Utopia Talk / Politics / Shortest Fox Benghazi segment

CrownRoyal Member	Mon Nov 26 11:10:05 This is terrific, you gotta watch it http://www...shortest-benghazi-segment-ever
Aeros Member	Mon Nov 26 11:39:38 lol, totally pwnt. That "you're welcome" at the end was so loaded.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Nov 26 12:14:39 Holy fucking shit balls of Jesus. That was, fucking AAAAAAWWWSOOOOOOOOOOMMMMEEEEEE!!
Honest Politician Member	Mon Nov 26 13:07:23 Hilarious! I hope his books are just as entertaining.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 18:08:00 The guy is an idiot. What the hell does civilian contractors have to do with an attack on an America Consulate? Those contractors signed on to go in harms way and they were very well paid for it. Face it people, the handling of Benghazi was politically motivated and now the coverup is blowing up in the face of the administration. People should be fired over the debacle, but they won't be because the administration is too corrupt.
Rugian Member	Mon Nov 26 18:42:38 "Those contractors signed on to go in harms way and they were very well paid for it." You don't think ambassadors know the risks inherent with their jobs, and that they aren't paid well for their work?
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 18:53:06 Ambassadors sign up with the expectation that American Embassies and Consulates will have adequate protection using US Marines and military from the host country. Benghazi had neither.
ehcks Member	Mon Nov 26 18:55:47 So do civilian contractors... and yes it did.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 19:01:18 Civilian contractors work in a war zone. That is why they created the SeaBees in the first place. And no, Benghazi did not have adequate protection. All they had was a small contingent of what was ludicrously called, Libyan army troops, some of which were taking photos of the Benghazi compound that day.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Nov 26 19:12:13 You only have yourself to blame really. Decades of American intervention, support for dictators, invasion of sovereign countries, war on terror unconditional support for Israel. Yes you have created many enemies and various groups that hate you.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Nov 26 19:13:03 With that said, I think US ambassadors are very well aware of the dangers of representing the US government.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 19:13:48 Once more you support the terrorists.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 19:17:29 And totally ignore the responsibilities of the Libyan government. Not to mention the fuck up of the Obama State Department for playing politics with peoples lives.
ehcks Member	Mon Nov 26 19:47:57 When the normal lies don't work, bring out the ones so untrue that they don't even make sense. Confuse your opponent with ridiculously impossible claims. "Playing politics"? You mean... being a politician in charge of something? What's next? Insulting the guards with "playing marines"?
ehcks Member	Mon Nov 26 19:49:51 You've already insulted the Libyan military. But I suppose it's all because you believe "adequate protection" means "complete invulnerability."
Aeros Member	Mon Nov 26 19:52:16 When will Fox drop this? Even if it was important nobody cares because Fox is running with the story. Nobody else wants to be tainted with their stink.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 20:02:52 Playing politics = Withholding security from Benghazi so that Obama's end run around Congress would look like a big success for the election. Aeros, the only ones not interested in this huge blunder are the ones trying to cover Obama's ass.
ehcks Member	Mon Nov 26 20:04:48 Now you're getting into KreeL-level conspiracy theory mode. You seem to believe that "withholding security" and "letting people die" makes him look better, which is what KreeL and them said about Bush and 9/11.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 20:13:05 "letting people die" was not part of the equation. The administration rolled the dice and four good men lost. If that is not the answer then please explain why extra security was not added after two recent attacks and repeated requests for more security.
ehcks Member	Mon Nov 26 20:19:39 Yep. You're definitely channeling the 9/11 truthers now.
ehcks Member	Mon Nov 26 20:20:09 Have you been watching Alex Jones and Faux Noise at the same time?
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 20:20:18 Answer my question.
Aeros Member	Mon Nov 26 20:21:48 Why should we answer? Your question implies you know the answer already Dumb Rod, otherwise this would not be a scandal.
ehcks Member	Mon Nov 26 20:23:06 You asked a question?
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 20:26:09 As I previously stated: "Aeros, the only ones not interested in this huge blunder are the ones trying to cover Obama's ass." Does Obama have a light inside his ass or is it dark in there. Liberals show cowardice again and lose by default. Now,I have more important things to do.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 20:27:54 I asked for an explanation of facts. How do you interpret the facts. "If that is not the answer then please explain why extra security was not added after two recent attacks and repeated requests for more security."
