Benghazi
 

It seems the crux of the issue regarding Benghazi is that even though Hilary did not personally give stand down orders that she is ultimately responsible since she was head of State Dept.

However, it has not been brought up that the lax intel or lax immigration policies that allowed the terrorists to train in airplane schools was on George W. Bush's watch. It may have started earlier but culminated on his term.

Was 9/11 W's fault?

A thread begun to bait folks into a conversation that is DAYS old begun by Trump's stupid comments and Jeb Bush's reply.

EVERYONE knows what happened....EVERYONE knows when it happened. We have had a number of commissions and many books written to tell how and why it happened.

The only motive for a thread like this is another "bash Bush" escapade, INSTEAD of discussing what is happening in the country and the world in present day.

It appears this is a vehicle for all those who have a conspiracy theory to expound on. I think maybe a thread on UFOs would also work.

I think it totally incredibly ridiculous to even suggest it was Bush's "fault" which is defined as "responsibility for an accident or misfortune".

On his watch...yep. Pearl Harbor was not the "fault" of FDR for example but it happened while he was President.

The recent recession happened on Obama's watch....his fault ?

In 1993, the towers were bombed under Clinton...his fault ?

I question and challenge you on your premise of what the "crux" of the issue is regarding Benghazi. It is a premise used by you to divert I believe and has no basis in actual FACT.

I have never heard anyone, anywhere EVER say that Benghazi was the FAULT of Hillary Clinton.

Thus the OP's premise is a red herring.

It is apparent that most of the democratic party, including Obama and for sure those on this forum, do not understand the managerial concept of ownership, accountability and responsibilty.

Starting with Obama the trend has been and continues, that as long as one can point to someone else to lay blame, then they are not responsible.

A testimony to the fact Obama was not, and still is not qualified to be POTUS. He sold a promise that he did not deliver. And has been blaming everybody else for anything that goes wrong, sideways or against his agenda. Just like a grade school kid.

Whether it is liked or not is not an issue. When one takes over a job or position they own it and everything good and bad that comes with it. The mark of those qualified is their ability to pick up on and change that which is not right or needs attention/fixing. And Obama has demonstrated every day of the last 7 years that is not him.

Let's do a review:

Under the Obama administration there have been 2 embassy attacks.
Under George W's there were 13 embassy attacks.
Under Reagan there were 10 embassy attacks.

What does that demonstrate?

Did I miss something? Did the terrorist that killed the four Americans in Benghazi receive flight training in the U.S.? No. What is your point?

Oh, by the way, Bill Clinton gutted the Intel community, not Bush

It demonstrates to me, your total inability to make a valid point.

Your premise, which you never explained at all is simply a childish implication.

IF you are suggesting anything other than the Arab Spring, etc, then you will need to act like an adult and make your point.

Your implication is this....

ACTIONS by Obama have prevented embassy attacks. What actions ?
ACTIONS by President Bush caused attacks on embassies. What actions ?
ACTIONS by Reagan caused attacks on embassies. What actions ?

This is a premise formed and propulgated by bloggers on far left web sites only and has no intellectual basis.

Now, we have had a few posters who asked for opinions on left wing governments in cities that have failed miserably. Do you feel those charges are valid ?

We just came out of a depression which was on President Obama's watch. Was that depression his fault ?

We destroyed Libya, Yemen and a few other countries on the watch of President Obama. How do you characterize that ?

If you would state the point you are trying to make it would really be helpful!!

However I cannot resist at least supplying a possible/feasible answer to your question.

The terrorists know they have gotten and will continue to get more from Obama than they would ever have gotten from the non Obama POTUS.
Obama is sympathetic to the terrorists.
Obama appeases the terrorists.

Hilary is a felon, plain and simple.
Hilary was also inept at her job as SecState, plain and simple. (ask any State employee)
Hilary was complicit in the cover up of Benghazi, video my as...
Hilary was blatantly violating Gov rules/laws in the handling of classified material.
Hilary allowed her assistant to falsify leave paperwork.
Hilary is a blatant liar. She didn't misstate something, she lied.

Hilary should receive the firing squad for endangering national security. I will accept a hanging if they do not wish to waste ammo on her.

