Do you think the Bengazi "scandal" is worth your attention?

About as worthy of attention to me as the attacks on US consulates and embassies under the bush regime were to republicans.
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/13333916-number-of-embassies-attacked-during-the-bush-years-before-benghazi-many

I still don’t know what’s going on.

I’m sure that amid all the Republican smoke surrounding the Bengazi event, there’s a certain amount of fire. But since I don’t know the true story and probably neven can, I choose to focus my attention and various shades of anger on issues that affect me more directly such as lack of gun control and the proliferation of lousy elected officials.

Well, we certainly can’t have foreigners shooting Americans. That’s our job.

“Thompson’s lawyer says he’s even received threats and intimidation about the case from superiors.” – concerning.

We obviously did not want this to happen and yes there might have been goofs, but Stevens was in a vulnerable position partly because he was effective. I wish the Republicans would bring as much energy to solving some of the real problems we are facing rather than beating this dead horse. I get so tired of the gotcha game that both parties play.

I am watching but am rather cynical as to whether anything productive will come of it.

I honestly don’t get why this is a story. I mean, I’m not an American, so I have the luxury of picking which stories to follow while I eat my popcorn, but as someone who finds American politics weirdly-train-wreck-fascinating, I still don’t see what the fuss is about.

If there was a coverup, incompetence or negligence involved then I want to know about it. I want the truth for a change. I demand it!

@glacial It’s a fuss because our government is suppressing the truth in foreign lands and actions. There have been threats against the people telling the truth about the govt as well. Granted we know this kind of thing happens more than we’d like to believe, but the Republicans are trying to gain leverage by blowing this one up and making Dems ‘fess up, or trying to make them.

This is the way I see this playing out. There will be much huffing and puffing from both the R’s and the D’s. Innuendos and charges of misconduct will be levelled. Obfuscation and denial will follow. People will be brought in and testimony will be heard but only if it fits with the pre-ordained outcome required, if not, it will be either cut off or discounted after the fact. Much name calling. Some minor official will be thrown to the wolves. Both sides will claim in the end that it clearly shows whatever they wanted to prove and that the other side is full of crap, grandstanding and politically motivated.

In my opinion, there was incompetence, there was negligence and therefore there was a coverup. But, that is not what this is about. In reality no one gives a flying fuck about this matter except as fodder for the next election cycle.

I heard an opinion that the main motivation of the investigation is to discredit Hillary Clinton for the next election and then it all made sense.

@rojo I don’t know about that. If our people are doing a job in foreign lands for our government, they should be told HONESTLY about the security risks and updated on crisis that can and will affect them and their lives. If our government new about risks and allowed our people to die due to lack of additional security, it’s kind of a big deal, and it’s important it isn’t allowed to continue happening.

How about this one that is still under investigation. Twisting facts to show an entire group of people as guilty of sodomy and murder, is not cool. The American people deserve the truth from our government.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/stevens.asp

@KNOWITALL What we the people deserve and what we actually get are usually two different things. And that is what I am saying.

And, as for “our” government knowing something is going to happen, not doing anything about it and allowing people to die. I do not think this is an isolated incident but who you gonna ask and would they give you a straight answer anyway?

I wish I could believe that this hearing is about what it was called for but I do not.

@rojo Agreed, but regardless of whether it’s Hillary or Boehner or whomever, people need to start getting called out for this.

Even if the GOP is pushing it, I’m not automatically going to assume it’s for political posing, surely some people in DC actually care about people dying and our whistleblowers getting threatened by the govt.

Obviously there was a coverup after the fact to disguise the fact that the govt. did not do what it should have done to protect our diplomats.

There have been other notable cover ups in history (Watergate, Monica Lewinsky, etc) one of which resulted in the end of Nixon’s presidency.

But the primary difference between Watergate and Benghazi is that, in the Watergate scandal, nobody died.

We owe it to the families of those killed in Benghazi to find the truth of what happened, regardless of the attempts at cover up.

Let the chips fall where they may. People died, so this should transcend the petty political maneuvering of Dems and Repubs alike. The truth needs to come out.

@Buttonstc
How many people died due to Bush lying about WMDs in Iraq?

@ragingloli Do you have any interest in what would have happened if we had not invaded Iraq? Do you believe they never existed even though we had intelligence experts that believed they were there and removed?

Even if Bush was lying, which I do NOT believe, pre-emptive strikes against known terrorists aren’t all that intolerable in defense of America and the people who live here. I read his book, I get it.

@KNOWITALL
What whould have happened?
Well, for one, islamic terrorists wouldn’t have grown in Iraq.
the 170000 people that died since the invasion began would still be alive.
Your debt would be 800 billion less.