Aeros Member	Mon Nov 26 20:30:54 Because bureaucracy moves slow and somewhere along the way the request was filed improperly or looked over and dismissed by a minor flunky. Next question?
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 20:32:12 They asked numerous times over a period of months.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 20:33:59 Even the Ambassador request more security. Are you saying that a minor flunky in Obama's administration ignores ambassadors?
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 20:37:20 I'm asking you for a legitimate reason for those requests to be ignored, not your half assed theories. If you want to theorize at least put forth one that is almost plausible.
ehcks Member	Mon Nov 26 20:42:06 You expect us to know exactly which answer is true out of all the plausible, implausible, and impossible answers, of which you seem to prefer the last of the three?
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 20:45:03 No idiot. What I said was, "If you want to theorize at least put forth one that is almost plausible." The truth is is you do not have an explanation because Obama doesn't have an explanation. And with that, see you later.
ehcks Member	Mon Nov 26 20:49:03 "If you want to theorize at least put forth one that is almost plausible." So "bureaucracy is slow" isn't plausible? "The truth is is you do not have an explanation because Obama doesn't have an explanation." Non sequiter. I am neither psychic nor a member of Obama's cabinet. I would not know what Obama's explanation is. Perhaps you should just ask him.
Glenn Beck Member	Mon Nov 26 21:09:29 If I was on fox still, I would have this resolved already.
roland Member	Mon Nov 26 21:43:46 "Withholding security from Benghazi so that Obama's end run around Congress would look like a big success for the election." lol, what an idiot, what you said don't even make sense anymore. wouldn't a peaceful Libya give obama more political capital than one that is chaotic and run by mobs?
Aeros Member	Mon Nov 26 21:48:36 I knew Rod had an answer, and as usual he goes with Occams baseball bat. The most implausible explanation.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Nov 26 22:01:02 BENGHAZI!!!!! Never forgett!
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Nov 26 22:09:31 You ruined the thread you douche!
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Nov 26 22:09:43 Oh wait...
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 23:25:39 "Aeros, the only ones not interested in this huge blunder are the ones trying to cover Obama's ass." Or have their heads up it.
Nekran Member	Mon Nov 26 23:36:42 "I'm asking you for a legitimate reason for those requests to be ignored, not your half assed theories. If you want to theorize at least put forth one that is almost plausible." You mean like "Withholding security from Benghazi so that Obama's end run around Congress would look like a big success for the election."?
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 07:15:06 Yeah. How do you explain it? The same as Aeros, "dismissed by a minor flunky."
Aeros Member	Tue Nov 27 07:18:21 How does an Ambassador getting killed look good for an election Dead Rod?
chen Member	Tue Nov 27 07:38:40 that's the kind of news report that id expect from a 1984-esque society. as soon as someone comes on the air to question their integrity they cut to another story. the sad part is that fox is still clinging to this non-story because they so badly want it to be their watergate.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 07:46:34 Aeros, as I stated earlier. Obama rolled the dice hopeing there would be no incident before the election and four good men lost. chen, a United States Diplomatic Compound attacked and an ambassador and three others killed and you call it a non-story? What the hell do you call a story?
ehcks Member	Tue Nov 27 07:58:23 "chen, a United States Diplomatic Compound attacked and an ambassador and three others killed and you call it a non-story? What the hell do you call a story?" All the other times an embassy or consulate were attacked and no one cared. This wasn't the first.
chen Member	Tue Nov 27 08:04:04 4 people dead deserves its week or two of coverage. That's long passed but fox keeps holding on to it because they so badly want a smoking gun.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 08:33:21 chen - 4 people dead deserves its week or two of coverage. They got their "week or two". What it is about now is the coverup. And still you people have no reasonable theory or explanation.
Aeros Member	Tue Nov 27 08:40:36 We do. Bureaucracy is slow. A perfectly plausible explanation, or do you think Obama even knew some Consular officials in one of the 180 odd nations we have diplomats in requested a few more security guards? Stop being an idiot. The request landed on the desk of some GS-12 Federal Worker at Foggy Bottom, who probably filled out a Standard Form to request apropriation from the general fun to hire more security contractors. However, hazard pay security contractor cost around a quarter million bucks a year with benefits, pay and so on, so the request would have to had been addendum and submitted to a political appointee, most likely an under secretary of state. At which point, once the Under secretary got around to looking at it, the money would have to be found. However there is presently no money because CONGRESS HAS STILL NOT PASSED A BUDGET! Thus the State Department did not have a spare couple million bucks around to hire another squad of security contractors for a consular post. Therefore, the fault does not lie with Obama or the State Department, but squarely in the laps of the Radical Republicans and there "Shut it all down if we don't get our way" policies.