My point was so clear Ronnie Milsap could have seen it. I can't help you. Reread the post and come back tomorrow night and try it again (thank you Little Richard).

To me, it demonstrates that you spend your spare time tracking embassy attacks and nothing more.

That the radical Muslims did not want to injure the reputation of our chief-radical Muslim-in-charge, so they held back? :1rotfl:

Some great answers.
Still no response to what the point is/was/what ever....just more sarcasm.

We know making a point requires commiting to what one said.
We also know there are those who survive only by responding/attacking/ridiculing other's points made....but never ventire out on the limb of life to make their own....requires a commitment or an identifiable position....can't have that can we?

Most times, smugness is difficult to determine in writing, but your smugness shines through.

Your OP, if it was you is simply baiting, and YOU know it which really sheds light on a juvenile mind.

After you read the 9/11 commission report, the hundreds of reports on that day, thevolumesof books published, read the news of the last week, then come back and make whatever case you want to make.

This progressive conspiracy websites came alive when Trump made his comments and they..well, I don't think they sucked you in.....I think you are simply what you have proven to be. A very angry bitter man,who instead of becoming well read and participating in a forum, enjoys the childish play of attempting to rile up his neighbors. Just like you do on occasion on the main board.

You get into things you know nothing about, and your only pleasure is baiting people or making fun and mocking others.

You should be ashamed, but I know you are not; you may just simply pay a visit to your alter are site and go at it...might make you feel better.

If what you want is to know that you are known, irritating to others, vacant of any original thoughts, hate filled, acrimonious, sneaky....Etc

Then you have succeeded

Want a commitment smart guy.

No he was not responsible for 9/11.

Now was Obama responsible for our recession as he was the President ? That was asked earlier and ignored by you.

Was Clinton responsible for 9/11 as he turned down a chance to kill the master mind of that day ?

Was Clinton responsible for 9/11 since ALL reports point to an intelligence failure in a fo piled he had recently gutted ?

Now I know you could care less...you are actually becoming infamous.

Let ISIS stone her--why waste a perfectly good rope?

Alongside each of those list AMERICAN deaths as a result of and tell me what that demonstrates.

Thank you

BS!!

Smart guy? No, not really. I just happen to have an opinion that does not match up with yours and many others.

The discussion was not about who was responsible.

We were discussing who owns the problems that came with the job as the incoming POTUS. And additionally making a point that if one has not done much during their tenure except blame someone else....as Obama and his administration has done on very many issues for the past 7 years.

Being responsible does not have to equate to who or what caused or allowed a given issue. OWNERSHIP? The person who is POTUS at the time owns the issue or the problem. And what is pertinent is what has been done or not about it during their tenure.

Actually quite a simple attribute. Except for those who either use or accept an excuse (of any kind) for inaction. Doing or not doing something plus an excuse does not make it right ....or somebody elses!

The OP said at the conclusion of the very short post

"Was 9/11 W's fault"

Pretty clear and concise question. If you are the OP, you got your reply.

You NOW say the conversation was "not about who was responsible" And you refer to incoming Presidents and problems they inherit.....NOT the same as the OP. Also answered many times. Clearly Bush took ownership and you can criticize him for whatever you want, but I do not recall him blaming Clinton...he simply did his job.

You then made a listing of embassy attacks by Presidents in office and asked "what does that demonstrate"

You made clear NO POINT to any of it, had all direct questions answered and made quite a few snide remarks about what responses were given.

Conversation is a two way thing.

What is your point and perhaps instead of mocking people who tried to respond, you could clarify and attempt to answer their questions.

Instead of passing judgement, allow us that lofty opinion

OMG a firing squad...JUST PLAIN NUTS!!!!

You are quite right. She IS "plain nuts."

Are you kidding or smoking something illegal? Firing squad? Seriously what century are you living in?

Something every one forgot that when 911 happened we just came off of Bill Clinton stay in the WH. And if you remember he is the one that alerted Bin Ladin to stop using a satellite phone to conduct his business.We knew about him in the 80's so blame Reagan and Al Gore. In respects to the recession of 08 that goes back to Clinton and Gingrich with allowing banks to buy mortgage securities. Check history on all the above.

