Exclusive: Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror Reference
POSTED BY: GEEZER
UPDATED: Tuesday, March 3, 2026 15:58
VIEWED: 5307
PAGE 4 of 6
Quote:
Originally posted by reaverfan:Quote:So,what was Iraq all about? Spreading freedom?
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Bush's reaction to 9/11 was to go after al-Qaeda in Afghanistan,and track down the leaders behind the attacks.
You really don't know ?
Wow.
It was a failure to comply w/ UN Resolutions. It had zero to do w/ 9/11. Where in the hell were you the past 12 years ?
On March 17, 2003, Lord Goldsmith, Attorney General of the UK, set out his government's legal justification for an invasion of Iraq. He said that Security Council resolution 678 authorised force against Iraq, which was suspended but not terminated by resolution 687, which imposed continuing obligations on Iraq to eliminate its weapons of mass destruction. A material breach of resolution 687 would revive the authority to use force under resolution 678. In resolution 1441 the Security Council determined that Iraq was in material breach of resolution 687 because it had not fully carried out its obligations to disarm. Although resolution 1441 had given Iraq a final chance to comply, UK Attorney General Goldsmith wrote "it is plain that Iraq has failed so to comply". Most member governments of the United Nations Security Council made clear that after resolution 1441 there still was no authorization for the use of force. Indeed, at the time 1441 was passed, both the U.S. and UK representatives stated explicitly that 1441 contained no provision for military action. As the New York Times noted about the negotiations,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#2003
_Iraq_War
Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen
Resident USA Freedom Fundie
" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by GEEZER:
Let the excuse-fest begin.
And it does.
...
An editorial cited as fact.
Well, in fairness, that's how you began this whole thread.
And you oh so conveniently left out a whole bunch of "... but OBAMA!"
One might get the idea your withered old brain is broken and biased.
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero
"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012
Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"
Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
And then Rappy tries to explain the U.S. invasion of Iraq by bringing up the UK's justification for invading Iraq.
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero
"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012
Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"
Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Does anyone evevn KNOW/CARE who was responsible for Benghazi?
It's cute when teabillies get on their soap boxes and monologue about that which they ADMIT they have no clue of in the first place.
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero
"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012
Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"
Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Does anyone evevn KNOW/CARE who was responsible for Benghazi?
It's cute when teabillies get on their soap boxes and monologue about that which they ADMIT they have no clue of in the first place.
But we DO know. Unlike you.
We know NOW , despite this WH's attempt to cover up, the facts that there were 12 revisions of the talking points, which completely scrubbed any and all talk of al-qaeda or radical Islamic groups involved in this attacks. And doing so in favor of this crazy, cooked up story about a YouTube video, which hardly ANYONE had seen, and which had been posted way back in June of that summer.
We now know that the State Dept ignored CIA reports and failed to raise the threat level, despite multiple warnings and events.
You keep pushing this insane narrative that there's nothing there, even after the WH admitted to covering this up. They use the words like 'stylistic' changes, and you buy it, hook, line and sinker, but in fact, those are incredibly substantive and concrete changes.
This admin is too incompetent to deal w/ the real world , or it was trying to cover something up, something other than its incompetence.
There are no other possible explanations.
Quote:
And then Rappy tries to explain the U.S. invasion of Iraq by bringing up the UK's justification for invading Iraq.
I succeeded, actually. The reasons were one in the same. Iraq failed to comply, and it also shows that the U.S. didn't 'unilaterally' decide to go to war, as all the phony anti-war ( which were just anti-Bush ) types love to chant.
But, as you'd find fault for anything I post, what difference does it make ?
Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen
Resident USA Freedom Fundie
" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Holy crap! This is so fullbloodedly retarded. You're talking about a press release!
A PRESS RELEASE.
That's basically White House ad copy. There is no legal nor criminal significance to what the fucking Press Secretary refrains from saying. They can revise their talking points a hundred and fifty thousand times and it's all totally legit. A press release does not set policy, it neither saves nor endangers lives. It's gorram AD COPY. What's wrong with you?
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'll let this speak for me:Quote:
10 Examples Of Why The Republican ‘Benghazi’ Talking Point Is Hypocritical
At this point it’s well-established there was no wrongdoing by President Barack Obama or former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when it came to the response to the terror strike in Benghazi that Fox News and conservatives around the nation have been trying to use to score political points against the high-profile Democratic leaders.