Aeros Member	Tue Nov 27 08:45:23 But you don't like that explanation. After all, you cheer all the time the recalcitrant representatives in Congress threaten to "shut it down" if the Democrats don't cave. Like every other moron though you don't think about the consequences of there not being an operating budget. Well, not being able to hire more security at embassies is one of those consequences.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 08:58:07 Aeros - At which point, once the Under secretary got around to looking at it, the money would have to be found. Would that be the same Under Secretary that found the money to pay for three Chevy Volts for the Austrisn Embassy? Aeros - CONGRESS HAS STILL NOT PASSED A BUDGET Bullshit, those budgets are sitting on Reid's desk and he refuses to bring them up for a vote because he knows they will not pass the Senate which he Leads". Aeros - Therefore, the fault does not lie with Obama or the State Department, but squarely in the laps of the Radical Republicans and there "Shut it all down if we don't get our way" policies. Reid did put Obama's first budget up for a vote. It was unanimously voted down with not *one* single yes vote. The democrats in a democratic Senate voted against ir. Since then Reid has not even allowed a debate on any budget.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 09:05:07 Aeros - After all, you cheer all the time the recalcitrant representatives in Congress threaten to "shut it down" if the Democrats don't cave. The republicans have been softening on raising revenues ever since they returned from their hiatus. Carney just announced in a news conference that Obama has stated *HE WILL NOT* sign any Bill that does not include a tax increase on those making over $250K per year. Who is being recalcitrant there?
Aeros Member	Tue Nov 27 09:07:16 See nothing in your posting here rebutting the argument that Bureaucratic grid lock due to no budget is most likely to blame though. Glad you are dropping the "Obama orchestrated this to get reelected line".
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 09:18:21 Obama may not have made the decision to make himself look good, but I firmly believe his minions did. The day after the attack Obama claims he said, in the Rose Garden, that it was a terrorist attack. Two weeks later he told the United Nations it was the result of the video. Which one is the lie? The CIA said the next day that it was a terrorist attack, but the National Security Team removed references of that to the CIA report and then the National Security Adviser claimed it was no one in his department that did it. Now he is admitting it was. Five days after the attack the Ambassador to the UN went on five talk shows saying it was the video. Who sent her out to do that when it was Clinton's job not her's. Come on Aeros, this is a cover up, not some under flunky that caused all this shit.
Aeros Member	Tue Nov 27 09:20:30 Only in your paranoid delusions.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 09:25:04 Go hide under the porch, that's where you belong. BTW, Watergate never happened, the democrats framed Nixon.
Aeros Member	Tue Nov 27 09:29:45 The moment you find any evidence to support your conspiracy theory outside of "it all makes so much sense" then I will buy into it. We can start with either a paper trail or the Presidents recorded conversations. Good luck!
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 10:16:27 And if you ever come up with a better explanation I will be glad to read it, just don't try to blame this whole scandal on a flunky or a budget that Reid has in his pocket and refuses to bting up for a vote. "We can start with either a paper trail or the Presidents recorded conversations. Good luck!" How about sworn testimony?
so what Member	Tue Nov 27 10:29:13 HR's reaction is the reaction of a true believer be it of a religion, political affiliation, theory; dogma and interpretation are more important than facts and reason. Such people are being made in increasing numbers. If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 10:36:32 "The liberal "reaction is the reaction of a true believer be it of a religion, political affiliation, theory; dogma and interpretation are more important than facts and reason. Such people are being made in increasing numbers. If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." (FIXED)
Aeros Member	Tue Nov 27 10:43:10 You are just making assertions with absolutely zero evidence. You just have an interpretation of a narrative in keeping of your world view. You don't even have circumstantial evidence, let alone something solid.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 11:01:12 I call this very circumstantial. Why the lies if there is not a coverup? "The day after the attack Obama claims he said, in the Rose Garden, that it was a terrorist attack. Two weeks later he told the United Nations it was the result of the video. Which one is the lie? The CIA said the next day that it was a terrorist attack, but the National Security Team removed references of that to the CIA report and then the National Security Adviser claimed it was no one in his department that did it. Now he is admitting it was. Five days after the attack the Ambassador to the UN went on five talk shows saying it was the video. Who sent her out to do that when it was Clinton's job not her's."
