| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#12
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Remember Benghazi?
On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 15:15:46 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 11/23/2014 3:05 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 14:28:56 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/23/2014 2:17 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On 11/22/2014 9:27 AM, F*O*A*D wrote: You know, that non-scandal the GOPers investigated, investigated, and investigated, and our own little PsychoScotty pushed... Well, the GOP now admits, in writing, there was nothing of a serious nature to be found there. Nothing. The House Select Intelligence Committee?controlled by Republicans?has been investigating the Benghazi attacks in minute detail for two years. Today, with the midterm elections safely past, they issued their findings. Their exoneration of the White House was sweeping and nearly absolute. The Committee first concludes that the CIA ensured sufficient security for CIA facilities in Benghazi....Appropriate U.S. personnel made reasonable tactical decisions that night, and the Committee found no evidence that there was either a stand down order or a denial of available air support.... Second, the Committee finds that there was no intelligence failure prior to the attacks. In the months prior, the IC provided intelligence about previous attacks and the increased threat environment in Benghazi, but the IC did not have specific, tactical warning of the September 11 attacks. Third, the Committee finds that a mixed group of individuals, including those affiliated with Al Qa'ida, participated in the attacks.... Fourth, the Committee concludes that after the attacks, the early intelligence assessments and the Administration's initial public narrative on the causes and motivations for the attacks were not fully accurate....There was no protest. The CIA only changed its initial assessment about a protest on September 24, 2012, when closed caption television footage became available on September 18, 2012 (two days after Ambassador Susan Rice spoke).... Fifth, the Committee finds that the process used to generate the talking points HPSCI asked for?and which were used for Ambassador Rice's public appearances?was flawed.... Finally, the Committee found no evidence that any officer was intimidated, wrongly forced to sign a nondisclosure agreement or otherwise kept from speaking to Congress, or polygraphed because of their presence in Benghazi. The Committee also found no evidence that the CIA conducted unauthorized activities in Benghazi and no evidence that the IC shipped arms to Syria. I read that yesterday. Another thing that caught my attention is that the specific report you are citing is the seventh of eight "investigations" conducted regarding the Benghazi affair. This report, by the House Committee, is consistent with the six previous investigations. One more investigation is being conducted apparently. We, the US, were invovled in "gun running" in Libya. Do you know that to be a fact? The CIA denies it but said they "can't comment on other agencies". So if the CIA doesn't know for sure, where did you get your intel? Or is your position that the CIA is just lying? http://www.globalresearch.ca/cia-gun...-syria/5345464 John, that's one of many media reports of allegations. None have been proven. The CIA denies it. I am not saying the allegations are not true and I am not saying the CIA isn't lying. BAR made a unequivocal statement that "We, the US, were involved in "gun running" in Libya". I simply asked where he got that factual info since no one else or any other agency seems to know. Given the choice between BAR and the CIA, I'd stick with BAR - especially since so many of the various media tend to agree with him. |
|
#13
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Remember Benghazi?
On Saturday, November 22, 2014 9:17:14 AM UTC-8, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 11/22/14 10:08 AM, Poco Loco wrote: On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 09:27:20 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: You know, that non-scandal the GOPers investigated, investigated, and investigated, and our own little PsychoScotty pushed... Well, the GOP now admits, in writing, there was nothing of a serious nature to be found there. Nothing. Good. They investigated and cleared those being investigated. That's the way the system is supposed to work, Toad. The Grand Jury in Ferguson will soon provide its findings. That's the way the system is supposed to work. Zimmerman was found not guilty. That's the way the system works. Why does that **** you off, Toad? I have virtually no confidence in the American legal system as it pertains to and treats minorities. Zimmerman was and is a thug. OJ was a minority thug as well. He walked. Cochran was a minority racist who pulled the race card. He won. Think of a better line Krause. |
|
#14
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Remember Benghazi?
