Forum: Political Forum - Spirited Political comedy. All serious political and World Event posting is also to be posted in this forum.

Thread: House Republicans Cut 300 Mill From U.S. Embassy Security Budget.... How Did Russ Miss This?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
  1. #1 House Republicans Cut 300 Mill From U.S. Embassy Security Budget.... How Did Russ Miss This? 
    RX Local
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    pa
    Posts
    15,406
    So the grandstanding repubs who are politicizing american deaths yet again, turns out they voted for cuts in embassy security funding. Even this total fool from utah says this after being asked if he voted yes to cut funding for embassy security " Absolutely, I did".....rep. jason chaffetz (r-utah)


    where is the russ and right wing outrage over this?????...damn conservative stream media coverup
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    RX SemiGod
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma City - all my life
    Posts
    13,673
    What a stupid MF you are. Really? Did you notice that was for fiscal year 2013. Do you understand that has nothing to do with anything that happened in Libya or other recent events in the middle east. Again you circle the wagons riding a shetland pony. They are cutting the budget across the board dumb ass just like we should have been doing for more than a decade. I did not miss it, it is just not relevent to current events in Libya if that is your Stretch Armstrong on this feable attempt. You Dem's are grasping at straws. Why are you not on your administration for full disclosure on the Libyan deaths to American citizens. Now that is relevant. You are so simple.
    "Always drink upstream from the herd"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    RX Local
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    pa
    Posts
    15,406
    ummm russ. House repubs cut the admin request for embassy funding by 128 million in fiscal 2011 and 331 million in fiscal 2012.

    Paul Ryan and Darrell Issa along with other house repubs voted for an amendment in 2009 to cut 1.2 billion from state operations....including funds for more than 300 diplomatic security positions.

    Last year Hillary clinton commented by saying "cuts like this can be detrimental to American security"

    nice try though russ. Repub hypocrisy strikes again. You wont find this info on brietbart or malkin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    RX SemiGod
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma City - all my life
    Posts
    13,673
    Pellosi, you have to be kidding me. lol

    When pressed if what happened in Libya had anything to do with the funding she did not really have an answer. Again, deflect. It will boil down to having nothing to do with funding. The fact it occured on Sept 1 and there were prior warnings may be more relevant. Once again, you may drop back into punt formation and await the snap, this time use both hands. The security people were withdrawn and the State Dept can divert funds and request additional funds. They did not see it coming and that is the bottom line. If they thought that lack of funds was the cause they would have jumped all over it right off the bat. Duh
    "Always drink upstream from the herd"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    RX SemiGod
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma City - all my life
    Posts
    13,673
    Obama's Lies Unravel in Congressional Hearing on Libya 9/11 Attack


    84
    4
    201



    Email Article
    Print Article Send a Tip


    by Joel B. Pollak 10 Oct 2012, 11:29 AM PDT 100post a comment
    Today's congressional hearing on the Sep. 11, 2012 attacks across the Middle East, that killed the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other Americans in Benghazi, have destroyed the Obama administration's lies about the event. There was not enough security in Benghazi, despite repeated requests; there was no preparation for the attacks, despite intelligence and warning signs; and the assault in Libya had nothing to do with an anti-Islamic video, as President Barack Obama and his appointees had claimed for weeks.