Aeros Member	Tue Nov 27 11:05:31 The problem is both that statements are true. There was a riotous protest outside the consolate due to the video, and during that incident terrorists used the protests and riots as a cover to launch their attack. Neither is a lie because both are true.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 11:10:40 Where is your proof?
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 11:12:01 I really don't expect you to have any because Obama doesn't have any proof he is not lying.
Aeros Member	Tue Nov 27 11:13:58 Plenty of video about the riot in front of the consulate.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 11:59:12 Does it have a time stamp?
CrownRoyal Member	Tue Nov 27 12:45:01 " because Obama doesn't have any proof he is not lying. " LOL, this is funny. But, fair is fair. I mean, we constantly call Rod a child molester and he denies it. But we still call Rod a child molester because because Rod doesn't have any proof he is not lying.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 12:50:10 Aeros - The problem is both that statements are true. There was a riotous protest outside the consolate due to the video, and during that incident terrorists used the protests and riots as a cover to launch their attack. Neither is a lie because both are true. "Rice acknowledged in their discussion that she had been incorrect in initially suggesting the attack grew out of a spontaneous protest over an anti-Islam video, Graham said." http://www...|dl1|sec1_lnk1%26pLid%3D238529
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 12:51:51 Her admission came out during this mornings meeting.
Aeros Member	Tue Nov 27 13:18:06 Incorrect in the sense of who actually conducted the attack, yes. But its obvious how the mistake happened. God, the efforts the Republicans are going to try and make this story get traction is retarded. Nobody cares Rod.
Aeros Member	Tue Nov 27 13:18:34 Should say, nobody cares anymore, largely due to the efforts to politicize this issue.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 16:36:21 Aeros - But its obvious how the mistake happened. Damn it, LEARN TO READ. "Rice acknowledged in their discussion that she had been incorrect in initially suggesting the attack grew out of a spontaneous protest over an anti-Islam video, Graham said." THERE WAS NO PROTEST.
ehcks Member	Tue Nov 27 17:55:04 Non sequiter. It does not follow from what she said that there was no protest. What follows is that the attack was not caused by protesters.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 18:30:12 FACEPALM.
Snuke Member	Tue Nov 27 18:42:13 WHERE WAS YOUR OUTRAGE OVER IRAQ HOT ROD?
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 19:28:55 I SUPPORTED IRAQ DIP SHIT.
ehcks Member	Tue Nov 27 19:33:11 You supported the deaths of between 100k and 1M people, but more likely around 150k, for no reason at all; but you're against the deaths of 4 people as retaliation for those previous deaths and all the harassment we've been giving them for over a hundred years.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 19:36:41 I'll discuss tht with you when you are intelligent enough to accept the facts. So go away.
Unemployed Children Member	Tue Nov 27 20:03:23 Soooo, you support false documentation used to invade iraq, and have only years later while W was still president admit that there were no evidence of WMDs and were irrelevant. See link 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSN-Kku_rFE See link 2: http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500257_162-562312.html See link 3: http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2005/12/15/2882/wmd-irrelevant/
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 20:09:06 Watch the You Tube again, he clearly states they thought there were WMD's before they went in and it was found they had the capability of making WMD's. He also explains another reason for going in, to give the people hope through government.
Unemployed Children Member	Tue Nov 27 20:16:35 Again, you support false documentation.
kargen Member	Tue Nov 27 20:17:33 The guests arguement was stupid. He could have asked how many astronauts died on space shuttle missions, or how many gas attendants died of heart attacks. It was just something to divert from the real question, and was for that segment pointless.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 20:18:25 Fuck off Billy Bastard, you get more stupid everyday.
Unemployed Children Member	Tue Nov 27 20:22:46 So we have from hot rod, on UP, you can't use historical references as this is only a politics forum AND that he supported false documention to invade a country, where the president admitted so and still said it was irrelevant and still would have done it without any documentation of WMDs. God, you are such a fuck stick.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 20:28:33 "Watch the You Tube again, he clearly states they thought there were WMD's before they went in and it was found they had the capability of making WMD's. He also explains another reason for going in, to give the people hope through government." I'm just quoting your source Billy.
