Posts: 4269

    May 12, 2013 12:17 AM GMT
    topathlete said
    Too funny - you and your left wing spin sites are in panic mode. icon_lol.gif


    Translation: "As usual, I have no facts to counter anything that you wrote. Because, after all, I'm a Republican and facts don't matter."

    Yeah, the "left" is in total panic over some the pronouncements of one random British guy, hhahaha. Remember how we were in a panic over the immenent Romney landslide and unskewed polls? Hahaha. Crazy nuts. The entire conservative movement should be committed to a mental hospital one hundred feet below the Pacific Ocean.

    "What was "covered-up" Republicans?"
    *crickets*
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 12, 2013 12:19 AM GMT
    TroyAthlete saidRemember how we were in a panic over the immenent Romney landslide and unskewed polls? Hahaha. Crazy nuts.

    I DO remember! I'm in a panic about Romney still. I mean, after all, these same conservanuts told me I was in panic last Fall, so I must be in a panic again now, right? icon_rolleyes.gif
  • TroyAthlete

    Posts: 4269

    May 12, 2013 12:22 AM GMT
    ART_DECO said
    TroyAthlete saidRemember how we were in a panic over the immenent Romney landslide and unskewed polls? Hahaha. Crazy nuts.

    I DO remember! I'm in a panic about Romney still. I mean, after all, these same conservanuts told me I was in panic last Fall, so I must be in a panic again now, right? icon_rolleyes.gif


    Oh, yes, we're in such panic about this extensive, clandestine "cover-up" of Beghazi's terrorism...

    ...that lasted all of six hours until the President's very first remarks on the incident called it "terror." icon_rolleyes.gif

    Republican is a mental disease.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    May 12, 2013 1:04 AM GMT
    well based on the fact this thread was created shows that its is starting to bother the left of center.

    What was it 6 months of headline / front page news about Valorie Plane who was arguably a low level CIA operative.

    To quote the left , "its the seriousness of the charge that matters".

    I think that political interference into an investigation and prevention of a terrorist attack is serious enough to investigate.

    Considering what is and was at stake.

    The fact that the attack occurred is not the point. Its that someone cooked the facts to make it appear as if it was a protest which it clearly was not. And it seems that the political arm held back helping Americans in need to prevent an escalation.
  • TroyAthlete

    Posts: 4269

    May 12, 2013 1:49 AM GMT
    musclmed saidwell based on the fact this thread was created shows that its is starting to bother the left of center...

    Its that someone cooked the facts to make it appear as if it was a protest which it clearly was not.


    More GOP lies, both of these points are veritably and demonstrably false.

    1. The fact that this thread was created shows that responsible American adults have learned that childish Republican crazy lies have to be forcefully confronted and called out early on, so that their mental disease doesn't spread. But yes: the fact that the Republican party are a bunch of irresponsible, paranoid, partisan hacks does bother everyone that's not on the fringe right: that's why the GOP didn't win in 2008 and won't in 2016. We will stand idly by like we did in 2004 and allow you morons to "Swift Boat" Hillary Clinton.

    2. Stating that it "clearly was not" a protest is a lie. The consensus at the time was that it was a protest -- just one that also happened to involve a terrorist attack. This is the functional equivalent equivalent of saying the 2013 Boston Marathon was not a marathon. It was a marathon at which a terrorist attack occurred as far as anyone knew.

    3. On a related note, stating that there was a "cover-up" that it was a protest is also a lie. Republicans would love Americans to forget that our television sets were on that day filled with images of embassy protests across the globe. What happened in Benghazi was part of that, and then terrorists got involved. No one has "covered-up" that it was a protest: the first draft of the CIA talking points and the last draft (after the White House and the State Department saw it) BOTH said the incident originated from spontaneous protests. So, again, you nutbag Republicans -- where was the "cover-up"? *crickets*

    Republicans are retarded to think they can continue to spew total bullshit that is easily-debunked and get away with it. Keep fishing, nutjobs.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 12, 2013 1:51 AM GMT
    So you're just figuring out that Fox only does slanted news for geezers and idiots? Really?
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    May 12, 2013 3:05 AM GMT
    TroyAthlete said
    musclmed saidwell based on the fact this thread was created shows that its is starting to bother the left of center...

    Its that someone cooked the facts to make it appear as if it was a protest which it clearly was not.


    More GOP lies, both of these points are veritably and demonstrably false.

