Conquer Club

Benghazi

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Re: Benghazi

Postby warmonger1981 on Thu May 16, 2013 11:40 pm

SKID ROW with Sebastian Back. 18 baby
User avatar
Captain warmonger1981
 
Posts: 2554
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 7:29 pm
Location: ST.PAUL

Re: Benghazi

Postby warmonger1981 on Fri May 17, 2013 12:18 am

www.dailymail.co.uk-------under headlines---- " 'Frankly, I'd just as soon not use this': Emails show the then CIA-chief David Petraeus objected to Obama administration's version of Benghazi terror attack events

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z2TW9lDsiL
By JAMES NYE
PUBLISHED: 18:34 EST, 15 May 2013 | UPDATED: 10:37 EST, 16 May 2013
User avatar
Captain warmonger1981
 
Posts: 2554
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 7:29 pm
Location: ST.PAUL

Re: Benghazi

Postby Symmetry on Fri May 17, 2013 4:44 am

warmonger1981 wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk-------under headlines---- " 'Frankly, I'd just as soon not use this': Emails show the then CIA-chief David Petraeus objected to Obama administration's version of Benghazi terror attack events

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z2TW9lDsiL
By JAMES NYE
PUBLISHED: 18:34 EST, 15 May 2013 | UPDATED: 10:37 EST, 16 May 2013


the world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it- Albert Einstein
User avatar
Sergeant Symmetry
 
Posts: 9255
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:49 am

Re: Benghazi

Postby thegreekdog on Fri May 17, 2013 7:32 am

Phatscotty wrote:Obama will be impeached. Maybe he can survive it, but that won't matter.

It will leave a stain on him, FOREVER!!!

Can't change history, or the lies the Obama administration has been telling.

Official White House statement, 4 days after terrorist attack in Benghazi


It didn't take you very long (like, what? 5 days) to prove Ron Paul's point about the Republicans. Which is, again (how many times is that now - 50?) why you aren't really a Ron Paul supporter, you just pretend you are.

Ron Paul wrote:However, the whole discussion is again more of a sideshow. Each side seeks to score political points instead of asking the real questions about the attack on the US facility, which resulted in the death of US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.

But the Republicans in Congress also want to shift the blame. They supported the Obama Administration’s policy of bombing Libya and overthrowing its government. They also repeated the same manufactured claims that Gaddafi was “killing his own people” and was about to commit mass genocide if he were not stopped. Republicans want to draw attention to the President’s editing talking points in hopes no one will notice that if the attack on Libya they supported had not taken place, Ambassador Stevens would be alive today.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7245
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Benghazi

Postby Juan_Bottom on Fri May 17, 2013 5:06 pm

And to add to that;

Republicans Outed as the Source Of ABC’s Deliberately Edited Benghazi Emails

Ron Paul's right, and the poor guy has been Teddy Roosevelted into staying in the Republican Party. I don't really believe he identifies any of his own beliefs with those of his party's, but to go on his own means he will never rise higher in politics than he is today.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Juan_Bottom
 
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 4:59 pm
Location: USA RULES! WHOOO!!!!

Re: Benghazi

Postby Woodruff on Fri May 17, 2013 11:59 pm

Juan_Bottom wrote:And to add to that;

Republicans Outed as the Source Of ABC’s Deliberately Edited Benghazi Emails

Ron Paul's right, and the poor guy has been Teddy Roosevelted into staying in the Republican Party. I don't really believe he identifies any of his own beliefs with those of his party's, but to go on his own means he will never rise higher in politics than he is today.


To add to this:
http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/05/17/2027861/gop-sources-altered-benghazi-e-mails-to-suggest-a-cover-up-reporter-confirms/?mobile=nc
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Benghazi

Postby Phatscotty on Sat May 18, 2013 12:02 am

thegreekdog wrote:
It didn't take you very long (like, what? 5 days) to prove Ron Paul's point about the Republicans. Which is, again (how many times is that now - 50?) why you aren't really a Ron Paul supporter, you just pretend you are.


Wat's your problem with what I said? Because I like Ron Paul, I can't have some fun? You are such a buzz kill, but I have been expecting that since you stabbed the Tea Party in the back, and now it turns out we were right all along, and you are struggling with having bad mouthed the good guys for so long, and that crow isn't getting any fresher. eat up.

