Seems there is a news topic or so missing - here's one

[Biggs3535]

Get your head out of the sand

Sand?  I thought it was up Obama's ass.

[VinBucFan]

any American who stayed in Benghazi or the middle east during the last yr made the choice to do so.

lots of people making choices . . . one of which was not to send help . . . the CIA says they did NOT say don't send help, so . . .

personal responsibility. you couldn't pay me enough to go live in an american embassy in the middle east and so I have nothing but respect for anyone who could, in the name of democracy.

Glad you think that way but you are missing (or avoiding) the point of the link.  Maybe a question would clear it up:

What do you think of the person or people who CHOSE not to send help for those people you have "nothing but respect" for?

with all due respect I wasn't there and don't know enough to place blame on anyone other than the attackers. Incompetence within the military complex is not a new concept but neither is agenda reporting from the media, but what I do know is  the time frame is too short to go pointing fingers. When we know the hostility towards americans in that region, and when we know terrorist attack without warning, a death in this situation is as close to moral suicide as you can get. How else do you describe someone who labors themselves in those conditions?

You're trying hard, I will give you that. You keep trying to put the blame on the Amassador and the soldiers who chose to be there, but that is NOT the point of the link.  And this is not "agenda reporting form the media." It is the ACTUAL PLAYERS speaking.  The Pentagon said ONE thing. The CIA says ANOTHER . . . . quotes . . . not "agenda reporting."

You're a good soldier

I'm trying hard? It would seem to me it takes more effort to make a judgment stick when your CIA is saying one thing and the pentagon is saying another. Hence the incompetent chain of command. You want to blame Obama? Go ahead, he took responsibility, cause thats what real men do. Not point fingers. Is there any record of the Ambassador pointing fingers? No cause he's a real man.I understand the point of the link and someone should take these journalist out back and teach them some respect because they are reporting a miscommunication of our chain in command, with an agenda.

lol, where was the "miscommunication"? There was no miscommunication.  Maybe you're not grasping what has transpired so I will just move on. You may want to read the info, which may be why another posters commented about getting your head out of the sand.

I've read the article, no need to insult my intelligence. You seem to be missing my point which is the politicizing of a mans death. I've fully grasped what transpired and the president did take responsibility so whats your agenda?

you used the word miscommunication, not me.

My agenda is hoping that American's abroad can rely on their government and hoping that the government is honest with it citizens at homew.  I know . .  crazy agenda, right?

[wreck ship]

any American who stayed in Benghazi or the middle east during the last yr made the choice to do so.

lots of people making choices . . . one of which was not to send help . . . the CIA says they did NOT say don't send help, so . . .

personal responsibility. you couldn't pay me enough to go live in an american embassy in the middle east and so I have nothing but respect for anyone who could, in the name of democracy.

Glad you think that way but you are missing (or avoiding) the point of the link.  Maybe a question would clear it up:

What do you think of the person or people who CHOSE not to send help for those people you have "nothing but respect" for?

with all due respect I wasn't there and don't know enough to place blame on anyone other than the attackers. Incompetence within the military complex is not a new concept but neither is agenda reporting from the media, but what I do know is  the time frame is too short to go pointing fingers. When we know the hostility towards americans in that region, and when we know terrorist attack without warning, a death in this situation is as close to moral suicide as you can get. How else do you describe someone who labors themselves in those conditions?

You're trying hard, I will give you that. You keep trying to put the blame on the Amassador and the soldiers who chose to be there, but that is NOT the point of the link.  And this is not "agenda reporting form the media." It is the ACTUAL PLAYERS speaking.  The Pentagon said ONE thing. The CIA says ANOTHER . . . . quotes . . . not "agenda reporting."

You're a good soldier

I'm trying hard? It would seem to me it takes more effort to make a judgment stick when your CIA is saying one thing and the pentagon is saying another. Hence the incompetent chain of command. You want to blame Obama? Go ahead, he took responsibility, cause thats what real men do. Not point fingers. Is there any record of the Ambassador pointing fingers? No cause he's a real man.I understand the point of the link and someone should take these journalist out back and teach them some respect because they are reporting a miscommunication of our chain in command, with an agenda.

lol, where was the "miscommunication"? There was no miscommunication.  Maybe you're not grasping what has transpired so I will just move on. You may want to read the info, which may be why another posters commented about getting your head out of the sand.

I've read the article, no need to insult my intelligence. You seem to be missing my point which is the politicizing of a mans death. I've fully grasped what transpired and the president did take responsibility so whats your agenda?

you used the word miscommunication, not me.

My agenda is hoping that American's abroad can rely on their government and hoping that the government is honest with it citizens at homew.  I know . .  crazy agenda, right?

lol @ head line agendas...so your agenda next week will be whatever's at the top of the news feed? Gottcha

[dbucfan]

This board doesn't offer any awards for the last word.