    On the eve of the hearings, the State Department claimed not to have linked the Libya attack to an anti-Islamic video made in the United States--although Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did so in television advertisements the State Department produced for Pakistani television, and UN Ambassador Susan Rice told the media over and over again that the attacks had been part of a spontaneous demonstration of outrage across the region. Numerous requests for additional security in Benghazi had been ignored by the diplomats at Foggy Bottom.
    The White House, meanwhile, finally discarded the "video" narrative to which it had clung for weeks, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary--but not before the filmmaker had been arrested in the dead of night at his home on the pretext of a parole violation, and not before President Obama devoted the bulk of his September address to the United Nations to condemning the video and defamation of Islam and Muhammad.
    The new White House line is that poor intelligence led it to an erroneous conclusion about the video--even though that claim is contradicted by the State Department's own claims about what it knew about the attacks.
    Both the White House and the State Department were adamant in their criticism of the video in the hours after demonstrators scaled the walls of the U.S. embassy in Cairo, as well as in the weeks thereafter, though the White House claimed--through an unnamed source in Politico--to have denounced the embassy's apologies.
    In one of today's hearing's more memorable--and ignoble--exchanges, Rep. Darrell Issa took umbrage at State Department Official for Embassy Security Charlene Lamb's assertion that “We had the correct number of assets in Benghazi at the time of 9/11 for what had been agreed upon.” Issa retorted that her claim "doesn’t seem to ring true to the American people.” Nor, indeed, did it comport with other evidence presented to the hearing, including Lt. Col, Andrew Wood, who once headed U.S. security in Libya and testified that there had been serious deficiencies in embassy security, and that it had never been protected with the necessary resources.
    What is clear is that the attacks on the anniversary 9/11 took the Obama administration by surprise; that the administration placed too much confidence in the removal of Osama bin Laden, as well as the President's own personal popularity, in declaring that Al Qaeda was in retreat; that the first impulse of the administration was to attack freedom of expression in the U.S., as well as the political opposition; that the administration never lived up to its most basic security responsibilities in Libya; that it lied for weeks about the most serious terror attack against the United States in years; and that it is lying still, in an attempt to minimize political fallout.
    The entire cover-up is falling apart--and today's congressional hearings are likely just the beginning.
    "Always drink upstream from the herd"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    RX Local
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    pa
    Posts
    15,406
    Quote Originally Posted by russ1945 View Post
    Pellosi, you have to be kidding me. lol

    When pressed if what happened in Libya had anything to do with the funding she did not really have an answer. Again, deflect. It will boil down to having nothing to do with funding. The fact it occured on Sept 1 and there were prior warnings may be more relevant. Once again, you may drop back into punt formation and await the snap, this time use both hands. The security people were withdrawn and the State Dept can divert funds and request additional funds. They did not see it coming and that is the bottom line. If they thought that lack of funds was the cause they would have jumped all over it right off the bat. Duh
    it cant possibly have anything to do with funding, right? Because, if it does, then you beloved party for who you drop to your knees for, must accept some of the responsibility. We all know thats something members of the republican party are simply not willing to do.....ever....on anything.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    RX SemiGod
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma City - all my life
    Posts
    13,673
    Quote Originally Posted by vitterd View Post
    it cant possibly have anything to do with funding, right? Because, if it does, then you beloved party for who you drop to your knees for, must accept some of the responsibility. We all know thats something members of the republican party are simply not willing to do.....ever....on anything.
    Read below dumbass:

    security funding in Libya despite majority Dem support for vote

    1:29 PM 10/10/2012










    House Democrats opened Wednesday’s House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing by attacking Republicans for cuts to embassy security funding — cuts that only happened thanks to overwhelming support from House Democrats, including House Oversight Committee Ranking Democratic member Rep. Elijah Cummings. In fact, more House Democrats – 149 of them — voted for the cuts than did House Republicans, of which 147 voted for them.
    “We have to examine the funding,” Cummings said in his opening statement. “The fact is, since 2011, the House has cut embassy security by hundreds of millions of dollars below the amounts requested by the president. The House has done that. The Senate restored some of these funds but the final amounts were still far below the administration’s requests and they were far below the levels we enacted in 2010.”
    Democratic staff on the Oversight Committee circulated a memo to Democratic members on Tuesday evening, too, that also attacks Republicans along the same line of reasoning.
    “Since gaining the majority in 2011, House Republicans have voted to reduce embassy security funding by approximately half a billion dollars below the amounts requested by the Obama Administration,” the memo reads. “Although the Senate has been able to restore a small portion of these funds, the final appropriations enacted by Congress in the previous two Fiscal Years have been far below the amounts requested by the Administration for embassy security, and far below the levels enacted in Fiscal Year 2010, the last year Democrats controlled the House.”
    What Cummings and the Democratic Oversight Committee staff are referring to is the final fiscal year 2012 omnibus appropriations package that included $2.075 billion for the programs – $567.5 million less than the Obama administration’s request.
    Cummings and the Democratic staff memo don’t mention that Democrats made those cuts into embassy security funding possible.
    A spokeswoman for Cummings has not returned a request for comment on the matter.
    Follow Matthew on Twitter