Btw, I have delegated for Ron Paul twice, I think you are just way behind the curve/way out of the loop. I actually am a Ron Paul supporter, and I helped Ron Paul take over the GOP in my state. For the last time, it's not my fault that what you think is wrong.
Last edited by Phatscotty on Sat May 18, 2013 12:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Benghazi

Postby Phatscotty on Sat May 18, 2013 12:10 am

lol at people who think it's their duty to wash Obama's scandals with scandals from Republicans.

Talk about being dominated by the left right paradigm....
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Benghazi

Postby Woodruff on Sat May 18, 2013 12:16 am

Phatscotty wrote:lol at people who think it's their duty to wash Obama's scandals with scandals from Republicans.

Talk about being dominated by the left right paradigm....


What are you talking about?
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Benghazi

Postby thegreekdog on Mon May 20, 2013 2:53 pm

Phatscotty wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
It didn't take you very long (like, what? 5 days) to prove Ron Paul's point about the Republicans. Which is, again (how many times is that now - 50?) why you aren't really a Ron Paul supporter, you just pretend you are.


Wat's your problem with what I said? Because I like Ron Paul, I can't have some fun? You are such a buzz kill, but I have been expecting that since you stabbed the Tea Party in the back, and now it turns out we were right all along, and you are struggling with having bad mouthed the good guys for so long, and that crow isn't getting any fresher. eat up.

Btw, I have delegated for Ron Paul twice, I think you are just way behind the curve/way out of the loop. I actually am a Ron Paul supporter, and I helped Ron Paul take over the GOP in my state. For the last time, it's not my fault that what you think is wrong.


There is a difference between campaigning for Ron Paul and agreeing with Ron Paul. You don't actually agree with Ron Paul because all you care about is making the Democrats look bad and the Republicans look good. Ron Paul is interested in shedding light on both parties and how bad they both are. You have no interest in doing this, especially with respect to foreign policy issues. This is clear from this thread and, unfortunately for you, no amount of whining is going to change that.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7245
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Benghazi

Postby AndyDufresne on Mon May 20, 2013 3:21 pm

thegreekdog wrote:There is a difference between campaigning for Ron Paul and agreeing with Ron Paul. You don't actually agree with Ron Paul because all you care about is making the Democrats look bad and the Republicans look good. Ron Paul is interested in shedding light on both parties and how bad they both are. You have no interest in doing this, especially with respect to foreign policy issues. This is clear from this thread and, unfortunately for you, no amount of whining is going to change that.

+1 for TGD. Here is a visual representation of this post.

Edit: TGD is Kirk (In light green) and PS is the Alien (with antennae).

Image


--Andy
Last edited by AndyDufresne on Mon May 20, 2013 3:37 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24919
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: Benghazi

Postby thegreekdog on Mon May 20, 2013 3:25 pm

Woah. Are you saying I was an extremely poor actor (in this situation only - relax Woodruff) whose pretend punch didn't even look like it landed, even remotely? If so, BOOOOOOO.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7245
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Benghazi

Postby AndyDufresne on Mon May 20, 2013 3:37 pm

I don't want you to get the wrong idea, TGD. So I picked a different gif for the pictorial representation.


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24919
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: Benghazi

Postby ooge on Mon May 20, 2013 3:55 pm

Image
User avatar
Captain ooge
 
Posts: 594
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 2:31 am
Location: under a bridge

Re: Benghazi

Postby Woodruff on Mon May 20, 2013 7:51 pm

thegreekdog wrote:Woah. Are you saying I was an extremely poor actor (in this situation only - relax Woodruff) whose pretend punch didn't even look like it landed, even remotely? If so, BOOOOOOO.


Everyone knows Shatner can't act...that won't raise my ire. <smile>
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Benghazi

Postby Phatscotty on Mon May 20, 2013 8:26 pm

thegreekdog wrote:There is a difference between campaigning for Ron Paul and agreeing with Ron Paul. You don't actually agree with Ron Paul because all you care about is making the Democrats look bad and the Republicans look good. Ron Paul is interested in shedding light on both parties and how bad they both are. You have no interest in doing this, especially with respect to foreign policy issues. This is clear from this thread and, unfortunately for you, no amount of whining is going to change that.


that's ridiculous. I'm not trying to make Democrats look bad, I am criticizing them for their actions. I don't know where the hell you get your assumptions from, but they are laughable. You think I spent years and years supporting someone I disagree with? That's just ridiculous

You are talking out of your ass now. I agree with Ron Paul, and I'm sorry you can't read my mind better. I am the one who shared his post shedding light on both parties, so I think you are forgetting that when you say I have no interest.