[VinBucFan]

all speech is created equal . . .oops . . . .  nevermind:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/10/30/Facebook-Censors-Navy-SEALS-To-Protect-Obama-on-Benghazi-Gate

[CBWx2]

all speech is created equal . . .oops . . . .  nevermind:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/10/30/Facebook-Censors-Navy-SEALS-To-Protect-Obama-on-Benghazi-Gate

For someone who is so opposed to people quoting partisan sources, you sure do quote Breitbart a lot.

[VinBucFan]

all speech is created equal . . .oops . . . .  nevermind:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/10/30/Facebook-Censors-Navy-SEALS-To-Protect-Obama-on-Benghazi-Gate

For someone who is so opposed to people quoting partisan sources, you sure do quote Breitbart a lot.

keep trying, not taking the bait .. but you can keep following me around if you want.

[Bayfisher]

Is the article incorrect, CBW? 

A General and an Admiral both now relieved of duty.  The plot thickens. 

[VinBucFan]

Is the article incorrect, CBW? 

A General and an Admiral both now relieved of duty.  The plot thickens.

Of course it is not incorrect, that is why he tried to deflect with the shot at me.

CBW often tries to bolster his posts with OPINION pieces from various liberal ragsblogs and . I called him on it once,  so he tried to draw a parallel here, no doubt to avoid the substance. All part of hnis transparent game.

[VinBucFan]

One Tunesian terrorist caught on consulate video.  Maybe he was vacationing in Libya

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/30/us-officials-idd-libya-attack-suspect-on-surveillance-video-sources-say/?test=latestnews

[CBWx2]

Is the article incorrect, CBW? 

Which part? The part about Facebook isn't. The part about Obama denying the Navy Seals aid is.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-did-not-deny-requests-help-benghazi-aide-182415488--election.html

That's what happens when you get your news from only media sources with a right-wing partisan slant. You get a twinge of truth bathed in a sea of propaganda.

Is the article incorrect, CBW? 

A General and an Admiral both now relieved of duty.  The plot thickens.

Of course it is not incorrect, that is why he tried to deflect with the shot at me.

CBW often tries to bolster his posts with OPINION pieces from various liberal ragsblogs and . I called him on it once,  so he tried to draw a parallel here, no doubt to avoid the substance. All part of hnis transparent game.

Translation: "It's okay when I do it, but not when you do it."

[Bayfisher]

Is the article incorrect, CBW? 

Which part? The part about Facebook isn't. The part about Obama denying the Navy Seals aid is.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-did-not-deny-requests-help-benghazi-aide-182415488--election.html

And this is final fact because they said so?  Why have congressional investigations at all.  This has turned into the mess most saw coming from day 1.   

[CBWx2]

Is the article incorrect, CBW? 

Which part? The part about Facebook isn't. The part about Obama denying the Navy Seals aid is.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-did-not-deny-requests-help-benghazi-aide-182415488--election.html

And this is final fact because they said so?  Why have congressional investigations at all.  This has turned into the mess most saw coming from day 1.

Is the Breitbart article final fact? Point is, the investigation is ongoing. If the mainstream media doesn't have a definitive explanation of events, Breitbart sure as hell doesn't either. You asked if the article was correct. It is not. It is right wing propaganda, despite how much you and Vince want to act as though it's "real" news. There is zero evidence confirming that the president denied aid to Navy Seals in Libya.

[Biggs3535]

Is the article incorrect, CBW? 

Which part? The part about Facebook isn't. The part about Obama denying the Navy Seals aid is.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-did-not-deny-requests-help-benghazi-aide-182415488--election.html

And this is final fact because they said so?  Why have congressional investigations at all.  This has turned into the mess most saw coming from day 1.

Sure.  The White House also denied knowing about the attack while it was happening and blamed it on a YouTube video for a week.  If the White House says it, I believe it.

[VinBucFan]

Is the article incorrect, CBW? 

Which part? The part about Facebook isn't. The part about Obama denying the Navy Seals aid is.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-did-not-deny-requests-help-benghazi-aide-182415488--election.html

And this is final fact because they said so?  Why have congressional investigations at all.  This has turned into the mess most saw coming from day 1.

Is the Breitbart article final fact? Point is, the investigation is ongoing. If the mainstream media doesn't have a definitive explanation of events, Breitbart sure as hell doesn't either. You asked if the article was correct. It is not. It is right wing propaganda, despite how much you and Vince want to act as though it's "real" news. There is zero evidence confirming that the president denied aid to Navy Seals in Libya.

so says the guy who claimed Zimmerman had no head injury and used a racial epithet ....

nice use of the word confirming . . . typical CBW bull spit