Cohen surrenders to FBI today (Page 2): You have to understand, these 4 Americans mean nothing to the l*****ts. Now, if they had been i*****l a***ns, that would have been another...

Pegasus Loc: Texas Gulf Coast

usnpilot wrote:

"4 Americans died in B******i because of piss poor foreign policy, a strength of the Obama administration.

You have to understand, these 4 Americans mean nothing to the l*****ts. Now, if they had been i*****l a***ns, that would have been another matter,

Texcaster Loc: Queensland

Pegasus wrote:

You have to understand, these 4 Americans mean nothing to the l*****ts. Now, if they had been i*****l a***ns, that would have been another matter,

You sanctimonious bar stool patriot types will always have B******i and birtherism.

Ronald Reagan’s B******i - https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/ronald-reagans-b******i

Ever since militant jihadists k**led four Americans, including the U.S. Ambassador, in an attack on a U.S. diplomatic outpost in that remote Libyan town two years ago, House Republicans have kept up a drumbeat of insinuation. They have already dev**ed thirteen hearings, twenty-five thousand pages of documents, and fifty briefings to the topic, which have turned up nothing unexpected.

Around dawn on October 23, 1983, I was in Beirut, Lebanon, when a suicide bomber drove a truck laden with the equivalent of twenty-one thousand pounds of TNT into the heart of a U.S. Marine compound, k*****g two hundred and forty-one servicemen. The U.S. military command, which regarded the Marines’ presence as a non-combative, “peace-keeping mission,” had left a vehicle gate wide open, and ordered the sentries to keep their weapons unloaded. The only real resistance the suicide bomber had encountered was a scrim of concertina wire. When I arrived on the scene a short while later to report on it for the Wall Street Journal, the Marine barracks were flattened. From beneath the dusty, smoking slabs of collapsed concrete, piteous American voices could be heard, begging for help. Thirteen more American servicemen later died from injuries, making it the single deadliest attack on American Marines since the Battle of Iwo Jima.

Six months earlier, militants had bombed the U.S. embassy in Beirut, too, k*****g sixty-three more people, including seventeen Americans. Among the dead were seven C.I.A. officers, including the agency’s top analyst in the Middle East, an immensely valuable intelligence asset, and the Beirut station chief.

There were more than enough opportunities to lay blame for the horrific losses at high U.S. officials’ feet. But unlike today’s Congress, congressmen did not talk of impeaching Ronald Reagan, who was then President, nor were any subpoenas sent to cabinet members.

If you compare the costs of the Reagan Administration’s serial security lapses in Beirut to the costs of B******i, it’s clear what has really deteriorated in the intervening three decades. It’s not the security of American government personnel working abroad. It’s the behavior of American congressmen at home.

usnpilot Loc: Ft Myers Fl

Texcaster wrote:

You sanctimonious bar stool patriot types will always have B******i and birtherism.

Ronald Reagan’s B******i - https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/ronald-reagans-b******i

Ever since militant jihadists k**led four Americans, including the U.S. Ambassador, in an attack on a U.S. diplomatic outpost in that remote Libyan town two years ago, House Republicans have kept up a drumbeat of insinuation. They have already dev**ed thirteen hearings, twenty-five thousand pages of documents, and fifty briefings to the topic, which have turned up nothing unexpected.

Around dawn on October 23, 1983, I was in Beirut, Lebanon, when a suicide bomber drove a truck laden with the equivalent of twenty-one thousand pounds of TNT into the heart of a U.S. Marine compound, k*****g two hundred and forty-one servicemen. The U.S. military command, which regarded the Marines’ presence as a non-combative, “peace-keeping mission,” had left a vehicle gate wide open, and ordered the sentries to keep their weapons unloaded. The only real resistance the suicide bomber had encountered was a scrim of concertina wire. When I arrived on the scene a short while later to report on it for the Wall Street Journal, the Marine barracks were flattened. From beneath the dusty, smoking slabs of collapsed concrete, piteous American voices could be heard, begging for help. Thirteen more American servicemen later died from injuries, making it the single deadliest attack on American Marines since the Battle of Iwo Jima.

