I do remember her, and i think she was so clouded by her sons death she went bonkers, so I get your point. As always, cooler head prevails.
Embassy Attacks
- Thread starter Babagounj
- Start date
I did not hear what Condi said, and Geraldo, unless hes standing in a hurricane, dont listen to him much..................Post if it available if not Ill look it up later, thanks.
Buddybrown
Well-Known Member
---I'm not quite convinced,---why wait a month and a half before saying anything?---And then when he did speak up he said this--- "They refused to pull the trigger," Woods said. "Those people who made the decision and who knew about the decision and lied about it are murderers of my son." Woods said he---- FORGIVES whoever denied the apparent request, but he urged them to "stand up."----Yeah I forgive someone who can't even tell me a straight story because I already don't like them -- SOUNDS TO ME HE LIKE HE JUST WANTS THE TRUTH ABOUT HIS SONS MURDER--- Father of ex-SEAL: Those who denied request for help at consulate 'murderers of my son' | Fox News
Buddybrown
Well-Known Member
Ten Questions for the White House: ----1.) To whom did the president give the first of his "three very clear directives"—that is, "make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to?" 2.) How did he transmit this directive to the military and other agencies? 3.) During the time when Americans were under attack, did the president convene a formal or informal meeting of his national security council? Did the president go to the situation room? 4.) During this time, with which members of the national security team did the president speak directly? 5.) Did Obama speak by phone or teleconference with the combatant commanders who would have sent assistance to the men under attack? 6.) Did he speak with CIA director David Petraeus? 7.) Was the president made aware of the repeated requests for assistance from the men under attack? When and by whom? 8.) Did he issue any directives in response to these requests? 9.) Did the president refuse to authorize an armed drone strike on the attackers? 10.) Did the president refuse to authorize a AC-130 or MC-130 to enter Libyan airspace during the attack? THE WEEKLY STANDARD has asked the White House these questions, and awaits a response. --- Ten Questions for the White House | The Weekly Standard
Of course it sounds that way to you, it's exactly what you want to hear. This is known as confirmation bias.
Buddybrown
Well-Known Member
Sorry, but you don't know me. I would like to think that my observations are more a result of logic and reasoning based on the information that is out there so far. I never wanted to hear what I've heard so far.... Hey, look up...never mind!
Sorry, but you don't know me. I would like to think that my observations are more a result of logic and reasoning based on the information that is out there so far. I never wanted to hear what I've heard so far.... Hey, look up...never mind!
Im outraged, but we do not have the truth yet, and I do not know why. I assume it lies somewhere in the middle, but one thing for sure, they flubbed it from the beginning, and made us think this way.
I am sure if the president had been assassinated, we would know by now who it was, and he would be in jail. Of course then almost 50 yrs later we arent sure who killed JFK, either.
I am sure if the president had been assassinated, we would know by now who it was, and he would be in jail. Of course then almost 50 yrs later we arent sure who killed JFK, either.
M
MenInBrown
Guest
I think BUSH did it.
wkmac
Well-Known Member
M
MenInBrown
Guest
See...when all else fails...just blame BUSH.
wkmac
Well-Known Member
When you consider Poppy Bush's background, may be JFK said something which needed shutting up?
President John friend Kennedy Secret Society Speech version 2 - YouTube
Babagounj
Strength through joy
In post # 39 , on Sept 12th I called the administration's response a cover story .
I'm no Rhodes Scholar , yet I understood this incident .
Makes one wonder why most other news outlets are only now reporting what I already knew ?
And I must say that TOS & MrFEDX played their parts well, from the start they bragged about military forces that would be coming to OUR embassy aid . Unfortunately even these two were badly mistaken about the unfolding situation.
Which to this day is still a nightmare.
I'm no Rhodes Scholar , yet I understood this incident .
Makes one wonder why most other news outlets are only now reporting what I already knew ?
And I must say that TOS & MrFEDX played their parts well, from the start they bragged about military forces that would be coming to OUR embassy aid . Unfortunately even these two were badly mistaken about the unfolding situation.
Which to this day is still a nightmare.
island1fox
Well-Known Member
September 11 th. to October 28 th-----We are supposed to believe that the most powerful man in the world still does not have all the facts -----MULARKEY!!!
moreluck
golden ticket member
He’d throw his own kids under the bus if he felt it would help him.
Via Weekly Standard:
Via Weekly Standard:
Yesterday, the CIA insisted that ”No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.” The denial is in reference to the report that the CIA held back forces from helping the Americans who were under attack in Benghazi, Libya on 9/11.
And today, the White House is making a similar claim. ”Neither the president nor anyone in the White House denied any requests for assistance in Benghazi,” an Obama administration spokesman tells Yahoo’s Olivier Knox. [...]
So, since the the CIA says it wasn’t any of their guys, and since the White House is trying to eliminate any blame on themselves, does this mean the order not to help those Americans under siege in Benghazi came from the military? The White House, it would seem, is trying to shift blame in that direction.
And today, the White House is making a similar claim. ”Neither the president nor anyone in the White House denied any requests for assistance in Benghazi,” an Obama administration spokesman tells Yahoo’s Olivier Knox. [...]
So, since the the CIA says it wasn’t any of their guys, and since the White House is trying to eliminate any blame on themselves, does this mean the order not to help those Americans under siege in Benghazi came from the military? The White House, it would seem, is trying to shift blame in that direction.
Amazing isnt it. Throwing so many theories around, like a big merry go round. Coz when it stops, the truth will tumble off, and they dont want that.
M
MenInBrown
Guest
Its funny to see him tumble...1st lose his reelection then the truth come out about his cover-up...so pathetic
wkmac
Well-Known Member
Well being we've had a history of accepting the prepared storylines of other past 9/11 and associated events, there was no reason to believe on their part that we wouldn't accept, let's see how'd you put that, Mularkey I think it was, that we wouldn't accept more mularkey as we've accepted in the past!
I mean right now at this moment 2 large political sides have swallowed "mularkey" up to their eyeballs and oddly enough I don't hear any complaining about that.
M
MenInBrown
Guest
Listen to yourself.
wkmac
Well-Known Member
ABSOLUTELY SHOCKING! Isn't it?
Similar threads
