115
Benghazi : Swingers Discussion 221817102
Busy Swingers Forum - everything you always wanted to know about swingers.
SwingLifeStyle Swingers Personal Ads. | SwingLifeStyle Swingers Clubs

Busy Swingers Forum

Everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

Create A Free Account

HELP
FORUMSGeneral DiscussionsPoliticsBenghazi
TOPIC: Benghazi
GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... More 
Start   2 to 11 of 164   End
User Details are only visible to members.
If we had executed them on the field of battle on the spot no trial this war would be over.

Saint Louis MO
 
 
Username hidden
(12439 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Lucky:

"I would prefer they were executed a long time ago."

Ok, that was my first option. They are an illegal combatant, fighting for no nation and murdering innocent civilians. Little better (if at all) than the barbarrian camps in Civilizations 5. (game)

So now we must take those we capture alive, put them on trial to convict them of being a terrorist (gun powder on their person, soldiers pointing their fingers at the suspect as a terrorist, ect.) then upon conviction in a military court (few if any appeals) you take them out back and hang them.

Shall we use trees? The roof tops of buildings or shall we lay a road with poles erected and their brother-en (sometimes entire families) left hung from the poles?

We will make the newly condemned walk this road, we can even call it the golden road to their god.

Hazle Township PA
 
 
Username hidden
(6873 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
So you would rather pay taxes to keep a endless number of terrorist in prison for life?

I would prefer they were executed a long time ago.

Saint Louis MO
 
 
Username hidden
(12439 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Having:

Stupid? Really? So you would rather pay taxes to keep a endless number of terrorist in prison for life?

Hazle Township PA
 
 
Username hidden
(6873 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Having:

1) terrorist = illegal combatant... Just hang them.

2) if we want to treat this like a war, then when we call the war over, release them like we did German POWs.

3) we shouldn't by taking so many prisoner in the first place. When our enemies see our forces approch, they should think the wrath of god has befallen them

Hazle Township PA
 
 
Username hidden
(6873 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
FACT

e-mails released last month showed that the CIA originally included information in the talking points about five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi in the months leading up to the attack that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.

Nuland wrote that she had “serious concerns" about "arming members of Congress,” and she said such information “could be abused by Members to beat the State Department for not paying attention to Agency warnings so why do we want to feed that either? Concerned ..."

She also objected to the CIA’s suggestion that the talking points include that members of groups associated with al Qaeda, specifically Ansar al Sharia, participated in the attack. Including that information "will come back to us at podium,” Nuland wrote, referring to her role as the daily press briefer at State.

Pittsburgh PA
 
 
Username hidden
(16572 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
That's officially all I know as of right now.. FACT

Also a fact, don't know if it's entirely factual!

San Antonio TX
 
 
Username hidden
(7873 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Cut and Paste from a NY Times OP

San Antonio TX
 
 
Username hidden
(7873 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
At 7:51 p.m., the F.B.I. offered only minor changes to the draft, the bureau’s only suggestions during the contentious process.

At 9:24 p.m., Ms. Nuland, reading the latest draft, complained in an e-mail, “These don’t resolve all my issues or those of my building leadership.” Ten minutes later, Benjamin J. Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser, offered his first comments, saying, “We need to resolve this in a way that respects all of the relevant equities, especially the investigation.”

In a report that set off the latest tempest over the talking points, ABC News reported incorrectly that Mr. Rhodes had emphasized the need to protect the State Department’s interests.

At 9:52 p.m., a C.I.A. spokesman e-mailed to other agency staff members a draft note intended for Mr. Petraeus, warning him that while the White House had quickly cleared the proposed talking points, the State Department had “major concerns.”

Mr. Obama’s national security deputies reviewed the talking points at a meeting the next day, Sept. 15, Mr. Rhodes said.

At 11:25 a.m., Mr. Rhodes changed a reference to the United States “consulate” in Benghazi to “diplomatic post.”

Over the next couple of hours, aides made small final changes and e-mailed a final version to lawmakers shortly after 3 p.m.

With time short before Ms. Rice began taping her appearances on Sunday morning news programs, the White House also supplied her aides with the final talking points.

Asked by one of Ms. Rice’s aides, “Is this the final language you want to use on Benghazi,” Mr. Rhodes replied with a single word: “Yup.”

San Antonio TX
 
 
Username hidden
(7873 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
But there is no other evidence in the e-mails that Mr. Morell himself objected to the inclusion of this material. In an e-mail to Mr. Petraeus accompanying the final version of the talking points, Mr. Morell referred to the State Department’s deep concerns about the references.

The release of the e-mails offers a rare glimpse inside the White House five days after the attack as it struggled to piece together intelligence to formulate a public account of what happened.

The process began in earnest at 4:20 p.m. on Friday, Sept. 14, when Stephen W. Preston, the C.I.A. general counsel, sent an e-mail to other agency officials warning them not to disclose information that might interfere with the F.B.I.’s investigation.

At 6:20 p.m., the spokesman for the National Security Council at the time, Tommy Vietor, e-mailed to remind officials that Denis McDonough, then the deputy national security adviser and now the White House chief of staff, wanted to ensure that the edits were coordinated with the State Department.

At 6:41 p.m., Shawn Turner, the spokesman for the director of national intelligence, suggested saying that on Sept. 10, the C.I.A. had “notified” the American embassy in Cairo, not “warned” it, of social media reports calling for a demonstration and encouraging jihadists to break into the embassy. Mr. Morell later removed the entire reference.

At 7:16 p.m., Victoria Nuland, the State Department spokeswoman, weighed in with her initial concerns about ensuring that the talking points provided to lawmakers did not go further than what the administration was telling reporters.

Twenty-three minutes later, Ms. Nuland sent White House and intelligence officials an even more pointed e-mail, objecting that the talking points could be “abused” by lawmakers “to beat the State Department for not paying attention to agency warnings so why do we want to feed that either? Concerned ... ”

San Antonio TX
 
 
Username hidden
(7873 posts)
GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... More 
Start   2 to 11 of 164   End
TOPIC: Benghazi