Six months earlier, militants had bombed the U.S. embassy in Beirut, too, k*****g sixty-three more people, including seventeen Americans. Among the dead were seven C.I.A. officers, including the agency’s top analyst in the Middle East, an immensely valuable intelligence asset, and the Beirut station chief.

There were more than enough opportunities to lay blame for the horrific losses at high U.S. officials’ feet. But unlike today’s Congress, congressmen did not talk of impeaching Ronald Reagan, who was then President, nor were any subpoenas sent to cabinet members.

If you compare the costs of the Reagan Administration’s serial security lapses in Beirut to the costs of B******i, it’s clear what has really deteriorated in the intervening three decades. It’s not the security of American government personnel working abroad. It’s the behavior of American congressmen at home.

You sanctimonious bar stool patriot types will alw... (show quote)

Did the Reagan administration lie about the cause of the attacks? That’s a big difference.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

wilpharm wrote:

Mexico could be next with their new socialist president..could have the new Venezuela next door!!

Next door is fine, just as long as it stays there and not here. Maybe the Obama’s, Schumer’s, Pelosi’s and half of Hollywood will move there permanently. I am positive the Mexico government could find a place for them. Sean Penn could certainly play the role of brutal dictator with Ashley Judd or Cynthia Nixon as his wife.

Dennis

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

Pegasus wrote:

Lanny Davis, the lawyer for Michael Cohen, is a Clinton-era creature. He is also the Registered Foreign Agent for Putin-linked Ukrainian oligarch Dmytro Firtash, who is wanted by the US government. Lanny Davis is the co-founder and partner of the law firm Davis, Goldberg & Galper and they are the ACTIVE foreign agent for Firtash.

Hmm, more Russian collusion.

It amazes me how the Clintons, Comey, Mueller and others are all intertwined either through marriage or by being high school/college roommates and so on. With the Liberal Democratic Party all is NOT as it seems.

Dennis

Pegasus Loc: Texas Gulf Coast

Texcaster wrote:

You sanctimonious bar stool patriot types will always have B******i and birtherism.

Ronald Reagan’s B******i - https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/ronald-reagans-b******i

Ever since militant jihadists k**led four Americans, including the U.S. Ambassador, in an attack on a U.S. diplomatic outpost in that remote Libyan town two years ago, House Republicans have kept up a drumbeat of insinuation. They have already dev**ed thirteen hearings, twenty-five thousand pages of documents, and fifty briefings to the topic, which have turned up nothing unexpected.

Around dawn on October 23, 1983, I was in Beirut, Lebanon, when a suicide bomber drove a truck laden with the equivalent of twenty-one thousand pounds of TNT into the heart of a U.S. Marine compound, k*****g two hundred and forty-one servicemen. The U.S. military command, which regarded the Marines’ presence as a non-combative, “peace-keeping mission,” had left a vehicle gate wide open, and ordered the sentries to keep their weapons unloaded. The only real resistance the suicide bomber had encountered was a scrim of concertina wire. When I arrived on the scene a short while later to report on it for the Wall Street Journal, the Marine barracks were flattened. From beneath the dusty, smoking slabs of collapsed concrete, piteous American voices could be heard, begging for help. Thirteen more American servicemen later died from injuries, making it the single deadliest attack on American Marines since the Battle of Iwo Jima.

Six months earlier, militants had bombed the U.S. embassy in Beirut, too, k*****g sixty-three more people, including seventeen Americans. Among the dead were seven C.I.A. officers, including the agency’s top analyst in the Middle East, an immensely valuable intelligence asset, and the Beirut station chief.

There were more than enough opportunities to lay blame for the horrific losses at high U.S. officials’ feet. But unlike today’s Congress, congressmen did not talk of impeaching Ronald Reagan, who was then President, nor were any subpoenas sent to cabinet members.