    "Always drink upstream from the herd"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    RX SemiGod
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma City - all my life
    Posts
    13,673
    Politics
    Memo: US State Department knew months before of danger in Benghazi

    11:08 AM 10/10/2012












    Samantha Schroeder


    Related Articles






    Ads by Google




    According to a memo released by the State Department, the US knew two months before the fatal attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya of the significant threat to American lives surrounding the anniversary of September 11.
    “The risk of U.S. Mission personnel, private U.S. citizens and businesspersons encountering an isolating event as a result of militia or political violence is HIGH,” the July 22 security assessment stated.
    Weeks before September 11, the State Department withdrew U.S. security staff from Libya, staff that could have prevented the death of Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.
    Ads by Google




    According to the Associated Press, Eric A Nordstrom, the department’s former regional security officer, wrote in an email on October 1 of the Libyan government’s ”inability to secure and protect diplomatic missions.”
    “The government of Libya does not yet have the ability to effectively respond to and manage the rising criminal and militia violence, which could result in an isolating event,” Nordstrom’s email said, adding the Libyan government “was overwhelmed and could not guarantee our protection.”
    “Sadly, that point was reaffirmed on Sept. 11, 2012, in Benghazi,” Nordstrom said.
    Nordstrom’s email and the State Department security assessment were two of 230 alleged security threats between June 2011 and July 2012 released by House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issaa before the hearing, at which Nordstrom is set to testify.
    “There was a clear disconnect between what security officials on the ground felt they needed and what officials in Washington would approve,” Issa said Tuesday.
    Ads by Google




    “Reports that senior State Department officials told security personnel in Libya to not even make certain security requests are especially troubling,” Issa said.
    Earlier in September, controversy surrounded the release and subsequent removal of a governmental report of the terrorism threat level on the anniversary of September 11. Since posted on September 6, the report has been removed from the listings of global security reports.
    “What increasingly looks like an attempt to obscure the failures that took place, [what] some are calling a cover up, is itself a very serious matter,” said Charles Lipson, Peter B. Ritzma Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago.
    “The high point of the cover-up was sending Susan Rice out to either deliberately or by her own information misdirect the public,” Lipson told The Daily Caller.
    “The administration’s most serious failure in holding its own story together was when they began [to draw in] the intelligence community,” Lipson said, “because the intelligence community has all those documents and knows when it released them… they’re not going to take the fall.”
    Officials in the State Department are slated to answer questions today about what the agency knew about the terror threats surrounding the anniversary of the September 11 attack that killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.
    Follow Samantha on Twitter



    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/10/we...#ixzz28vqK2ACI
    "Always drink upstream from the herd"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    RX SemiGod
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma City - all my life
    Posts
    13,673
    Like Obama said at the debate the math just does not work. True that. I did the math and if you add up his 100 rounds of golf and 14 vacations we could have diverted that money to embassy security. But, Obama has his priorities don't you know.
    "Always drink upstream from the herd"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    RX Local
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    pa
    Posts
    15,406
    it is always fun to watch you scour the internet for your right wing spin doctors. The house majority was held by repubs from the 2010 elections. You remember the circle jerk you guys had about that? Somehow it's the dems fault though on the funding issue after the repubs held majority. Can you ever just admit your party fucked up? Most you always be a sheep? Jesus Christ Russ, you act like they are ginna revoke your right wing card if you disagree with one of their horrible decisions. amazing that you continue to stick your head in the sand and then up your ass.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #11  
    Life's a bitch, then you die! Dave007inVegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Henderson NV
    Posts
    13,397
    Quote Originally Posted by vitterd View Post
    it is always fun to watch you scour the internet for your right wing spin doctors. The house majority was held by repubs from the 2010 elections. You remember the circle jerk you guys had about that? Somehow it's the dems fault though on the funding issue after the repubs held majority. Can you ever just admit your party fucked up? Most you always be a sheep? Jesus Christ Russ, you act like they are ginna revoke your right wing card if you disagree with one of their horrible decisions. amazing that you continue to stick your head in the sand and then up your ass.
    It’s always funny to watch you step in your own shit when you try to throw it at the wall.