Concerning Benghazi, the Commander in Chief is a Democrat and he lied to the people about the reasons why we were attacked. That is not my fault, that's just the way it is. If you are trying to say I shouldn't hold my leader accountable, because the party that is not in power isn't perfect, I will leave that to you.
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Benghazi

Postby Woodruff on Mon May 20, 2013 8:53 pm

Phatscotty wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:There is a difference between campaigning for Ron Paul and agreeing with Ron Paul. You don't actually agree with Ron Paul because all you care about is making the Democrats look bad and the Republicans look good. Ron Paul is interested in shedding light on both parties and how bad they both are. You have no interest in doing this, especially with respect to foreign policy issues. This is clear from this thread and, unfortunately for you, no amount of whining is going to change that.


that's ridiculous. I'm not trying to make Democrats look bad, I am criticizing them for their actions.


In a thoroughly rational, fact-based way, no doubt?
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Benghazi

Postby thegreekdog on Mon May 20, 2013 9:29 pm

Phatscotty wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:There is a difference between campaigning for Ron Paul and agreeing with Ron Paul. You don't actually agree with Ron Paul because all you care about is making the Democrats look bad and the Republicans look good. Ron Paul is interested in shedding light on both parties and how bad they both are. You have no interest in doing this, especially with respect to foreign policy issues. This is clear from this thread and, unfortunately for you, no amount of whining is going to change that.


that's ridiculous. I'm not trying to make Democrats look bad, I am criticizing them for their actions. I don't know where the hell you get your assumptions from, but they are laughable. You think I spent years and years supporting someone I disagree with? That's just ridiculous

You are talking out of your ass now. I agree with Ron Paul, and I'm sorry you can't read my mind better. I am the one who shared his post shedding light on both parties, so I think you are forgetting that when you say I have no interest.

Concerning Benghazi, the Commander in Chief is a Democrat and he lied to the people about the reasons why we were attacked. That is not my fault, that's just the way it is. If you are trying to say I shouldn't hold my leader accountable, because the party that is not in power isn't perfect, I will leave that to you.


All I'm doing is quoting your posts. That's really all I have to do. Your criticism of the Republican Party is non-existent, not just in this thread but in any thread. Not your verbal criticism or your "thought" criticism. I have nothing else to go on other than your posts dude.

Let's look, for example, at the 2012 presidential election and the posts regarding that subject. During the Republican primary you were a vocal supporter of Ron Paul. After Mitt Romney won the primary, you became a vocal supporter of Romney and Ryan without considering any third party candidate. You indicated that it was because you wanted Barack Obama out, but you've voted for third party candidates in the past (at least according to this thread). So why no criticism of Romney?

As another example, you constantly reference Glenn Beck. I ultimately have no problem with the guy because he makes a good living, but he seems anthithetical to what you say you stand for.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7245
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Benghazi

Postby rishaed on Mon May 20, 2013 9:56 pm

Symmetry wrote:
warmonger1981 wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk-------under headlines---- " 'Frankly, I'd just as soon not use this': Emails show the then CIA-chief David Petraeus objected to Obama administration's version of Benghazi terror attack events

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z2TW9lDsiL
By JAMES NYE
PUBLISHED: 18:34 EST, 15 May 2013 | UPDATED: 10:37 EST, 16 May 2013



Like your song Sym :) =D>
aage wrote: Maybe you're right, but since we receive no handlebars from the mod I think we should get some ourselves.

Image
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class rishaed
 
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 8:54 pm
Location: Somewhere in the Foundry forums looking for whats going on!

Re: Benghazi

Postby Phatscotty on Mon May 20, 2013 10:09 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:There is a difference between campaigning for Ron Paul and agreeing with Ron Paul. You don't actually agree with Ron Paul because all you care about is making the Democrats look bad and the Republicans look good. Ron Paul is interested in shedding light on both parties and how bad they both are. You have no interest in doing this, especially with respect to foreign policy issues. This is clear from this thread and, unfortunately for you, no amount of whining is going to change that.


that's ridiculous. I'm not trying to make Democrats look bad, I am criticizing them for their actions. I don't know where the hell you get your assumptions from, but they are laughable. You think I spent years and years supporting someone I disagree with? That's just ridiculous

You are talking out of your ass now. I agree with Ron Paul, and I'm sorry you can't read my mind better. I am the one who shared his post shedding light on both parties, so I think you are forgetting that when you say I have no interest.