If you compare the costs of the Reagan Administration’s serial security lapses in Beirut to the costs of B******i, it’s clear what has really deteriorated in the intervening three decades. It’s not the security of American government personnel working abroad. It’s the behavior of American congressmen at home.

You sanctimonious bar stool patriot types will alw... (show quote)

Texcaster, you old ignorant reprobate. Way to sidetrack the issue, big time.

The B******i affair is very different from those very sad and horrible security lapses you mentioned. Those occurred at the dawn of the moslem terrorist era. We didn't know much then, we were still learning about this newish) threat and we were woefully unprepared for it. We had had our embassy in Tehran overrun by Iranian "students" and then we saw the debacle at Desert One. We were totally unprepared and after the Carter years, we had to start rebuilding our military.

In the intervening years up to B******i, we had a little event here, that we call 9-11. I'm not sure if you're familiar with it. It was in the newspaper and everything. I think that's when most people finally understood the extremes to which moslem terrorists would go to inflict damage and k**l people; it's what they do. Well, you would think that most people had figured it out by then, but it seems that many in our government chose to ignore the threat.

In 2012, US ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens, went to a diplomatic compound in the town of B******i on a mission. We do not know what that mission was but it is believed that he was trying to recover Stinger missiles that had been given by the 0bama misadministration to the rebels during the pushback against Mohamar Khadafy. For many months prior, he had been asking for greater security for both the embassy in Tripoli and the annex in B******i. His boss, Hillary Clinton who was then secretary of State, turned down or ignored these requests. Maybe Chris Stevens did not know the email address she used on her home-brewed server.

At any rate, he didn't get the additional security he was begging for, but he went about his mission. 9-11 had taken place 11 years ago and it was an anniversary of sorts for the moslem terrorists. As seems to have been the MO since 9-11-2001, the US embassies around the world go on a higher state of alert because it is possible that moslems somewhere would like to "celebrate" the anniversary with a bang so to speak. 9-11-2012 was no different, but Chris Stevens was not in his embassy in Tripoli, he was in B******i, at the lightly guarded compound, doing wh**ever his mission required him to do. After some meetings that day, he retired to the compound for the night.

Reports had been coming into State that there were demonstrations at another embassy and that it was a little ugly. We don't know that anything was done about that information. At any rate around 9:40PM local time, moslem terrorists attacked the diplomatic compound and ambassador Christopher Stevens along with IT officer Sean Smith were k**led. The book and subsequently, the movie about the event, purport to say that the people in the compound were calling for help as the attack was going on. They reported that it was a surprise attack, that there had been no marches or demonstrations prior to the attack. When they got no answer from State, they called the CIA annex that was located about a mile away. Several "contractors" were ready and more than willing to go to their rescue but they were told to "stand down" by the head of the CIA annex. Several times.

At some point, these guys said "screw this" and took off for the compound, too late. They found Sean Smith's body but not the ambassador's. They made their way back to the CIA annex. In the meantime, the annex was in touch with their superiors in real time. They were promised immediate help and relief. Around 4:00Am on 9-12, the moslem terrorists launched a mortar attack on the annex and the battle was joined. In the meantime a small CIA and JSOC team from Tripoli had landed in B******i and made their way to the annex and were on hand for the battle.

Throughout the night, the annex repeatedly asked and pleaded for help. They were promised it several times but no one came to their rescue until it was all over. During the battle, Glen Doherty, who had flown in from Tripoli and Tyronne Woods, both CIA "contractors" were k**led by mortar fire.

Back in the USA, then President 0bama, who was in the midst of his re-e******n campaign stated that the attack was prompted by the release of some obscure video, he stated that it was not a planned attack. Demonstrators always come to marches with automatic weapons, mortars, grenades and so on. Hillary repeated the video fable and said she knew nothing about anything. "I don't recall seeing requests from my dear friend Chris for increased security."

