Can anybody answer these questions?

[Thumper]

And the subject continues to be swept under the carpet ....

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=A1jeJmeeMjs

[Niner]

What difference does it make? It's just a phony scandal anyway. NOT!

How loudly would the leftists be screaming if this had happened on W's watch?
:angryfire:pissed:atomic:angry1

[Fido]

Bengahzi!!!!!! Just another notch in the record of "The Community Organizer's" record of totaly incompetent leadership!

[BarryBobPosthole]

I believe thirteen embassy attacks did occur under the Bush administration, and most of them included multiple American deaths. you heard nothing about them because nobody was low enough to use them as a political lever like Senator Graham and his cronies are doing. Google it if you want, but here a list of embassy attacks and resulting American deaths. If there was anything to this but politics, FoxNews and Graham wouldn't be the only ones making a big political deal out of it.
BKB

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.

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.

[Thumper]

Embassies have always been a target of extremists and terrorists and have been attacked by various groups since the early 1800's ... that's not what the issue is here. What makes THIS one different is the events leading up to the attack as well as the events that took place DURING the attack ... and worse yet, the events (or "non-events"?) that took place AFTER the attack.

[DeputyDog]

I think the biggest problem have with the situation isn't that the embassy was attacked in the first place, it's that it was put out by the administration that the attack was the result of a "protest" that got out of hand and NOT a terrorist attack. If they would have said that a group of terrorists attacked an embassy, no one would have given it a second thought. The "cover up" of what really happened is what made this a big story, not the event itself.

[BarryBobPosthole]

The events leading up to the attack, the events that happened in the attack, are not unique. what is unique is that the administration made a mistake in how it characterized the reason for the attack. And basically, that has been branded for political reasons as an intentional mischaracterization for some nefarious reason that is yet to be identified. that the administration made a mistake in understanding who actually made the attack and why is not a question at all. and the unwillingness of this administration to open its kimono to its political enemies is certainly not something that is new or even surprising. the fact that the story that is the whole basis for the supposed coverup has changed as time has went make the whole thing smell even worse.

The fake horror, the plucking of emotional patriotic strings of American diplomats dying and calling for help, and all of that is just sickening in that is only being used to try to score political points with the american public. That is the lowest of the low.

I don't condone ass covering, but I certainly think throwing shit on people to see what maybe will stick wshen we're talking about real deaths of people in the service of their country is worse.

BKB

[LJ3]

I agree with some of BBPs points but not all. You're welcome. Embassy attacks are not uncommon. I do think the administration dropped the ball in more than one area as it pertains to securing the place. But to say they didn't give a shit and watched embassy employees die without caring is ignorant

I do think a primary difference here was the images of the dead ambassador being dragged thru the street. I think that fueled as much of this crap as political zeal. The whole thing is a recipe for sensationalizing something that should not be sensationalized. It was a horrible thing that happened.

[Thumper]

I don't condone ass covering, but I certainly think throwing shit on people to see what maybe will stick when we're talking about real deaths of people in the service of their country is worse. BKB

You should know by now, it doesn't do one bit of good to throw shit at Teflon Man ... he's as slippery and slimy as they come and Super Glue wouldn't stick to his worthless ass. BUT ... bringing facts to light that the pussy-assed, lame-stream media wouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole is something that NEEDS to be done. Politically motivated or not ... facts are facts and need to be presented. That POS tried his best to blame the attack on a frigging YouTube video and that cunt Hillary was right there in bed with him ... although, even she is trying to distance herself from him now! Do you see him disagreeing with anything she says here? What's irresponsible is the highest leaders of this country throwing around "facts" before they even have a clue what the facts are.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/QSooz2wXpes" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[BarryBobPosthole]

Wherever you are, man, that's where you're at.

BKB

[Thumper]

I'm just a little bit right of center. :D

[LJ3]

You're more than a little off center. Which is why you're so dang lovable!

[Thumper]

If I lean too far to one side, I try to catch it and re-center myself. Does that make me self-centered? :confused:

[BarryBobPosthole]

You're a bubble off plumb, that's where you are, pal.


BKB

[Captain]

And I'm slightly to the right myself... :D

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

[Buckrub]

Ghengis Khan was a liberal.

[Captain]

Compared to me Ronald Reagan was a liberal too!

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

[BarryBobPosthole]

I would have neverguessed that of any of you!

BKB

[Niner]

So what we are saying is that Hillary lied after people died?
That's a great and catchy slogan. I need to see if I can get that printed onto a bunch of bumper stickers.

After she officially announces she's gonna run, I can sell them on eBay and make a fortune!!