On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 16:59:28 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 11/23/14 3:24 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 15:15:46 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/23/2014 3:05 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 14:28:56 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/23/2014 2:17 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On 11/22/2014 9:27 AM, F*O*A*D wrote: You know, that non-scandal the GOPers investigated, investigated, and investigated, and our own little PsychoScotty pushed... Well, the GOP now admits, in writing, there was nothing of a serious nature to be found there. Nothing. The House Select Intelligence Committee?controlled by Republicans?has been investigating the Benghazi attacks in minute detail for two years. Today, with the midterm elections safely past, they issued their findings. Their exoneration of the White House was sweeping and nearly absolute. The Committee first concludes that the CIA ensured sufficient security for CIA facilities in Benghazi....Appropriate U.S. personnel made reasonable tactical decisions that night, and the Committee found no evidence that there was either a stand down order or a denial of available air support.... Second, the Committee finds that there was no intelligence failure prior to the attacks. In the months prior, the IC provided intelligence about previous attacks and the increased threat environment in Benghazi, but the IC did not have specific, tactical warning of the September 11 attacks. Third, the Committee finds that a mixed group of individuals, including those affiliated with Al Qa'ida, participated in the attacks.... Fourth, the Committee concludes that after the attacks, the early intelligence assessments and the Administration's initial public narrative on the causes and motivations for the attacks were not fully accurate....There was no protest. The CIA only changed its initial assessment about a protest on September 24, 2012, when closed caption television footage became available on September 18, 2012 (two days after Ambassador Susan Rice spoke).... Fifth, the Committee finds that the process used to generate the talking points HPSCI asked for?and which were used for Ambassador Rice's public appearances?was flawed.... Finally, the Committee found no evidence that any officer was intimidated, wrongly forced to sign a nondisclosure agreement or otherwise kept from speaking to Congress, or polygraphed because of their presence in Benghazi. The Committee also found no evidence that the CIA conducted unauthorized activities in Benghazi and no evidence that the IC shipped arms to Syria. I read that yesterday. Another thing that caught my attention is that the specific report you are citing is the seventh of eight "investigations" conducted regarding the Benghazi affair. This report, by the House Committee, is consistent with the six previous investigations. One more investigation is being conducted apparently. We, the US, were invovled in "gun running" in Libya. Do you know that to be a fact? The CIA denies it but said they "can't comment on other agencies". So if the CIA doesn't know for sure, where did you get your intel? Or is your position that the CIA is just lying? http://www.globalresearch.ca/cia-gun...-syria/5345464 John, that's one of many media reports of allegations. None have been proven. The CIA denies it. I am not saying the allegations are not true and I am not saying the CIA isn't lying. BAR made a unequivocal statement that "We, the US, were involved in "gun running" in Libya". I simply asked where he got that factual info since no one else or any other agency seems to know. Given the choice between BAR and the CIA, I'd stick with BAR - especially since so many of the various media tend to agree with him. Indeed, the media sure has reported Darryl Issa's never-ended, dead-end inquiries and of course, BAR is a degreed, credentialed and nationally recognized expert in diplomacy and gun running. Oh, wait... He's not a liar. That puts him way above you, Toad. |
|
#15
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Remember Benghazi?
On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 17:18:21 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 11/23/14 5:16 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 16:59:28 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 11/23/14 3:24 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 15:15:46 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/23/2014 3:05 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 14:28:56 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/23/2014 2:17 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On 11/22/2014 9:27 AM, F*O*A*D wrote: You know, that non-scandal the GOPers investigated, investigated, and investigated, and our own little PsychoScotty pushed... Well, the GOP now admits, in writing, there was nothing of a serious nature to be found there. Nothing. The House Select Intelligence Committee?controlled by Republicans?has been investigating the Benghazi attacks in minute detail for two years. Today, with the midterm elections safely past, they issued their findings. Their exoneration of the White House was sweeping and nearly absolute. The Committee first concludes that the CIA ensured sufficient security for CIA facilities in Benghazi....Appropriate U.S. personnel made reasonable tactical decisions that night, and the Committee found no evidence that there was either a stand down order or a denial of available air support.... Second, the Committee finds that there was no intelligence failure prior to the attacks. In the months prior, the IC provided intelligence about previous attacks and the increased threat environment in Benghazi, but the IC did not have specific, tactical warning of the September 11 attacks. Third, the Committee