Unfortunately for Republicans, the fact that they have pushed so hard when there was no “scandal” ( http://www.alan.com/2013/05/07/fox-news-pentagon-refutes-claim-that-tr
oops-could-have-been-on-ground-in-time-to-stop-second-benghazi-attack.]) shows that they were only out to use Benghazi for the political ammunition. Here’s even more proof, with 10 examples of other things that Republicans didn’t seem nearly so upset about or interested in investigating/ Details at http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/05/12/ten-things-republicans-cared-a
bout-less-than-benghazi/]
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Holy crap! This is so fullbloodedly retarded. You're talking about a press release!
A PRESS RELEASE.
No, it's much more than a 'press release'. It spurred on the talking points for UN Sec Rice, to go on 5 Sunday morning shows, and repeat the same lie, 5 different times. It was the basis for Obama and SecState Clinton's cutting a PSA, to be aired in WHERE ?? Pakistan, of all places, about a video no one saw, after a amb. in Libya was killed. Tell us again how THAT fits into the real world ??
It was far more than a 'press release'.
Quote:
That's basically White House ad copy. There is no legal nor criminal significance to what the fucking Press Secretary refrains from saying. They can revise their talking points a hundred and fifty thousand times and it's all totally legit. A press release does not set policy, it neither saves nor endangers lives. It's gorram AD COPY. What's wrong with you?
HKCavalier
What's wrong w/ us is that we have in office the most inept, incompetent and arrogant leaders the free world has seen in possibly EVER.
And Niki.. anytime you let D I C K Durbin speak for you, you've lost the argument.
Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen
Resident USA Freedom Fundie
" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
For months, Fox News has been promising to blow open the Benghazi cover-up that they’re sure is worse than Watergate, Iran-Contra and the Titanic, multiplied by the Hindenburg to the Teapot Dome Scandal power. And again and again, the same essential facts have emerged. As protests raged at U.S. embassies across the region, the U.S. military tried and failed to protect the diplomatic mission in Benghazi.
On Wednesday’s Daily Show, Jon Stewart explained how Republicans and Fox News are outraged at a supposed cover-up that they can’t prove or explain, and are equally outraged that no one else is outraged.
The right suggests the lack of outrage in Benghazi is part of the left’s continued control of the media. But the media loves a good scandal, and would jump right in if one existed.
The fact is, most Americans are skeptical of the GOP not because of media bias, but because we have a memory. We all know the the GOP has a tendency, as Hypervocal‘s Slade Sohmer points out, to “cry wolf.”
We remember the ridiculous impeachment of President Clinton. We remember the fixed intelligence that led to the Iraq War. We remember birtherism, Solyndra, Fast and Furious — all examples of the GOP trying to conjure scandals that in no way resonated with the American public.
And some of us even remember Mitt Romney politicizing the attacks in Libya within hours of the deaths of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans, attacking embassy officials in a bizarre manner that continued his obsession of accusing President Obama of “apologizing for America.” Romney humiliated himself that night, and again in the second presidential debate when he accused the president of refusing to call the attacks “terror” when Obama had in fact used that exact word the day after the attack.
President Obama has been trying to commit what the GOP considers the greatest high crime and misdemeanor: Being a Democratic president who finishes his second term. So you can’t expect them to ever give up on trying to turn Benghazi into Watergate, unless they find some bright, shiny new scandal that actually makes sense. http://www.nationalmemo.com/the-party-that-cries-wolf-jon-stewart-expl
ains-why-no-one-is-buying-fox-news-never-ending-benghazi-outrage/]
Watch and laugh: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-may-8-2013/the-big-benghazi-theo
ry----if-
"worse than Watergate, Iran-Contra and the Titanic, multiplied by the Hindenburg to the Teapot Dome Scandal power" ... 
"What's wrong with you?" We already know the answer to that one...
(Rap, little man, I didn't let Dick Durban speak for me, that's hysterical; I put up a quote from him, period. Even a busted clock is right twice a day, but you? Virtually never.)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
...what difference does it make ?
Oh their god - Hillary has gotten to Rappy now!
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero
"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012
Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"
Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME