Posted - 9/29/2012 1:20:26 PM | show profile | flag this post
Peter King is calling for the resignation of UN Ambassador Susan Rice over her insistence that the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, Libya, was a spontaneous reaction to an obscure filn trailer.
For several days, Rice and the Obama administration doggedly stuck to that story, even in the face of denial by the Libyan president an mounting evidence to the contrary.
Eventually the facts prevailed and the administration had to acknowledge that the attack was planned and militarily executed by Islamic terrorists, probably in commemoration of September 11, 2001.
But Peter King is going after the wrong person. The buck...as a sign on Harry Truman's desk conveys...stops with the president. He's the one who should resign.
Posted - 9/29/2012 1:40:33 PM | show profile | flag this post
You're so funny, cruiser!
Condoleeza Rice can NOT do her only job--to keep America safe as National Security Advisor (failing spectacularly with America's largest terrorist attack, losing 3,000 people in the process and 2 of the country's most iconic pieces of architecture, and hundreds of billions of dollars), and the Rice you suggest needs to resign is Susan, not Condoleeza.
And Condi's boss, who sent the entire country into war that's cost us into the trillions of dollars, he shouldn't have resigned, but Barack Obama should...because for a few days, they got the reasoning of the attack wrong.
There aren't words to express how fabulously stupid and partisan your post is. They always are, but this one might well be the Mt. Everest of dumb, the Mariana Trench of low posts.
Posted - 9/29/2012 2:12:37 PM | show profile | flag this post
the radical left is attempting to change the subject because it doesn't have a viable rebuttal to my post.
Posted - 9/29/2012 2:34:35 PM | show profile | flag this post
It's quite specifically referencing your post
Putting the gravity of your point to the test by comparing it with others is the best way to measure its merit. And doing so renders your suggestion right up there to the phenomenally stupid category.
Thing is, even you know it.
Posted - 9/29/2012 2:53:42 PM | show profile | flag this post
"reasoning of the attack wrong"
the obama admin. flat out lied. its much more important for the obama admin. to silence dissent- than to label the attack what it is- a terrorist attack.
Posted - 9/29/2012 3:30:28 PM | show profile | flag this post
...they gather all the evidence before declaring it to be one thing or another. They should rush to judgment and assume it wasn't just one of the dozens of demonstrations breaking out across the middle east at the time?
Small change thinking, that.
Posted - 9/29/2012 3:56:06 PM | show profile | flag this post
you're trying to change the subject. I was speaking specifically about the attack on the consulate at Benghazi.
Posted - 9/29/2012 4:20:15 PM | show profile | flag this post
there were spontaneous protests over the film going on all over Northern Africa and the Mideast, the fact there was a spontaneous protest in Benghazi. Whether terrorists took advantage of that protest to cover an attack of opportunity is what intel agencies are trying to determine.
We do know this: Libyans tried to rescue our ambassador and there was a spontaneous protest the following day in Tripoli of Libyans protesting the death of Stevens -- who they saw as a hero of Libya.
At any rate, Obama's careful and thorough approach to the situation is far superior that Romney's ill-informed and falsehood-filled response to the attack in Egypt.
We need a grownup like Obama who listens to his intel agencies and four-stars before choosing a course of action -- not a billionaire CEO, rich-boy who ignores them and demands the world conform to his uninformed opinions.
Posted - 9/29/2012 6:54:01 PM | show profile | flag this post
"At any rate, Obama's careful and thorough approach"
which includes lies and cover-ups.
within 24 hrs. after the benghazi attack, the obama admin. knew it was a planned terrorist attack. they knew who was behind it.
why not tell the truth in the beginning? why spend the next week lying and covering up?
Posted - 9/29/2012 7:33:27 PM | show profile | flag this post
Let me get this straight...
This president (among others) should resign--because of an intelligence failure AFTER an attack--not by us, but by our enemy--a tragic attack that resulted in the deaths of four Americans.