As usual, it was not the event that was an issue of controversy, it was the aftermath. Why did the US not answer the urgent calls for help with something a little more robust that "we'll get there." We have forces specifically trained and ready for this kind of event. We have planes and gunships within striking distance of the event. We have something called Combatant Commanders In-Extremis Force (CIF) company specifically for this type of intervention. An AC-130 Spectre gunship was located at Aviano, ready to go. F-16s could have been there, overflying the annex and putting the fear of God in the moslem terrorists. We had all this hardware and these people ready to go and they were all told to stand down. Why?

0bama never revealed what he was doing during that time; the battle lasted 13 hours and not a finger was lifted to help. Why?
Why did the US government, 0bama and Hillary, lie about the attack? Why did they say it was because of a video when everyone knew it was a planned attack? What was ambassador Chris Stevens doing there on the anniversary of 9-11? Why were his requests for increased security ignored?

Those are the questions that have never been answered. But history tells us that at some point, we will get the answers.

Texcaster Loc: Queensland

usnpilot wrote:

Did the Reagan administration lie about the cause of the attacks? That’s a big difference.

There was no lie, just inadequate security in both cases. Times three under Dutch's watch

Texcaster Loc: Queensland

Pegasus wrote:

Texcaster, you old ignorant reprobate. Way to sidetrack the issue, big time.

The B******i affair is very different from those very sad and horrible security lapses you mentioned. Those occurred at the dawn of the moslem terrorist era. We didn't know much then, we were still learning about this newish) threat and we were woefully unprepared for it. We had had our embassy in Tehran overrun by Iranian "students" and then we saw the debacle at Desert One. We were totally unprepared and after the Carter years, we had to start rebuilding our military.

In the intervening years up to B******i, we had a little event here, that we call 9-11. I'm not sure if you're familiar with it. It was in the newspaper and everything. I think that's when most people finally understood the extremes to which moslem terrorists would go to inflict damage and k**l people; it's what they do. Well, you would think that most people had figured it out by then, but it seems that many in our government chose to ignore the threat.

In 2012, US ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens, went to a diplomatic compound in the town of B******i on a mission. We do not know what that mission was but it is believed that he was trying to recover Stinger missiles that had been given by the 0bama misadministration to the rebels during the pushback against Mohamar Khadafy. For many months prior, he had been asking for greater security for both the embassy in Tripoli and the annex in B******i. His boss, Hillary Clinton who was then secretary of State, turned down or ignored these requests. Maybe Chris Stevens did not know the email address she used on her home-brewed server.

At any rate, he didn't get the additional security he was begging for, but he went about his mission. 9-11 had taken place 11 years ago and it was an anniversary of sorts for the moslem terrorists. As seems to have been the MO since 9-11-2001, the US embassies around the world go on a higher state of alert because it is possible that moslems somewhere would like to "celebrate" the anniversary with a bang so to speak. 9-11-2012 was no different, but Chris Stevens was not in his embassy in Tripoli, he was in B******i, at the lightly guarded compound, doing wh**ever his mission required him to do. After some meetings that day, he retired to the compound for the night.

Reports had been coming into State that there were demonstrations at another embassy and that it was a little ugly. We don't know that anything was done about that information. At any rate around 9:40PM local time, moslem terrorists attacked the diplomatic compound and ambassador Christopher Stevens along with IT officer Sean Smith were k**led. The book and subsequently, the movie about the event, purport to say that the people in the compound were calling for help as the attack was going on. They reported that it was a surprise attack, that there had been no marches or demonstrations prior to the attack. When they got no answer from State, they called the CIA annex that was located about a mile away. Several "contractors" were ready and more than willing to go to their rescue but they were told to "stand down" by the head of the CIA annex. Several times.