Relax. The only kind of firing squad known by these Village Tea Bag Party people is a circular firing squad. :boom:

:1rotfl:

If the firing squad is too much for you liberals, a hanging will suffice. As much as you like to use your perverted labels for the Tea Party, a hanging should be right in line with your kinky lifestyle.

:bigbow::bigbow:

Keep it coming.....:popcorn:

Ya know, it might be prudent to watch what you say in a forum that is accessible to everyone in the world. NSA and other agencies do pick up on this kind of chatter and could interpret or misinterpret your comments. You may be nameless to other TOTV posters but you ARE NOT nameless to government agencies looking for threats and chatter. Just advise on my part to you.

The "NSA and other agencies" do not have the time nor the inclination to investigate everyone that expresses their opinion that Hillary is a lying, corrupt, immoral, unprincipled sack of s_ it.

Don't hold back.

No, not for expressing opinions but for having phrases like hanging, stoning, or firing squads, it may pique someone's interest to probe deeper. Just a thought.

Now if everyone would just speak the truth and not try to save themselves this would of ended a long time ago. The silent majority needs to open up on these forums! It is always the same haters posting and the silent majority say nothing and they allow this evil to grow!

That's pretty humorous. I've worked in that arena and happen to know a bit about what the gov does and doesn't do. Nothing I said would be flagged by NSA computers. And nothing I said could be construed as a threat or conspiracy. If this offends liberals like you, feel free to go hide in your mom's basement and play your video games.

Hilary is a felon, without a doubt. I know because like I said, I worked there and know exactly what kind of laws she broke. She is a threat to national security and should not ever be allowed a security clearance again. She should be confined to a penitentiary but we know with the corrupt gov we have now, this will never happen. Hilary said that Republicans are her enemy, so that probably means the radical Muslims are her friends.

Plain and simple, Hilary is a criminal.

From: SF312

4. I have been advised that any breach of this Agreement may result in the termination of any security clearances I hold; removal from any position of special confidence and trust requiring such clearances; or termination of my employment or other relationships with the Departments or Agencies that granted my security clearance or clearances. In addition, I have been advised that any unauthorized disclosure of classified information by me may constitute a violation, or violations, of United States criminal laws, including the provisions of sections 641, 793, 794, 798, *952 and 1924, title 18, United States Code; *the provisions of section 783(b}, title 50, United States Code; and the provisions of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. I recognize that nothing in this Agreement constitutes a waiver by the United States of the right to prosecute me for any statutory violation.

12 FAM 531.1 Top Secret Storage
12 FAM 531.1-1 Domestic
(CT:DS-185; 01-31-2012) (Uniform State, USAID, OPIC, TDP)
You must store Top Secret documents in either of the following:
(1) General Services Administration (GSA)-approved container with a GSA-approved, built-in, three-position, dial-type combination lock; locate this container either in a DS-approved alarmed area or in a building controlled by cleared U.S. citizen personnel on a 24-hour basis; or
(2) Domestic strongroom (see 12 FAM 090 definition) approved for Top Secret storage by the Program Applications Division Chief (DS/IS/APD) or a GSA-approved vault.

12 FAM 531.2 Secret and Confidential Storage
12 FAM 531.2-1 Domestic
(CT:DS-185; 01-31-2012) (Uniform State, USAID, OPIC, TDP)
You must store Secret and Confidential material only as follows:
(1) In the same manner authorized for Top Secret information (see 12 FAM 531.1);
(2) In a barlock cabinet equipped with a GSA-approved three-position, dial-type, changeable, combination padlock located either in a DS-approved alarmed area, or in a building controlled by cleared U.S. citizen personnel on a 24-hour basis; or
(3) In a domestic strongroom or vault approved for Secret storage by the DS/IS/APD division chief.

What I find laughable is that Hillary's defense is that "None of the the emails that I sent or received were marked classified". It is always the originator's responsibility to ensure that any correspondence, to include emails, be appropriately annotated to reflect the proper classification of the content contained within. Even low-level government and military personnel know this. Being an idiot is not a mitigating factor or defense in her case. She is clearly incompetent and in violation of the law.