Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
88 days ago.
by Tiredofit
Ithink
#1

Who Lied About the Attack on 9/11/12?

It is incredible that democrats keep blathering about Romney lying, when we have the shock and disgust of seeing the president and his administration lying to us about the security of Americans. Unbelievable .

 
 

Member Comments

Tiredofit

Ok I get it, you think Bush dropped the ball and lied to us, so be intellectualy honest and hold Obama accountable if he did. Or is he excused?

Posted 451 days ago.

Tiredofit

Is it possible to discuss this administration without discussing the last? Does criticism of this administration necessarily mean support for the previous one?

Posted 451 days ago.

Tiredofit

Why deflect so much? What does Bush have to do with Bengazi, answer nothing. Attacking a strawman shows a lack of facts or intellectual prowess.

Posted 451 days ago.

moderation

Exploitation, you say? Perhaps the actions of the 'pom pom' boy's administration, after rejecting the alarms of the cia, the nsc, and anti- terrorism chief richard clark and virtually green lighting the 9-11 attacks, would qualify for an example of political exploitation !?

Posted 451 days ago.

Tiredofit

Yea its exploitation at the highest level. Pushing a supposed assault wepons ban when no supposed assault weapon was used, nor would any legislation proposed have stopped that tragic event. That's exploitation.

Posted 451 days ago.

mythravere

Is it exploitation?

Posted 451 days ago.

"Its funny if we look back to the days and years after 9-11. Bush and his administration somehow escaped any punishment being sought for their failures in stopping the 9-11 attacks."

I don’t think not knowing or even dropping the ball carries a big difference than ‘standing down’ as American Special Forces were commanded to do. And while I agree that Republicans are driving the conversation, for me that’s not as much of an issue as the fact that Democrats on the panel are giving the Administration a free pass. If profiting from American deaths is shameful here as you claim Republicans are doing, then ignoring American deaths as Democrats are doing is despicable.

I do find it odd though that you ridicule the right as shameful for “exploiting 3 deaths.” If that’s the case, what is the left for exploiting the 26 Sandy Hook deaths?

Posted 451 days ago.

mythravere

We both know that if a 9-11 style attack happened on his watch and it was found out have been planned during Bushs term. Just for arguments sake. You know for a fact it'll all be about Obama. When it was planned will be a moot point unworthy of consideration by you folks.

Posted 451 days ago.

Myth, you know very well that Bush was not president when all the training and planning took place for 911 . Clinton had that honor. He paid no attention to terror, just like Obama.

American diplomats begging for help, and being told no, is not excusable. This was covered up to get obama re~elected. It worked.

Posted 451 days ago.

Tiredofit

Generalize much?

Posted 451 days ago.

Tiredofit

Generalize much?

Posted 451 days ago.

Tiredofit

Myth there you go with the you guys routine. I see you slipping back to that angry insulting tone you had before, shame. Care to tell me what I said about Obama or bush? Care to tell me why the SOS won't be doing some explaining about this?

Posted 451 days ago.

mythravere

I mean care to explain how 3000 deaths on our own soil never resulted in the level of outrage that you guys are leveling toward Obama?

When its your own boy you look the other way. And if I remember correctly. After 9-11. Anyone or any country that wasn't with us was against us. Right? People that questioned Bush had their patriotism questioned also.

Man you guys are a certain kind of special.

Posted 451 days ago.

mythravere

No whats shameful is the fact that the right is exploiting the deaths of three people for political ends.

I am pretty sure it doesn't matter what the facts say about this issue. You guys WANT this to be a scandal. You WANT this to have negative implications for Obama. After all getting Obama is so important to your cause.

My question is how can this investigation be impartial when those seeking the investigation have a set agenda?

Its funny if we look back to the days and years after 9-11. Bush and his administration somehow escaped any punishment being sought for their failures in stopping the 9-11 attacks.

Hypocrisy much?

Posted 451 days ago.

Tiredofit

But then again, if you promise free stuff, people tend to overlook certain things.

Posted 451 days ago.

Tiredofit

I think Hillary will have a lot of 'slpainin to do. This won't be good for her ambition of being POTUS.

Posted 451 days ago.

This is the most disgraceful, shameful scandal I can remember from United States officials.

The "Whistleblowers" will speak Wednesday. Coverups from this bunch have been going on far too long.

h ttp://w ww.washingtonpost.c om/world/national-security/special-ops-halted-from-responding-to-benghazi-attacks-us-diplomat-says/2013/05/06/c3f311d4-b677-11e2-aa9e-a02b765ff0ea_print.html

Sometimes people get a mistaken idea of their own invulnerability when they get by with so much corruption. Those chickens do,indeed, come home to roost eventually.

Posted 452 days ago.

Did I put quotation marks around "exonerated",harry? No I did not. You were talking like the commission gave Obama a pass. It did not.

Posted 577 days ago.

And harry, YOU wrote

" So Ithink,

Are you saying that the two men who headed this independent commission, Mike Mullen (whom Republican George W. Bush appointed Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) and Tom Pickering (whom Republican George H.W. Bush appointed Ambassador to the U.N.), are covering up for the current Democratic Administration? " and a bunch more stuff that I still don't know what you were talking about.

Posted 577 days ago.

harryanderson

Ithink, you wrote,

"I never could understand what harry was talking about here. The Obama administration was certain;y not exonerated. Just the Opposite."

Perhaps you couldn't understand because you didn't read what I wrote. I said nothing about exonerated. My posts were directed towards judging in advance of the facts. I concluded, "Wise and discriminating people are now free to form an initial judgment."

I said, "initial judgment." I could express that better by saying, "Wise people are now free to form a tentative judgment."

Nowhere did I claim the Administration was exonerated.

Posted 578 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or