Hillary declares victory over Benghazi panel, pivots to bash P P ‘witch hunt'

Note what your buddy said Margot. Feb 2011 was the First time. He was Right about that, after I had to direct his attention again.

Try again.....look up the Libya Timeline. Not Benghazi. This way you wont be confused when the Libyans knew we were there.

 

Dude sounds pretty messed up to me on his dates and facts.

Originally Posted by MMC

It was a worthless deflection they used anyways.....as not one Committee or ARB board came back saying the Security was adequate for our people in Benghazi. Or even the rest of Libya. It's why they evacuated the Embassy in Tripoli."

You follow that? During the civil war and uprising in Libya in 2011, there wasn't adequate security in Benghazi, and that's why they evacuated the Embassy in Tripoli. !!

LOLOL

It wasn't because of the civil war and NATO forces about to bomb the **** out of the place.

Amazing, huh?

 

Speaks for itself. ^^^^

:

 

Yeah I know it does. But then I am not limited with comprehension nor have all those mental limitations. Like the majority of the leftists have.

 

Nah, not at all.....oh and when you FINALLY figure out we were the last of the Westerners to close our Embassy. Which was after the Red Cross pulled up out of dodge. ( that would mean leaving Libya.....I wouldn't want you to say I took advantage of you with terminology) You might actually know when we evacuated the Embassy.

But I did find it quite amusing how you kept looking at the 2014 evacuation, thinking you had some play. But then as usual.....you do look for a false hope.

You didn't nor will you when it comes to dealing with me. That's why I didn't put forth any reason for the First evacuation.

At least you did finally, manage to figure out it was during a Civil War......wherein we did leave the Embassy open for a bit of time. Like before Feb came rolling around. Despite all others closing up shop and leaving.

NEXT!!!!!

 

It speaks to a display that you don't know what the hell you're talking about --

I think you made a mistake and didn't notice 2011 wasn't 2012, you got caught in it and made a huge punt regarding the embassy evacuation.

Because to make that comment knowing the NATO airstrikes were about to occur and the civil war going on at the time makes your point about lax security at that time skull****ingly ridiculous.

 

Once again.....you think wrong. All due to that assuming (*)(*)(*)(*) you play with.

I never gave any time frame for the Evacs, until after you started your one dimensional thinking process. So that is just some more of that make believe world you live in.

Oh not at all.....see its the dense grey matter that prevented you from knowing. Our Embassy still was open while the Civil War was taking place. While the NATO airstrikes took place. Which would mean, Security was on High Alert at our Embassy.

Now you can see why that causes most to question your thought processes and its limitations.

 

You really have a problem with timelines, it appears.

^ Coo coo for coocoo puffs. ^ I knew there were two evacuations of our Embassy in Tripoli, and I sure as hell knew it wasn't in the 2012, post-Gaddafi time frame you appeared to comingle with this absurd statement:

Originally Posted by MMC It was a worthless deflection they used anyways.....as not one Committee or ARB board came back saying the Security was adequate for our people in Benghazi. Or even the rest of Libya. It's why they evacuated the Embassy in Tripoli."

That's why I asked you repeatedly for the dates. And you said ...
You gonna say it didn't happen??? Huh Huh?

To which provided much humor as you continue to stumble.

Know this about me: Before I post, I have the facts and make darn sure I know it's correct and sources will back me up. Credibility matters to me.

Wish that were the case with more of your ilk.

Yep, you definitely have a problem with timelines.

 

You have no credibility.....just like you didn't at DP. Nothing has changed from then, when I came round to help you out with all those limitations you had back then.

Oh and using Government sites by this Administration. That would be BO peeps commentary. Doesn't help your case much!

Those were your own words bragging about using the Peeps sites.

 

Because you thought it was in 2012. To make that statement about something that happened in early 2011 makes no sense -- or, well just go back to ...you didn't know what the hell you were talking about.

Definite timeline problem

When did we evacuate the Embassy in Tripoli?
Evacuations began on Feb 21, 2011.

"NATO took control of the arms embargo on 23 March, named Operation Unified Protector. An attempt to unify the military command of the air campaign (whilst keeping political and strategic control with a small group), first failed over objections by the French, German, and Turkish governments.

On 24 March, NATO agreed to take control of the no-fly zone, while command of targeting ground units remains with coalition forces.[SUP]

[/SUP]The handover occurred on 31 March 2011 at 06:00 UTC (08:00 local time). NATO flew 26,500 sorties since it took charge of the Libya mission on 31 March 2011."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_military_intervention_in_Libya

When did the Civil War begin?

"The Libyan Civil War began on 15 February 2011 as a chain of civil protests and later evolved into a widespread uprising against the regime of Muammar Gaddafi. On 25 February, most of eastern Libya was reported to be under the control of protesters and rebel forces.

Wow. six whole days of "Our Embassy still open while the Civil War was taking place."

 

Hilarious.

You made a fool of yourself there with your crazy posts, just as you are doing here.

I'll leave it to the readers to judge who is more credible.

Maybe these words made sense in your head when you typed them.

 

Yes.....I think you are. Especially when thinking that Government sites give you all the facts. Truly that is quite Hillaryarious.

It wont take them long to see how much you are limited with.....especially when I am around.

Well you know Obama is BO Peep.....or did you want to admit to your lack of intelligence?

 

That's because there's literally nothing to fool anyone about. Your argument tactics consist of petty ad hominem attacks, straw man fallacies, and attempted character assassinations, but little more than that. That's what's really amusing.

