Forum Groups

 

Forums / Politics / Dishonest or Imcompetent

Dishonest or Imcompetent

13 posts
  1. Albert Kronwall
    Albert Kronwall avatar
    0 posts
    10/2/2012 11:10 AM
    In the five months leading up to this year's 9/11 anniversary, there were two bombings on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. Yet, security detail for Ambassador Chris Stevens was not increased. I have to wonder why this administration didn't provide more security for our people. Would that have been an admission that terrorism was on the rise? More damning evidence is being uncovered by news media sources but our president is not allowing the FBI investigators into Benghazi saying it's too dangerous. CNN and who knows how many others have removed evidence from the site of the bombing and have contaminated the crime scene. When our president spoke at the UN meetings weeks later he was still blaming spontaneous rioting as a result of the You Tube video even though Sec. of State Clinton had previously stated it was a terrorist attack. The fact that Osama is dead and Al quadea terrorism lives on would be a big hit to this administrations bid for re-election. That has been their rally cry "GM is alive and Osama is dead". Could re-election be that important to sacrifice american lives?



  2. Ronald Conard
    Ronald Conard avatar
    4 posts
    10/2/2012 11:10 AM
    Albert Kronwall said: In the five months leading up to this year's 9/11 anniversary, there were two bombings on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. Yet, security detail for Ambassador Chris Stevens was not increased. I have to wonder why this administration didn't provide more security for our people. Would that have been an admission that terrorism was on the rise? More damning evidence is being uncovered by news media sources but our president is not allowing the FBI investigators into Benghazi saying it's too dangerous. CNN and who knows how many others have removed evidence from the site of the bombing and have contaminated the crime scene. When our president spoke at the UN meetings weeks later he was still blaming spontaneous rioting as a result of the You Tube video even though Sec. of State Clinton had previously stated it was a terrorist attack. The fact that Osama is dead and Al quadea terrorism lives on would be a big hit to this administrations bid for re-election. That has been their rally cry "GM is alive and Osama is dead". Could re-election be that important to sacrifice american lives?



    I would hope not, and until I have proof otherwise, instead of conspiracy theory run amok, I won't clutter my day with the paranoia.



  3. Clay Putnam
    Clay Putnam avatar
    33 posts
    10/2/2012 1:10 PM
    It's not much of paranoia at this point. It would appear more security was requested on multiple occasions and not granted. I'm sure the administration did not "knowingly" refuse additional security. BUT, it's a huge black eye for Obama who has been down playing this since it's inception. Oh, and it is politics. Obama will never take ownership of this. Obama has a habit of blaming others for the bad stuff and taking credit for the things he didn't create. That's his "entitlement". http://forums.gcsaa.org/posting.php?mode=reply&f=29&t=2299



  4. Jon Gansen
    Jon Gansen avatar
    1 posts
    10/3/2012 7:10 AM
    Depends if you believe whats coming out of the media. I believe it is dishonest incompetence.



  5. Keith Lamb
    Keith Lamb avatar
    3 posts
    10/3/2012 7:10 AM
    Apparently the White House had approved a plan over a year ago for added security and special forces operations, but they had only arrived 6 months ago and were not set-up to properly respond. But you can believe what you want. Obviously some of you are smarter and better prepared to make security decisions than our military command...but you knew that already.

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-bc-us--us-north-africa-terror-20121002,0,2264991.story



  6. McCallum David K
    McCallum David K avatar
    10/3/2012 11:10 AM
    Now Keith you are disregarding some very intelligent individuals on the forum with comments like that. But that being said I am not entirely sure if the US military has total control over who protects what. I think in the end it's probably the state departments call if they want military protection (US Marines). Why they chose not to have it is anyones guess.

    I did hear yesterday that the family of the ambassordor had made some post on social networks posing questions as to why no FBI investigation into what happened has not begun. Not a facebook guy so have no idea if any of that is factual.



  7. Ronald Conard
    Ronald Conard avatar
    4 posts
    10/4/2012 1:10 AM
    Clay Putnam, CGCS said: It's not much of paranoia at this point. It would appear more security was requested on multiple occasions and not granted. I'm sure the administration did not "knowingly" refuse additional security. BUT, it's a huge black eye for Obama who has been down playing this since it's inception. Oh, and it is politics. Obama will never take ownership of this. Obama has a habit of blaming others for the bad stuff and taking credit for the things he didn't create. That's his "entitlement". http://forums.gcsaa.org/posting.php?mode=reply&f=29&t=2299



    "Could re-election be that important to sacrifice american lives?"

    This is a touch paranoid I tend to think.



  8. Clay Putnam
    Clay Putnam avatar
    33 posts
    10/4/2012 5:10 AM
    Ronald Conard, CGCS said:
    Clay Putnam, CGCS said: It's not much of paranoia at this point. It would appear more security was requested on multiple occasions and not granted. I'm sure the administration did not "knowingly" refuse additional security. BUT, it's a huge black eye for Obama who has been down playing this since it's inception. Oh, and it is politics. Obama will never take ownership of this. Obama has a habit of blaming others for the bad stuff and taking credit for the things he didn't create. That's his "entitlement". http://forums.gcsaa.org/posting.php?mode=reply&f=29&t=2299



    "Could re-election be that important to sacrifice american lives?"

    This is a touch paranoid I tend to think.


    Are we talking about two different things? When I reference paranoia I am referring to the administration's paranoia of the political fallout from the terrorist attack.



  9. Wahlin Scott B
    Wahlin Scott B avatar
    10/14/2012 10:10 AM
    [img">http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll284/scottcgcs/irony.jpg[/img">



  10. Wahlin Scott B
    Wahlin Scott B avatar
    10/16/2012 7:10 PM
    [img">http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll284/scottcgcs/romneyflipflopper.jpg[/img">



  11. Peter Bowman
    Peter Bowman avatar
    11 posts
    10/16/2012 7:10 PM
    Scott Wahlin, CGCS said: [img">http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll284/scottcgcs/romneyflipflopper.jpg[/img">


    Liberals have a tough time being funny.



  12. Albert Kronwall
    Albert Kronwall avatar
    0 posts
    10/16/2012 8:10 PM
    Let's talk flip-flopper or letting the woman take the bullet to save your own a$$

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIviu4T0 ... re=related



  13. Wahlin Scott B
    Wahlin Scott B avatar
View or change your forums profile here.