finds that a mixed group of individuals, including those affiliated with Al Qa'ida, participated in the attacks.... Fourth, the Committee concludes that after the attacks, the early intelligence assessments and the Administration's initial public narrative on the causes and motivations for the attacks were not fully accurate....There was no protest. The CIA only changed its initial assessment about a protest on September 24, 2012, when closed caption television footage became available on September 18, 2012 (two days after Ambassador Susan Rice spoke).... Fifth, the Committee finds that the process used to generate the talking points HPSCI asked for?and which were used for Ambassador Rice's public appearances?was flawed.... Finally, the Committee found no evidence that any officer was intimidated, wrongly forced to sign a nondisclosure agreement or otherwise kept from speaking to Congress, or polygraphed because of their presence in Benghazi. The Committee also found no evidence that the CIA conducted unauthorized activities in Benghazi and no evidence that the IC shipped arms to Syria. I read that yesterday. Another thing that caught my attention is that the specific report you are citing is the seventh of eight "investigations" conducted regarding the Benghazi affair. This report, by the House Committee, is consistent with the six previous investigations. One more investigation is being conducted apparently. We, the US, were invovled in "gun running" in Libya. Do you know that to be a fact? The CIA denies it but said they "can't comment on other agencies". So if the CIA doesn't know for sure, where did you get your intel? Or is your position that the CIA is just lying? http://www.globalresearch.ca/cia-gun...-syria/5345464 John, that's one of many media reports of allegations. None have been proven. The CIA denies it. I am not saying the allegations are not true and I am not saying the CIA isn't lying. BAR made a unequivocal statement that "We, the US, were involved in "gun running" in Libya". I simply asked where he got that factual info since no one else or any other agency seems to know. Given the choice between BAR and the CIA, I'd stick with BAR - especially since so many of the various media tend to agree with him. Indeed, the media sure has reported Darryl Issa's never-ended, dead-end inquiries and of course, BAR is a degreed, credentialed and nationally recognized expert in diplomacy and gun running. Oh, wait... He's not a liar. That puts him way above you, Toad. *snerk* BAR's even more of an outspoken racist than you are, and he's a John Bircher. That can be true only if Luddite chimes in with 'it's ingrained' or some such. Like I said, he's not a liar, which puts him way above you, Toad. |
|
#16
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Remember Benghazi?
On 11/23/2014 2:17 PM, BAR wrote:
In article , says... On 11/22/2014 9:27 AM, F*O*A*D wrote: You know, that non-scandal the GOPers investigated, investigated, and investigated, and our own little PsychoScotty pushed... Well, the GOP now admits, in writing, there was nothing of a serious nature to be found there. Nothing. The House Select Intelligence Committee?controlled by Republicans?has been investigating the Benghazi attacks in minute detail for two years. Today, with the midterm elections safely past, they issued their findings. Their exoneration of the White House was sweeping and nearly absolute. The Committee first concludes that the CIA ensured sufficient security for CIA facilities in Benghazi....Appropriate U.S. personnel made reasonable tactical decisions that night, and the Committee found no evidence that there was either a stand down order or a denial of available air support.... Second, the Committee finds that there was no intelligence failure prior to the attacks. In the months prior, the IC provided intelligence about previous attacks and the increased threat environment in Benghazi, but the IC did not have specific, tactical warning of the September 11 attacks. Third, the Committee finds that a mixed group of individuals, including those affiliated with Al Qa'ida, participated in the attacks.... Fourth, the Committee concludes that after the attacks, the early intelligence assessments and the Administration's initial public narrative on the causes and motivations for the attacks were not fully accurate....There was no protest. The CIA only changed its initial assessment about a protest on September 24, 2012, when closed caption television footage became available on September 18, 2012 (two days after Ambassador Susan Rice spoke).... Fifth, the Committee finds that the process used to generate the talking points HPSCI asked for?and which were used for Ambassador Rice's public appearances?was flawed.... Finally, the Committee found no evidence that any officer was intimidated, wrongly forced to sign a nondisclosure agreement or otherwise kept from speaking to Congress, or polygraphed because of their presence in Benghazi. The Committee also found no evidence that the CIA conducted unauthorized activities in Benghazi and no evidence that the IC shipped arms to Syria. I read that yesterday. Another thing that caught my attention is that the specific report you are citing is the seventh of eight "investigations" conducted regarding the Benghazi affair. This report, by the House Committee, is consistent with the six previous investigations. One more investigation is being conducted apparently. We, the US, were invovled in "gun running" in Libya. Actually, it was missiles, but it's all the same... Fortunately for our CIA and others repubs put security and patriotism above personal vendettas.. if this was a repub president the libs could get a bit of political gain, they would be singing it far and wide, outing the agents and process just in time for the next election.... |
|
#17
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Remember Benghazi?