It's important because of how he describes the attack--a coordinated attack executed by trained insurgents who had practiced it before. And he said that they had been sending reports of organized terrorist activity in the region to the State Department, yet no one approved bolstered security for the compound and no one gave the order to go assist, they didn't even bother giving an order for an attempted military reaction/rescue. Why is that, again? And then why did Hillary and Obama, who should have been well aware of the fact that it was an orchestrated terrorist attack by trained insurgents attempt to minimize it, calling it the act of unorganized protesters over a YouTube video? Shall we get back on track to the last questions I asked which of course went unanswered by you?

 

A news investigation that interviews one person who lies about his part of the story doesn't immediately discredit the rest of the story. You're either able to address the rest of the news story or you aren't. It's really that simple. This enormous attempted distraction won't achieve anything productive, because the rest of us are still on track, but I would be surprised if your position is taking that into account.

 

If that were true, then why didn't you correct Paperview's timelines instead of charging him with credibility issues? It would make sense that one should come before the other, if you are to prove your claim, don't you think?

 

And who exactly is planning on giving you better facts? People like Trey Gowdy and Kevin McCarthy who admitted conspiring against Hillary?

 

Try reading from the beginning of where I started. Then you will see why I let him rush to the play he thought he had.

Oh, and I gave the date when first time the Tripoli Embassy was evacuated. He was looking after the Benghazi incident. Which I already stated Security was already a problem in Tripoli. That it wasn't with just Benghazi.

 

This has been asked an answered a thousand times

Read the ****ing numerous bipartisan reports and testimonies.

With pinpoint accuracy, of course she should have known immediately! That night! Or in the days that followed.

Good god. Listen to yourself.

It's not like protesters had been storming our Embassy in Cairo earlier that day, or the headlines all over the world were inflaming Muslims about a video that was the equivalent for their prophet, of Jesus ****ing a dog, and a child molester. No....

Do you even remember the huge news it was all over the world the day of the attack??

And here was what was happening after -- around the whole freakin' world during that week :


Here: Muslim Protests by John Hudson

From there, you are shown a Reuters interactive map with bubbles.

Hover your mouse over a bubble, any bubble. That map is dated September 14, 2012. There were still more protests that would continue throughout the week...

Protests all over the world, at a lot of our embassies, some at consulates, some on Main streets -- all because of that stupid video. By stupid religious extremists.


I'll get you started:



It was a big ta-do.

September 14, 2012: "If you can't keep track of all the Muslim protests erupting across the globe, you're not alone. The uproar over a 14-minute anti-Islam YouTube video has sparked furious protests from Somalia to Egypt to Sudan to Tunisia to Libya to Bangladesh to Indonesia to Pakistan.

With new reports of protests surfacing every minute, we've compiled the latest reported incidents into this handy interactive Google Map. Click the locations and embedded links for more details about each incident."

A Map of Muslim Protests Around the World - The Wire

How unimaginable people could think the two might have had any - *any* connection.

Not to mention the people who were there that night saying it helped inflame them, and some who joined in as they began to attack.

Or the guy who was the ringleader sitting in our US prison right now who said the video was part of what motivated him.

The two things do not have to be mutually exclusive.

This get so old repeating -for - damn - three - years - now.

Get over it, for chrissakes.

 

You didn't think the US was the only sources out there, did you? Better people than BO peep and his Team or Hillary and her team.

 

Sorry dude. You lost. Big time.

Originally Posted by MMC

It was a worthless deflection they used anyways.....as not one Committee or ARB board came back saying the Security was adequate for our people in Benghazi. Or even the rest of Libya. It's why they evacuated the Embassy in Tripoli."

Accept it and move on.

 

Here let me help you with that limitation you always run around with.

It was a worthless deflection they used anyways.....as not one Committee or ARB board came back saying the Security was adequate for our people in Benghazi. Or even the rest of Libya. It's why they evacuated the Embassy in Tripoli."

Which then you tried to use the civil war as an excuse. Despite the security we had that was on high. Before we closed the Tripoli Embassy.

Thanks for showing why all that assuming (*)(*)(*)(*). Didn't help you out. Now you need to apply that to using BO peeps sites.

 

We'll, we know Gowdy and McCarthy aren't on your list. Or at least we hope they aren't. I asked who?

 

If you do not understand the conclusions of the senate report and its findings, while continually asking the same questions that have already been answered, your own case becomes mute. Because of your own failings to respond to the report given, an intelligent debate can no longer continue. You must provide counter evidence of the key points made by the report in order keep the debate going. Here are some key points that have sparked questions that have already been answered, many times; http://mediamatters.org/research/2014/01/15/fox-benghazi-myths-dispelled-by-new-bipartisan/197609

 

Obviously not just US Sources. So what does that tell you?

 

Holy ****. Using the civil war, the madness happening there with the rat **** Gaddafi and the NATO bombing about to occur as an excuse??

Wow.

You are off in candyland.

And you have major timeline issues, as has been pointed out repeatedly.

Yes, IN FEBRUARY OF 2011.

The Committees and ARB board looking into the attack of SEPT 2012 -- did not go into why we left the ****ing place for six months while there was mass mayhem and bombs dropping all around the place --

because they knew it happened

because there was a (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) war going on and Gaddfi's military was executing, torturing and imprisoning civilians by the tens of thousands.

Geezez.