And we know that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, so it was by no means a “preemptive strike against known terrorists”, and Iraq posed no threat whatsoever to the US, so it was not “defense” either.
It was an unprovoked, illegal war of aggression in contravention to international law.
Bush is therefore a war criminal.

And yes, I am quite certain that the mythical WMD’s did not exists. UN Inspectors did not find any during the prelude to the illegal invasion.

@ragingloli My Irish is up, we can debate this another time. peace.

@KNOWITALL “even though we had intelligence experts that believed they were there and removed”

That is not how it happened, and there is no excuse for propagating this misinformation. Bush had his own reasons for going into Iraq. The WMDs were a fabrication, and we all know that now.

@glacial & @ragingloli See, this is why I hate these pi$$ing matches, especially when I’m already worked up.

Since we haven’t found WMD in Iraq, a lot of the anti-war/anti-Bush crowd is saying that the Bush administration lied about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. Well, if they’re going to claim that the Bush administration lied, then there sure are a lot of other people, including quite a few prominent Democrats, who have told the same “lies” since the inspectors pulled out of Iraq in 1998. Here are just a few examples that prove that the Bush administration didn’t lie about weapons of mass destruction…

ADVERTISEMENT
————————————————————————————————————————

————————————————————————————————————————

“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” — From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

“This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.” — From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

http://www.rightwingnews.com/quotes/if-the-bush-administration-lied-about-wmd-so-did-these-people-version-3-0/

@ragingloli

Good point. I’m glad you reminded me about it.

And nothing ever happened to anyone in the Bush administration for the cover up so my hopes on this one aren’t that high either.

Politics is just a dirty business regardless of which side of the aisle.

@ragingloli I agree with you that it was a huge mistake to remove Saddam Hussein from power as Hillary Rodham Clinton voted to do

@KNOWITALL The reason that people say that the Bush administration lied is not because “they didn’t find WMD in Iraq.” The reason they say it is because they lied.

What random Democrats had to say about any of it is beside the point. It’s even further off the topic of the Bush administration leading a nation into war under false pretenses as this discussion is to the actual question that @josie asked.

@glacial Could you have proved it back then? All information, and some that we aren’t privy to, suggested wmd’s to both parties. To me it’s significant and often left out of conversations with libs.

And @rojo and I were talking above about this (see below), and a lot of people were pretty glad to see Americans in Iraq if you’ve forgotten the atrocities.
“And, as for “our” government knowing something is going to happen, not doing anything about it and allowing people to die. I do not think this is an isolated incident but who you gonna ask and would they give you a straight answer anyway?”

@ragingloli started the partisan talk about Bush, not me.

@KNOWITALL No, I couldn’t have proved it back then, because it was being kept a closely guarded secret. I think that is why there were so many liberals who did chime in (as well as conservatives like Colin Powell) – because they genuinely believed the WMD story.

But my point is that we know better now. We know that the entire WMD hunt was a lie. So there is no reason to repeat the story, as you did above (saying that the intelligence experts believed that they were there – when they were the ones saying, “Umm, guys, we have no reason to believe there are WMDs here”), as if it were fact. It hurts everyone to rewrite history that way, and I think we should stop it when we see it.

@glacial The fact is, even the President has information that he has to work with, his advisors advise him and he makes a decision, right or wrong, and deals with repercussions. So most of the world cracks Bush jokes, but to me, he took a gamble to save American lives, I think that’s part of that particular job.

After the 1990–1991 Persian Gulf War, the United Nations located and destroyed large quantities of Iraqi chemical weapons and related equipment and materials throughout the early 1990s, with varying degrees of Iraqi cooperation and obstruction.[1] In response to diminishing Iraqi cooperation with UNSCOM, the United States called for withdrawal of all UN and IAEA inspectors in 1998, resulting in Operation Desert Fox. The United States and the UK asserted that Saddam Hussein still possessed large hidden stockpiles of WMD in 2003, and that he was clandestinely procuring and producing more. Inspections by the UN to resolve the status of unresolved disarmament questions restarted from November 2002 until March 2003,[2] under UN Security Council Resolution 1441, which demanded Saddam give “immediate, unconditional and active cooperation” with UN and IAEA inspections, shortly before his country was attacked.[3]

And lastly:
A key CIA informant in Iraq admitted that he lied about his allegations, “then watched in shock as it was used to justify the war”.[18]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction

@glacial is right. Back on track now.

@rojo I disagree, but he can PM me or post a Q if he wants to continue.

Tru dat. And a good idea too.

Yes, I do. Especially since I called bullshit long ago, flat out said that the administration lied about it being a terrorist attack, and was called a teabagging fucktard because of it.