As an aside, I noticed that the mainstream media completely ignored the Right-to-Life march on Washington, but it gave front page coverage to the gun rights march. I'm all for coverage of the gun rights march. I'm just comparing what is and is not coverable by the MSM.
Hillary: “Not Enough Money For Security in Benghazi”. But Plenty For Kindles, Art, Mosque Building, Etc… Mosque rebuilding and kindles are more important than protecting four Americans obviously. Via Frontpage: According to Hillary Clinton’s long-delayed Benghazigate testimony, the State Department just did not have enough money to provide security for a mission in one of the most dangerous places in the world. It did however have 16 million dollars to spend on 2,500 kindle book readers at the drastically inflated price of $6,600 per device. How much security could that 16 million buy? It had $79,000 to spend on Obama’s books and $20,000 on a portrait of Obama. The US Embassy had $150,000 to spend on a book about the ambassador’s residence. The US Embassy in Austria had $150,000+ for a Chevy Volt and its charging station. And here is what else Hillary’s State Department did have money for… 7.9 billion dollars for Obama’s Global Health Initiative. 1 billion for global climate change. 2.2 billion to strengthen democratic institutions in Pakistan. And of course… Mosque renovations. In 2011 the State Department provided funds to restore the 15th century Gobarau Minaret in Katsina State in Nigeria’s predominantly Muslim north, an area which has become a virtual killing field for Christians at the hands of Muslim militants, led by the al-Qaeda-linked terror group Boko Haram.
Sounds like a horrible mistake not to fund extra security for the location or possibly to have been there at all. It was a mistake to ignore warnings about Al-Queda pre 9-11 and it was a mistake to invade Iraq based on bogus intel. I am sure in hindsight all involved might act differently.
Dateline: December 2029 Democrat President Sammy Bin Laden found guilty of murdering a Catholic Priest in hand to hand combat. And MCG posts: But more people died in the 9-1-1 incudent while Bush was president. Dave, what kind of tragedy will it take to have you let your hatred for anything Republican go.
Dave, please answer this: If you were the president during that time and you had a vague report that terrorists were going to attack by air what would you have done? Let's hear it. Obviously you had a grand plan to save lives or you would not be choking on this Blame Bush session this long without finding any fault with the dems.
What I am saying is that if H. Clinton and Obama and their staff had a clear vison that 4 Americans were about to be attacked and murdered do you for one minute think that they would have stood by and watched it happen when it could have been prevented? Really?? You really think that they are that callous and reckless? Of course all of the right wing media would try and have us all believe that Obama and Hilary are just that heinous....... :roll: And of course politics have absolutely nothing to do with their attitude......no siree......nothin at all.....
Hilary is so gutless that she immediately went on a foreign tour to avoid questions about her involvement or lack thereof. OF course if she acted properly, why the dodge? She needed over 4 mos. to get her story straight and even then her attitued was "what's the point."
Dave... look in the freeking mirror! If Bush and his staff had a clear vison that 1000's of Americans were about to be attacked and murdered do you for one minute think that they would have stood by and watched it happen when it could have been prevented? Really?? You really think that they were that callous and reckless? Of course all of the left wing media would try and have us all believe that Bush was just that heinous....... :roll: And of course politics have absolutely nothing to do with their attitude......no siree......nothin at all.....
My point exactly. 9-11 and Benghazi are each different though than Iraq. In Iraq.....it was our choice to send thousands of Americans to their deaths.
She refused to act on repeated requests to provide adequate security to an embassy compound in a country where violence and terrorist activity have been staples for a generation. Shortly thereafter the compound was attacked and 4 US citizens including the Ambassador were murdered in the very Embassy she refused to protect....our chief diplomat and members of his staff were attacked and murdered on sovereign US territory as a result of her poor leadership and incompetence..... Clearly the President and his staff understood the significance of their mishandling and made the conscious decision to mislead the public during the campaign.
Always another side to the hard right viewpoint: "At both hearings, which together totaled more than five hours, Clinton acknowledged the "systemic breakdown" cited by an Accountability Review Board she appointed and noted she had accepted all 29 of its recommendations, adding her department was taking additional steps to increase security at U.S. diplomatic facilities around the world. However, she also told both the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee that she had no direct role in the handling of requests by Stevens and other diplomats for increased security that were denied, saying: "I didn't see those requests. They didn't come to me." In reference to the erroneous talking points by Rice that were aired on September 16, Clinton told the Senate panel that she was focused at that time on ensuring the safety of U.S. personnel at other facilities where protests were taking place. "I was pretty occupied about keeping our people safe, doing what needed to be done," Clinton said, adding "I wasn't involved in the talking points process." So... as I suspected she didn't just say tough **** take your chances...yada yada yada.... But....she's in charge....and she did to her credit seem visibly upset by the events and vows to make things right etc. etc. Interesting as always how partisan the questioning is......"Tea Party"..... "conservative".......those words spring up quite a bit about the inquisitors...... not suprisingly.
Is there anything more important than the safety of our foreign service people in dangerous areas? Did she delegate that decision to someone else or is she now just copping out? What incompetent did she have making those decisions? Since we know that the administration lied about what caused the attack in the first place WHY would we now believe her story that she didn't know about the requests for additional security. The fact that she told the committee one thing doesn't make it true. After all she's married to the "I did not have sex with that woman..." perjurer.
Yes she was and just exactly what DID she do to provide for the adequate security of our diplomatic corps? How would you grade her leadership, direction and management efforts on this very important dimension of her job?
BT, Dave is not concerned unless: 1) He can point an accusatory finger at the GOP 2) He is personally affected Any other situation will be his left wing slanted view. I am waiting for the dems to do something that adversely affects him personally just to watch his head explode trying to figure out how to blame Bush.
She says that request did not come to her and I take her word for it. Whoever turned it down must have a good reason other than can't afford it.....you're on your own and we'll notify the next of kin. In other words.....it probably seemd as safe as did the WTC on 9-10-2001. Certainly a target......but nothing's gonna happen.....etc. etc. Military and intelligence strategists and leaders do not always make the best and most accurate decisions.....I think that fact is well known. I am not sure why Clinton would have the military background to autonomously make that call......a call she in fact says she didn't make....and that makes sense.
My answer might be.....might be....if I was certain of the facts.....that the Benghazi incident is one in which Hilary wishes she could have back. Put it in the faux pas side of the ledger and at the end weigh her complete body of work as Sec. of State. For 8 years I watched the imperfections of the Bush administration rain hell on this country repeatedly. I'm not giving Hilary final judgement as a leader based on this one incident so there is your answer.
So in your view what were the highlights of her tenure that were more significant than overseeing the department that was called out by an independent board of inquiry for: 1) "Systemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels", 2) "demonstrated a lack of proactive leadership and management ability", 3) "findings of unsatisfactory leadership performance by senior officials", 4) "security staff in Benghazi on the day of the attack and in the months and weeks leading up to it was inadequate, despite repeated requests from Special Mission Benghazi and Embassy Tripoli for additional staffing" and resulted in the successful attack and murder of a sitting ambassador in a US Embassy compound. What possible achievement of national or international significance did she realize that can possibly begin to compensate for those failures and their horrific consequences not only to the families of those murdered as a result of her mismanagement but also for the damage done to our standing in the world community? Name one......