On 11/23/2014 2:28 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/23/2014 2:17 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On 11/22/2014 9:27 AM, F*O*A*D wrote: You know, that non-scandal the GOPers investigated, investigated, and investigated, and our own little PsychoScotty pushed... Well, the GOP now admits, in writing, there was nothing of a serious nature to be found there. Nothing. The House Select Intelligence Committee?controlled by Republicans?has been investigating the Benghazi attacks in minute detail for two years. Today, with the midterm elections safely past, they issued their findings. Their exoneration of the White House was sweeping and nearly absolute. The Committee first concludes that the CIA ensured sufficient security for CIA facilities in Benghazi....Appropriate U.S. personnel made reasonable tactical decisions that night, and the Committee found no evidence that there was either a stand down order or a denial of available air support.... Second, the Committee finds that there was no intelligence failure prior to the attacks. In the months prior, the IC provided intelligence about previous attacks and the increased threat environment in Benghazi, but the IC did not have specific, tactical warning of the September 11 attacks. Third, the Committee finds that a mixed group of individuals, including those affiliated with Al Qa'ida, participated in the attacks.... Fourth, the Committee concludes that after the attacks, the early intelligence assessments and the Administration's initial public narrative on the causes and motivations for the attacks were not fully accurate....There was no protest. The CIA only changed its initial assessment about a protest on September 24, 2012, when closed caption television footage became available on September 18, 2012 (two days after Ambassador Susan Rice spoke).... Fifth, the Committee finds that the process used to generate the talking points HPSCI asked for?and which were used for Ambassador Rice's public appearances?was flawed.... Finally, the Committee found no evidence that any officer was intimidated, wrongly forced to sign a nondisclosure agreement or otherwise kept from speaking to Congress, or polygraphed because of their presence in Benghazi. The Committee also found no evidence that the CIA conducted unauthorized activities in Benghazi and no evidence that the IC shipped arms to Syria. I read that yesterday. Another thing that caught my attention is that the specific report you are citing is the seventh of eight "investigations" conducted regarding the Benghazi affair. This report, by the House Committee, is consistent with the six previous investigations. One more investigation is being conducted apparently. We, the US, were invovled in "gun running" in Libya. Do you know that to be a fact? The CIA denies it but said they "can't comment on other agencies". So if the CIA doesn't know for sure, where did you get your intel? Or is your position that the CIA is just lying? Charles Krauthhammer(sp?) and several other respectable journalists but it was missiles not guns... |
|
#18
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Remember Benghazi?