    1. The fact that this thread was created shows that responsible American adults have learned that childish Republican crazy lies have to be forcefully confronted and called out early on, so that their mental disease doesn't spread. But yes: the fact that the Republican party are a bunch of irresponsible, paranoid, partisan hacks does bother everyone that's not on the fringe right: that's why the GOP didn't win in 2008 and won't in 2016. We will stand idly by like we did in 2004 and allow you morons to "Swift Boat" Hillary Clinton.

    2. Stating that it "clearly was not" a protest is a lie. It was a protest -- just one that also happened to involve a terrorist attack. This is the functional equivalent equivalent of saying the 2013 Boston Marathon was not a marathon. It was a marathon at which a terrorist attack occurred.

    3. On a related note, stating that there was a "cover-up" that it was a protest is also a lie. Republicans would love Americans to forget that our television sets were on that day filled with images of embassy protests across the globe. What happened in Benghazi was part of that, and then terrorists got involved. No one has "covered-up" that it was a protest: the first draft of the CIA talking points and the last draft (after the White House and the State Department saw it) BOTH said the incident originated from spontaneous protests. So, again, you nutbag Republicans -- where was the "cover-up"? *crickets*

    Republicans are retarded to think they can continue to spew total bullshit that is easily-debunked and get away with it. Keep fishing, nutjobs.


    Well funny, the STATE DEPARTMENT said last week there was NO PROTEST.




    http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/10/09/state_department_no_video_protest_at_the_benghazi_consulate



    In a conference call with reporters Tuesday, two senior State Department officials gave a detailed accounting of the events that lead to the death of Amb. Chris Stevens and three other Americans. The officials said that prior to the massive attack on the Benghazi compound by dozens of militants carrying heavy weaponry, there was no unrest outside the walls of the compound and no protest that anyone inside the compound was aware of.
  • TroyAthlete

    Posts: 4269

    May 12, 2013 3:45 AM GMT
    musclmed said
    In a conference call with reporters Tuesday, two senior State Department officials gave a detailed accounting of the events that lead to the death of Amb. Chris Stevens and three other Americans. The officials said that prior to the massive attack on the Benghazi compound by dozens of militants carrying heavy weaponry, there was no unrest outside the walls of the compound and no protest that anyone inside the compound was aware of.


    In other words, hindsight is 20/20. Republicans insisting conflicting reports the day of should have been 20/20 -- and because they weren't Hillary Clinton was "covering up" the real reports (why? how?) -- is what everybody is laughing at.

    Yes, six months later officials know what actually happened. No, the day of the administration did not have every single detail about what went down. They didn't know enough to cover anything up -- it's right-wing hogwash.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    May 12, 2013 4:54 AM GMT
    TroyAthlete said
    musclmed said
    In a conference call with reporters Tuesday, two senior State Department officials gave a detailed accounting of the events that lead to the death of Amb. Chris Stevens and three other Americans. The officials said that prior to the massive attack on the Benghazi compound by dozens of militants carrying heavy weaponry, there was no unrest outside the walls of the compound and no protest that anyone inside the compound was aware of.


    In other words, hindsight is 20/20. Republicans insisting conflicting reports the day of should have been 20/20 -- and because they weren't Hillary Clinton was "covering up" the real reports (why? how?) -- is what everybody is laughing at.

    Yes, six months later officials know what actually happened. No, the day of the administration did not have every single detail about what went down. They didn't know enough to cover anything up -- it's right-wing hogwash.



    A moment ago you were sticking to the "protest" story. Its sort of old news that the administration gave into that. But I completely understand why you would not know that fact. Its because the liberal press is not covering it.

    so time to get some new excuses.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 13, 2013 1:35 AM GMT
    So things happened in the past. Can we learn something from it, or do we just repeat the same mistakes over and over again. This is the point of an investigation. And if a cover up happened, it needs to be uncovered. Not that anything will happen to anyone found responsible.......
  • TroyAthlete

    Posts: 4269

    May 15, 2013 5:00 PM GMT
    Riddler bump
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    May 15, 2013 5:56 PM GMT
    The time is ripe for a NEW political party to be formed, founded the few moderate Republican party members still around. The Republican party that I identifed with and supported until the early 1980's just does not exist anymore.

    The current GOP/TEAbagger party has ceased to be a legitimate politcal party alternative for all but the "two percent" of rich, angry, white, old men.




    icon_idea.gif
  • TroyAthlete

    Posts: 4269

    May 15, 2013 6:42 PM GMT
    rnch saidThe current GOP/TEAbagger party has ceased to be a legitimate politcal party alternative for all but the "two percent" of rich, angry, white, old men.


    The Teabaggers have had a psychotic break this week -- I think they've finally reached the point of mass hysteria.