Concerning Benghazi, the Commander in Chief is a Democrat and he lied to the people about the reasons why we were attacked. That is not my fault, that's just the way it is. If you are trying to say I shouldn't hold my leader accountable, because the party that is not in power isn't perfect, I will leave that to you.


All I'm doing is quoting your posts. That's really all I have to do. Your criticism of the Republican Party is non-existent, not just in this thread but in any thread. Not your verbal criticism or your "thought" criticism. I have nothing else to go on other than your posts dude.

Let's look, for example, at the 2012 presidential election and the posts regarding that subject. During the Republican primary you were a vocal supporter of Ron Paul. After Mitt Romney won the primary, you became a vocal supporter of Romney and Ryan without considering any third party candidate. You indicated that it was because you wanted Barack Obama out, but you've voted for third party candidates in the past (at least according to this thread). So why no criticism of Romney?

As another example, you constantly reference Glenn Beck. I ultimately have no problem with the guy because he makes a good living, but he seems anthithetical to what you say you stand for.


So I am Tea Party, and Glenn Beck played a major role in creating the Tea Party, but he is antithetical to what I stand for? I would have to contend you know about as much about Beck as you do the Tea Party then. And as for your whole line of thought on Beck, I don't really operate on "the messenger", I do "the message"

Tell me, how are Republicans involved? Tell me which Republicans I should be criticizing? You may or may not remember that Obama did not even tell Congress we were bombing Libya.

Of course I considered a 3rd party candidate. How you could even know if I did or didn't is beyond me. I asked you and others right here many questions about Gary Johnson. Romney is Liberal ass Republican who drinks his own pee. There, ya happy? :-s I only ever said Romney was better than Obama, in my opinion. And now we know so much more about Obama (just like I always said, after the election we will all see the REAL OBama), so in hindsight it's looking like ANYBODY would be better than Obama. My vote, as I said many times. and as has obviously been ignored many times, had very little to do with the individual person, and a LOT more to do with who will work with a Tea PArty Congress. Given that we now know the Tea Party was specifically targeted by the IRS, it's pretty safe to say we already knew who would NOT work with a Tea Party Congress.
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Benghazi

Postby Night Strike on Fri Aug 02, 2013 9:11 am

Hmmm.....if this is just a "phony scandal", why were so many CIA officers in Benghazi when it was attacked AND are now being forced to take polygraphs monthly?

CNN has uncovered exclusive new information about what is allegedly happening at the CIA, in the wake of the deadly Benghazi terror attack.

Four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens, were killed in the assault by armed militants last September 11 in eastern Libya.

Programming note: Was there a political cover up surrounding the Benghazi attack that killed four Americans? Watch a CNN special investigation — The Truth About Benghazi, Tuesday at 10 p.m. ET.

Sources now tell CNN dozens of people working for the CIA were on the ground that night, and that the agency is going to great lengths to make sure whatever it was doing, remains a secret.

CNN has learned the CIA is involved in what one source calls an unprecedented attempt to keep the spy agency's Benghazi secrets from ever leaking out.

Read: Analysis: CIA role in Benghazi underreported

Since January, some CIA operatives involved in the agency's missions in Libya, have been subjected to frequent, even monthly polygraph examinations, according to a source with deep inside knowledge of the agency's workings.

The goal of the questioning, according to sources, is to find out if anyone is talking to the media or Congress.

It is being described as pure intimidation, with the threat that any unauthorized CIA employee who leaks information could face the end of his or her career.

In exclusive communications obtained by CNN, one insider writes, "You don't jeopardize yourself, you jeopardize your family as well."

Another says, "You have no idea the amount of pressure being brought to bear on anyone with knowledge of this operation."

"Agency employees typically are polygraphed every three to four years. Never more than that," said former CIA operative and CNN analyst Robert Baer.

In other words, the rate of the kind of polygraphs alleged by sources is rare.

"If somebody is being polygraphed every month, or every two months it's called an issue polygraph, and that means that the polygraph division suspects something, or they're looking for something, or they're on a fishing expedition. But it's absolutely not routine at all to be polygraphed monthly, or bi-monthly," said Baer.