On 11/23/2014 3:05 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 14:28:56 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/23/2014 2:17 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On 11/22/2014 9:27 AM, F*O*A*D wrote: You know, that non-scandal the GOPers investigated, investigated, and investigated, and our own little PsychoScotty pushed... Well, the GOP now admits, in writing, there was nothing of a serious nature to be found there. Nothing. The House Select Intelligence Committee?controlled by Republicans?has been investigating the Benghazi attacks in minute detail for two years. Today, with the midterm elections safely past, they issued their findings. Their exoneration of the White House was sweeping and nearly absolute. The Committee first concludes that the CIA ensured sufficient security for CIA facilities in Benghazi....Appropriate U.S. personnel made reasonable tactical decisions that night, and the Committee found no evidence that there was either a stand down order or a denial of available air support.... Second, the Committee finds that there was no intelligence failure prior to the attacks. In the months prior, the IC provided intelligence about previous attacks and the increased threat environment in Benghazi, but the IC did not have specific, tactical warning of the September 11 attacks. Third, the Committee finds that a mixed group of individuals, including those affiliated with Al Qa'ida, participated in the attacks.... Fourth, the Committee concludes that after the attacks, the early intelligence assessments and the Administration's initial public narrative on the causes and motivations for the attacks were not fully accurate....There was no protest. The CIA only changed its initial assessment about a protest on September 24, 2012, when closed caption television footage became available on September 18, 2012 (two days after Ambassador Susan Rice spoke).... Fifth, the Committee finds that the process used to generate the talking points HPSCI asked for?and which were used for Ambassador Rice's public appearances?was flawed.... Finally, the Committee found no evidence that any officer was intimidated, wrongly forced to sign a nondisclosure agreement or otherwise kept from speaking to Congress, or polygraphed because of their presence in Benghazi. The Committee also found no evidence that the CIA conducted unauthorized activities in Benghazi and no evidence that the IC shipped arms to Syria. I read that yesterday. Another thing that caught my attention is that the specific report you are citing is the seventh of eight "investigations" conducted regarding the Benghazi affair. This report, by the House Committee, is consistent with the six previous investigations. One more investigation is being conducted apparently. We, the US, were invovled in "gun running" in Libya. Do you know that to be a fact? The CIA denies it but said they "can't comment on other agencies". So if the CIA doesn't know for sure, where did you get your intel? Or is your position that the CIA is just lying? http://www.globalresearch.ca/cia-gun...-syria/5345464 Hey John, the CIA denied it! You would think they would be happy to open their books to AlQueda and the rest of the world on exactly this operation ran, and who ran it... but for some strange reason, they say they weren't involved.. Imagine that, the CIA working under cover, damn them.... lol... |
|
#19
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Remember Benghazi?
On 11/23/2014 3:24 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 15:15:46 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/23/2014 3:05 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 14:28:56 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/23/2014 2:17 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On 11/22/2014 9:27 AM, F*O*A*D wrote: You know, that non-scandal the GOPers investigated, investigated, and investigated, and our own little PsychoScotty pushed... Well, the GOP now admits, in writing, there was nothing of a serious nature to be found there. Nothing. The House Select Intelligence Committee?controlled by Republicans?has been investigating the Benghazi attacks in minute detail for two years. Today, with the midterm elections safely past, they issued their findings. Their exoneration of the White House was sweeping and nearly absolute. The Committee first concludes that the CIA ensured sufficient security for CIA facilities in Benghazi....Appropriate U.S. personnel made reasonable tactical decisions that night, and the Committee found no evidence that there was either a stand down order or a denial of available air support.... Second, the Committee finds that there was no intelligence failure prior to the attacks. In the months prior, the IC provided intelligence about previous attacks and the increased threat environment in Benghazi, but the IC did not have specific, tactical warning of the September 11 attacks. Third, the Committee finds that a mixed group of individuals, including those affiliated with Al Qa'ida, participated in the attacks.... Fourth, the Committee concludes that after the attacks, the early intelligence assessments and the Administration's initial public narrative on the causes and motivations for the attacks were not fully accurate....There was no protest. The CIA only changed its initial assessment about a protest on September 24, 2012, when closed caption television footage became available on September 18, 2012 (two days after Ambassador Susan Rice spoke).... Fifth, the Committee finds that the process used to generate the talking points HPSCI asked for?and which were used for Ambassador Rice's public appearances?was flawed.... Finally, the Committee found no evidence that any officer was intimidated, wrongly forced to sign a nondisclosure agreement or otherwise kept from speaking to Congress, or polygraphed because of their presence in Benghazi. The Committee also found no evidence that the CIA conducted unauthorized activities in Benghazi and no evidence that the IC shipped arms to Syria. I read that yesterday. Another thing that caught my attention is that the specific report you are citing is the seventh of eight "investigations" conducted regarding the Benghazi affair. This report, by the House Committee, is consistent with the six previous investigations. One more investigation is being conducted apparently. We, the US, were invovled in "gun running" in Libya. Do you know that to be a fact? The CIA denies it but said they "can't comment on other agencies". So if the CIA doesn't know for sure, where did you get your intel? Or is your position that the CIA is just lying? http://www.globalresearch.ca/cia-gun...-syria/5345464 John, that's one of many media reports of allegations. None have been proven. The CIA denies it. I am not saying the allegations are not true and I am not saying the CIA isn't lying. BAR made a unequivocal statement that "We, the US, were involved in "gun running" in Libya". I simply asked where he got that factual info since no one else or any other agency seems to know. Given the choice between BAR and the CIA, I'd stick with BAR - especially since so many of the various media tend to agree with him. I suppose luddite thinks is was a spontaneous action because of a video they had never ever seen or even heard of till the day after the attack... lol! Hey, that's what Hillary said, in fact she doesn't even think it's worth looking into.... |
|
#20
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Remember Benghazi?
