This post has been removed.

In response to NO MO O's comment:

Former CIA Director David Petraeus and other top intelligence officials were kept out of the loop on secret raids in Libya which may have triggered the attacks on the U.S. Consulate last year

 

We shouldn't attack terrorists because that might make them mad?

Back when Bush was President, isn't that exactly the strawman the RIGHT accused the LEFT of making, and then called the left a bunch of wusses?

Now Fox is going to Blame Obama for Benghazi because we attacked terrorists? Because Brennan didn't coordinate with Petreaus?

Clue: Even if that was a valid argument, it would be completely irrelevant because the terrorists don't care how the attacks against them are coordinated. They care about the attacks!

 

 

 

 

 

 

LOL

 

 

When are we going to hear from the survivors of Bengazi?  Why won't Obama let them speak?

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

That depends on whether or not Hillary becomes the next Democrat candidate for president. If she does don't plan on hearing from them until at least 2024.

 

 

This post has been removed.

 

We're cool with attacking terrorists. We're not so cool about lying about it when there are the inevitable consequences. This is a common theme in this administration, say one thing and do somthing completely different.

Go ahead and keep attacking terrorists but don't try to hide it and pretend that the Islamists are our friends.

Oh, and when our people are attacked don't go for some beauty sleep so you'll look your best at the campaign rally the next day.

 

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

 

Why don't the Obamy drones at NBC/ABC/CBS/NYT/ETC go find them for an interview? You'd think that it falls under some important "Americans need to know" journalistic rule.

And when I say CBS I'm excluding Sheryl Atkinson, she's great.

 

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

In response to StalkingButler's comment:

Oh, where to begin where to begin. Too many interrelated distortions and misrepresentations.

 

1. Characterizing the response as "consequences" is a deliberate deception. If they really are terrorists, they are going to try to attack us anyway. That's what terrorists do.

 

2. Regardless of what you think of #1, Obama never said "attacking terrorists has no consequences." Or get me a transcript, please.

 

3. Muslims are our friends. Except the ones who are terrorists. We kill those. Trouble with distinctions much?

In response to StalkingButler's comment:

Why don't the Palindrones at Fox go find them for us? Where's WSJ? Where's Glenn Beck? Where's Hannity? Where's O'Reilly? Where's Drudge?

And if there was dirt, don't you'd think they'd get (and embellish) it?

They're dying to run with "Obama lied, People died".

 

Your comment reflects your bias. You are simply suggesting NBC has to interview them - and successfully dig up dirt about Obama - to prove to you that NBC isn't an "Obamy drone."

Silly. You've framed the question wrong. Garbage in, garbage out.

Why were we wasting our time with congressional hearings, when there was an e-book by a right-wing blogger and a chief petty officer in the works?

 

This post has been removed.

In response to Newtster's comment:

Don't you mean:

In response to Newtster's comment:

 

 

 

 

Please respond to me even though I've already decided what you will have said?

 

I am not so naive. I was never under any illusions that the U.S., and just about every other meaningful power on the planet, has secret operatives doing secret things....and that those things must be secret in order to work. I didn't have any problem with this knowledge when Bush was president, neither do I now.

Of course, you'll just call me a liar because...well..you already decided what I believe. Because you're a good civil person like that.

What I had and have a problem with is....torture. Worst, a state sanctioned program of torture.

There are some lines, though I have to balance my beliefs against pragmatism. Unlike some here....     cough cough...

 

 

In response to Newtster's comment:

You're giving the authors too much credit.  The assassination of Osama bin Laden goes through the normal chain of command, but the operations in Libya are too sensitive?

Ambassador Stevens was a revenge assassination target, but he was recovered by Libyan civilians and brought (without any resistance) to a nearby hospital where he died of smoke inhalation?

These guys are just a couple of jack-asses trying to capitalize off right-wing paranoia.

 

In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

whatdoyou:

Well said

This post has been removed.