CIA spokesman Dean Boyd asserted in a statement that the agency has been open with Congress.

"The CIA has worked closely with its oversight committees to provide them with an extraordinary amount of information related to the attack on U.S. facilities in Benghazi," the statement said.

"CIA employees are always free to speak to Congress if they want," the statement continued. "The CIA enabled all officers involved in Benghazi the opportunity to meet with Congress. We are not aware of any CIA employee who has experienced retaliation, including any non-routine security procedures, or who has been prevented from sharing a concern with Congress about the Benghazi incident."

Among the many secrets still yet to be told about the Benghazi mission, is just how many Americans were there the night of the attack.

A source now tells CNN that number was 35, with as many as seven wounded, some seriously.

While it is still not known how many of them were CIA, a source tells CNN that 21 Americans were working in the building known as the annex, believed to be run by the agency.

The lack of information and pressure to silence CIA operatives is disturbing to U.S. Rep. Frank Wolf, whose district includes CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.

"I think it is a form of a cover-up, and I think it's an attempt to push it under the rug, and I think the American people are feeling the same way," said the Republican.

"We should have the people who were on the scene come in, testify under oath, do it publicly, and lay it out. And there really isn't any national security issue involved with regards to that," he said.

Wolf has repeatedly gone to the House floor, asking for a select committee to be set-up, a Watergate-style probe involving several intelligence committee investigators assigned to get to the bottom of the failures that took place in Benghazi, and find out just what the State Department and CIA were doing there.

More than 150 fellow Republican members of Congress have signed his request, and just this week eight Republicans sent a letter to the new head of the FBI, James Comey, asking that he brief Congress within 30 days.

Read: White House releases 100 pages of Benghazi e-mails

In the aftermath of the attack, Wolf said he was contacted by people closely tied with CIA operatives and contractors who wanted to talk.

Then suddenly, there was silence.

"Initially they were not afraid to come forward. They wanted the opportunity, and they wanted to be subpoenaed, because if you're subpoenaed, it sort of protects you, you're forced to come before Congress. Now that's all changed," said Wolf.

Lawmakers also want to about know the weapons in Libya, and what happened to them.

Speculation on Capitol Hill has included the possibility the U.S. agencies operating in Benghazi were secretly helping to move surface-to-air missiles out of Libya, through Turkey, and into the hands of Syrian rebels.

It is clear that two U.S. agencies were operating in Benghazi, one was the State Department, and the other was the CIA.

The State Department told CNN in an e-mail that it was only helping the new Libyan government destroy weapons deemed "damaged, aged or too unsafe retain," and that it was not involved in any transfer of weapons to other countries.

But the State Department also clearly told CNN, they "can't speak for any other agencies."

The CIA would not comment on whether it was involved in the transfer of any weapons.

http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/01/exclusive-dozens-of-cia-operatives-on-the-ground-during-benghazi-attack/
Image
User avatar
Major Night Strike
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:52 pm

Re: Benghazi

Postby AndyDufresne on Fri Aug 02, 2013 11:09 am

Night Strike wrote:Hmmm.....if this is just a "phony scandal", why were so many CIA officers in Benghazi when it was attacked AND are now being forced to take polygraphs monthly?

stuff


I retired animated Star Trek Gifs a while ago, but everything now and again needs a resurrection.

ImageImage

ImageImage


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24919
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: Benghazi

Postby Phatscotty on Fri Aug 02, 2013 7:36 pm

There must be a reason people are currently standing on highway overpasses with Benghazi signs and waving US flags
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Benghazi

Postby Woodruff on Sat Aug 03, 2013 9:01 am

Phatscotty wrote:There must be a reason people are currently standing on highway overpasses with Benghazi signs and waving US flags


Perhaps because they need something better to do?
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Benghazi

Postby oVo on Sat Aug 03, 2013 9:13 am

Phatscotty wrote:There must be a reason people are currently standing on highway overpasses with Benghazi signs and waving US flags

I'm guessing they are the same people who have been demanding Obama be impeached ever since the Presidential Elections back in 2008.

More than 200 American citizens have lost their lives at US Embassies over the last two decades. There has been an effort to make this an Obama Scandal, along with the IRS and other events that have occurred in recent years, if conservatives could find a way to link the President to the destruction of Hurricane Sandy it would be a scandal too.
User avatar
Major oVo
 
Posts: 3864
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 1:41 pm
Location: Antarctica

PreviousNext

Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users