Unemployed Children Member	Tue Nov 27 20:31:42 The funny thing is, you're not even quoting him correctly. Stupid fucking pseudo-republican.
kargen Member	Tue Nov 27 20:50:37 The US went into Iraq based on information most the world thought to be accurate. The decision was in part based upon intel reports from outside the United States. The "mob" story to explain the Bengahzi attack was known to be false before it was presented to the public. If Rice really didn't know that may let her off the hook, but her superiors knew the truth and none did anything to correct her statements. If it were truelly a matter of national security then she should have either not gone on those shows or answered the questions with a generic we are not willing to speculate on that issue now type of comment. And the arguement of government contractors is still stupid. Would have made as much sense for the guy to just randomly claim he likes hamburgers better than jelly sandwiches. Would have been as near the topic as anything else he spewed.
roland Member	Tue Nov 27 22:32:14 "The US went into Iraq based on information most the world thought to be accurate." most of the world disagree with you
Nekran Member	Tue Nov 27 23:10:54 I love how a few of their stooges' intelligence services playing along with them always translates to "most of the world believed it!". Meanwhile UN inspectors who weren't allowed to finish their jobs because of clearly undesirable outcomes are ignored. Their own administration's pre-9/11 statements on how well the containment of Iraq was working are ignored. Massive worldwide protests against the war are ignored. Yeah... most of the world totally agreed...
earthpig GTFO HOer	Tue Nov 27 23:46:16 1) Hot Rod is clueless, as normal. 2) Contractors guard the overwhelming bulk of the Green Zone embassy compound in Baghdad. These guys are and have been on the front line defending that compound and losing lives for some time. 3) Embassy Marines guard the inner-most core of the Green Zone, and haven't really been "in the shit" to any extent. 4) If I'm full of shit, Ork will call me on it.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Nov 28 00:31:09 ep - Hot Rod is clueless, as normal. You are right, I did not think of the Blackfeet or whatever they were called in Baghdad. I was thinking of the truck drivers they use in Afghanistan. But then, we are not talking about Baghdad, which was a war zone, and *those* contractors made even more than the truck drivers. We are talking about Benghazi that had only a small contingent of Libyan soldiers for protection. The request for additional security was ignored for, IMHO, political reasons. The guy being interviewed is still an idiot.
kargen Member	Wed Nov 28 01:05:29 "most of the world disagree with you" then they are not being honest. The arguement at the time wasn't if Saddam had weapons but what should be done about it. Hell even Saddam thought he had some.
roland Member	Wed Nov 28 01:23:44 " then they are not being honest. " incorrect, it is because those claims are dodgy, that's why we send weapon inspectors to try to find these weapons, and there was none found. "The arguement at the time wasn't if Saddam had weapons " link please? the argument at the time indeed wasnt if Saddam had weapons, but what if Saddam had weapon. no one apart from the neocons actually was sure saddam had the weapons. the CIA was skeptical of the yellow cake claim right after Powell made the case at the UN
CrownRoyal Member	Wed Nov 28 02:53:24 "The US went into Iraq based on information most the world thought to be accurate. The decision was in part based upon intel reports from outside the United States. " ^ old debunked lie. There were numerous warnings, both from domestic and foreign sources, that saddam intel was inaccurate.
NeverWoods Member	Wed Nov 28 05:10:31 Kargen will never put that to rest.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Nov 28 05:43:54 roland - the CIA was skeptical of the yellow cake claim right after Powell made the case at the UN When President Bush asked George Tenet, the head of the CIA, if he was sure that Iraq had WMD's Tenet replied, "it is a slam dunk." That Sir, is a fact.
NeverWoods Member	Wed Nov 28 06:30:39 Sure he was not watching the Lakers game?
Unemployed Children Member	Wed Nov 28 07:09:49 Pseudo-republican wrong again... Tenet: Bush administration twisted 'slam dunk' quote http://usa...07-04-26-tenet-interview_N.htm Good times.
CrownRoyal Member	Wed Nov 28 07:12:53 No, tenet is not to be trusted on that one, only on his slam dunk comment!
	show deleted posts