On 11/23/2014 5:47 PM, KC wrote:
On 11/23/2014 3:24 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 15:15:46 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/23/2014 3:05 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 14:28:56 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/23/2014 2:17 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On 11/22/2014 9:27 AM, F*O*A*D wrote: You know, that non-scandal the GOPers investigated, investigated, and investigated, and our own little PsychoScotty pushed... Well, the GOP now admits, in writing, there was nothing of a serious nature to be found there. Nothing. The House Select Intelligence Committee?controlled by Republicans?has been investigating the Benghazi attacks in minute detail for two years. Today, with the midterm elections safely past, they issued their findings. Their exoneration of the White House was sweeping and nearly absolute. The Committee first concludes that the CIA ensured sufficient security for CIA facilities in Benghazi....Appropriate U.S. personnel made reasonable tactical decisions that night, and the Committee found no evidence that there was either a stand down order or a denial of available air support.... Second, the Committee finds that there was no intelligence failure prior to the attacks. In the months prior, the IC provided intelligence about previous attacks and the increased threat environment in Benghazi, but the IC did not have specific, tactical warning of the September 11 attacks. Third, the Committee finds that a mixed group of individuals, including those affiliated with Al Qa'ida, participated in the attacks.... Fourth, the Committee concludes that after the attacks, the early intelligence assessments and the Administration's initial public narrative on the causes and motivations for the attacks were not fully accurate....There was no protest. The CIA only changed its initial assessment about a protest on September 24, 2012, when closed caption television footage became available on September 18, 2012 (two days after Ambassador Susan Rice spoke).... Fifth, the Committee finds that the process used to generate the talking points HPSCI asked for?and which were used for Ambassador Rice's public appearances?was flawed.... Finally, the Committee found no evidence that any officer was intimidated, wrongly forced to sign a nondisclosure agreement or otherwise kept from speaking to Congress, or polygraphed because of their presence in Benghazi. The Committee also found no evidence that the CIA conducted unauthorized activities in Benghazi and no evidence that the IC shipped arms to Syria. I read that yesterday. Another thing that caught my attention is that the specific report you are citing is the seventh of eight "investigations" conducted regarding the Benghazi affair. This report, by the House Committee, is consistent with the six previous investigations. One more investigation is being conducted apparently. We, the US, were invovled in "gun running" in Libya. Do you know that to be a fact? The CIA denies it but said they "can't comment on other agencies". So if the CIA doesn't know for sure, where did you get your intel? Or is your position that the CIA is just lying? http://www.globalresearch.ca/cia-gun...-syria/5345464 John, that's one of many media reports of allegations. None have been proven. The CIA denies it. I am not saying the allegations are not true and I am not saying the CIA isn't lying. BAR made a unequivocal statement that "We, the US, were involved in "gun running" in Libya". I simply asked where he got that factual info since no one else or any other agency seems to know. Given the choice between BAR and the CIA, I'd stick with BAR - especially since so many of the various media tend to agree with him. I suppose luddite thinks is was a spontaneous action because of a video they had never ever seen or even heard of till the day after the attack... lol! Hey, that's what Hillary said, in fact she doesn't even think it's worth looking into.... The recently released findings of the Republican led House Select Intelligence Committee and the six independent investigations that preceded it agree. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Betrayal in Benghazi | General | |||
| I remember when... | General | |||
| Remember this? | General | |||
| John can't remember houses, Cindy can't remember sisters. | General | |||
| Guys, remember spontoon boy. Remember Burnt Njall. | General | |||
Linear Mode