We found out, in a matter of days mind you, that the initial intelligence was WRONG. And in the span of two weeks, totally reversed ourselves--publicly--Said the initial intelligence was wrong--and are now trying to find the killers.
With me so far?? And how does this compare/contrast with another Adminstration who DID the attacking based on false intelligence--resulting in the deaths of not four, but 162,000 deaths, 4,486 Americans included. Gee. Let's ponder that. Did anyone resign in disgrace over the Iraq War??? far from it--the guy who provided the false intel was give the Medal of Freedom.
This (Libya) was an preliminary intelligence screw-up, we all can agree on that. But it involved who attacked us. Far different than US attacking someone else. When it became clear the initial story was wrong, this Admin corrected itself. Far different than the previous Admin taking YEARS to admit 'Okay, so we were wrong about that..."
Obviously, the hypocrisy here is staggering. Leave it to people like Peter King ('The Muslim threat among us') and cruise to go ape-shit over an Intel failure 'after the fact'--and GEE--we can make this political!!
Ain't gonna fly.
Posted - 9/29/2012 7:43:50 PM | show profile | flag this post
And this was
...essentially, my point from the beginning of this thread. Cruiser's comic posts have all the unintentionally buffoonery that the Republican Presidential nominee has.
Posted - 9/30/2012 5:45:05 PM | show profile | flag this post
"because of an intelligence failure AFTER an attack'
the obama admin. had warnings of a attack- and did nothing.
in fact, the obama admin. had three years worth of warnings about embassy security-and did nothing.
Posted - 9/30/2012 7:43:59 PM | show profile | flag this post
"in fact, the obama admin. had three years worth of warnings about embassy security-and did nothing."
That's just not true. We can't close down all the embassies. They have all been on alert snice the first 9/11. A surprise attack is just that. By your logic, our 6,000+ dead American soldiers serving in Bush's two wars have no one to blame but themselves...they were warned about the violence...
Wha happened was a tragedy. I don't see how a Romney Administration would have been better prepared.
Posted - 10/1/2012 9:57:14 AM | show profile | flag this post
Good grief, con (puzo)...
The U.S. consulate was put through a security "health check" right before the attacks.
The intel gathered -- if you and cruzo had been following this story for the past three weeks like the rest of us -- would have known that all terrorist intercepts concerning an attack in Benghazi came during or AFTER the attack.
That suggests that terrorists tried to seize an opportunity triggered by the protests.
Posted - 10/1/2012 12:04:16 PM | show profile | flag this post
It's humorously pathetic to watch
left wingers jumping through their asses trying to explain away the PRE-PLANNED, COORDINATED, MILITARIZED attack on the Benghazi consulate.
The Libyan president knew what happened...and he related it to Bob Schieffer on CBS.
Posted - 10/1/2012 12:30:58 PM | show profile | flag this post
"humorously pathetic" perfectly describes those who choose to defend supreme leader- instead of facing facts.
Posted - 10/1/2012 1:04:47 PM | show profile | flag this post
I can't believe
that Obama's minions in the nedia are still trying to sell that bullsh*t story of a spontaneous demonstration against the Benghazi consulate...EVEN AFTER THE ADMINISTRATION ADMITTED LAST WEEK THAT IT WAS A PLANNED AND COORDINATED ATTACK.
Posted - 10/1/2012 1:24:11 PM | show profile | flag this post
we've seen how ill-informed you are -- simply by "discovering" the identity of the "Innocence of Muslims" maker -- three weeks AFTER it was plastered all over the popular media.
Now, you propose to change timelines and alter statements to "prove" your false argument that the Obama administration knew in advance of the Benghazi attack and did nothing.
Not surprising, since your sidekick "con" believes Lyme Disease was a government conspiracy.
Sad that you've become a "Truther" as well as a "Birther."
So, why don't you tell us how 9/11 was also an "inside job?"