At some point, these guys said "screw this" and took off for the compound, too late. They found Sean Smith's body but not the ambassador's. They made their way back to the CIA annex. In the meantime, the annex was in touch with their superiors in real time. They were promised immediate help and relief. Around 4:00Am on 9-12, the moslem terrorists launched a mortar attack on the annex and the battle was joined. In the meantime a small CIA and JSOC team from Tripoli had landed in B******i and made their way to the annex and were on hand for the battle.

Throughout the night, the annex repeatedly asked and pleaded for help. They were promised it several times but no one came to their rescue until it was all over. During the battle, Glen Doherty, who had flown in from Tripoli and Tyronne Woods, both CIA "contractors" were k**led by mortar fire.

Back in the USA, then President 0bama, who was in the midst of his re-e******n campaign stated that the attack was prompted by the release of some obscure video, he stated that it was not a planned attack. Demonstrators always come to marches with automatic weapons, mortars, grenades and so on. Hillary repeated the video fable and said she knew nothing about anything. "I don't recall seeing requests from my dear friend Chris for increased security."

As usual, it was not the event that was an issue of controversy, it was the aftermath. Why did the US not answer the urgent calls for help with something a little more robust that "we'll get there." We have forces specifically trained and ready for this kind of event. We have planes and gunships within striking distance of the event. We have something called Combatant Commanders In-Extremis Force (CIF) company specifically for this type of intervention. An AC-130 Spectre gunship was located at Aviano, ready to go. F-16s could have been there, overflying the annex and putting the fear of God in the moslem terrorists. We had all this hardware and these people ready to go and they were all told to stand down. Why?

0bama never revealed what he was doing during that time; the battle lasted 13 hours and not a finger was lifted to help. Why?
Why did the US government, 0bama and Hillary, lie about the attack? Why did they say it was because of a video when everyone knew it was a planned attack? What was ambassador Chris Stevens doing there on the anniversary of 9-11? Why were his requests for increased security ignored?

Those are the questions that have never been answered. But history tells us that at some point, we will get the answers.

Texcaster, you old ignorant reprobate. Way to sid... (show quote)

There was no lie, just inadequate security in both cases. Times three under Dutch's watch

Pegasus Loc: Texas Gulf Coast

Texcaster wrote:

There was no lie, just inadequate security in both cases. Times three under Dutch's watch

Were you bitten by a parrot?

Texcaster Loc: Queensland

Pegasus wrote:

Were you bitten by a parrot?

My word! All the poor bastard can parrot is B******I! B******I!

usnpilot Loc: Ft Myers Fl

Texcaster wrote:

My word! All the poor bastard can parrot is B******I! B******I!

If you read Pegasus's lengthy reply to your crap maybe you will learn something, but probably not. Huge differences between the events.

Pegasus Loc: Texas Gulf Coast

usnpilot wrote:

If you read Pegasus's lengthy reply to your crap maybe you will learn something, but probably not. Huge differences between the events.

He won't read it. Typical lib.

I read the book went it came out and saw the movie, several times. The movie was quite close to the book.

usnpilot Loc: Ft Myers Fl

Pegasus wrote:

He won't read it. Typical lib.

I read the book went it came out and saw the movie, several times. The movie was quite close to the book.

I saw the movie, great movie but it pissed me off. If politicians are allowed to run the military then running for a federal office should require military experience.

Pegasus Loc: Texas Gulf Coast

usnpilot wrote:

I saw the movie, great movie but it pissed me off. If politicians are allowed to run the military then running for a federal office should require military experience.

Actually, the movie was more neutral about the inaction from Washington compared to what was in the book. If you were pissed off by the movie, you would be furious if you read the book.

The book goes into great detail about the various "contractors" that were there. Amazing people, all of them.

usnpilot Loc: Ft Myers Fl

Pegasus wrote:

Actually, the movie was more neutral about the inaction from Washington compared to what was in the book. If you were pissed off by the movie, you would be furious if you read the book.

The book goes into great detail about the various "contractors" that were there. Amazing people, all of them.

I will order the book.