    149 greater than 147.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #12  
    RX SemiGod
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma City - all my life
    Posts
    13,673
    Lamb to the slaughter


    Posted By Josh Rogin Wednesday, October 10, 2012 - 3:59 PM Share



    In an often heated congressional hearing Wednesday, lawmakers and witnesses alike pointed to State Department official Charlene Lamb as the person most directly responsible for rejecting multiple requests for increased security at the U.S. diplomatic missions in Libya prior to the Sept. 11 attack.

    COMMENTS (84) SHARE:
    Share on twitterTwitter
    Share on redditReddit

    More...


    House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) excoriated the State Department for rejecting requests from the U.S. Embassy in Libya for an extension of temporary security forces that were withdrawn in the months prior to the attack that killed Amb. Chris Stevens and three other Americans.
    In a dramatic moment at the hearing, Issa released unclassified cables from March and July that the State Department had refused to release, detailing those requests.
    One cable, written by then Amb. Gene Cretz, noted that three Mobile Security Detachments [MSD], consisting of 18 personnel, and the Site Security Team [SST], consisting of 16 personnel, were about to leave their temporary assignments. He said that the Libya mission needed both an extension of those forces and an increase in the number of permanent security officials in Libya.
    The SST is a team of U.S. military personnel that was deployed to assist the embassy staff on a temporary basis for 60 days and then extended for another 60 days, but not extended for a third 60-day tour.
    During the hearing, the top regional security officer in Libya over the summer, Eric Nordstrom, and Lt. Col. Andrew Wood, a Utah National Guardsman who was leading a security team in Libya until August, placed the blame squarely on Lamb, the deputy assistant secretary of state for international programs, whom they said was the official who denied those requests.
    "All of us at post were in sync that we wanted these resources," Nordstrom testified, adding that Lamb had directly told him over the phone not to make the requests, but that Cretz decided to do it anyway.
    "In those conversations, I was specifically told [by Lamb] ‘You cannot request an SST extension.' I determined I was told that because there would be too much political cost. We went ahead and requested it anyway," Nordstrom said.
    Nordstrom, who said in his opening statement that he understood the balance needed to manage risk at high-threat posts to allow diplomats to do their work, criticized the State Department for failing to plan for security in Libya after the team's departure.
    "Once the first team of [temporary personnel] expired, there was a complete and total lack of planning for what was going to happen next," he said. "There was no plan, there was just hope that everything would get better."
    Nordstrom also said that he received a danger pay increase after the U.S. security teams left because the official assessment of the danger for U.S. personnel in Libya had increased.
    Lamb defended her decision not to extend the missions of the MSD and SST teams, arguing that the mission of those teams had changed and that in any case they were replaced by local Libyan security personnel. The post had agreed that having only three diplomatic security agents in Benghazi was sufficient, she claimed.
    ""We had the correct number of assets in Benghazi on the night of 9/11," Lamb testified.
    "That doesn't ring true to the American people," Issa responded.
    Nordstrom said that Lamb never responded to the Tripoli embassy's request for continued security resources in what he considered a rejection, even if Lamb never issued a written objection. Lamb said that the U.S. mission in Libya had not been specific enough in its requests for forces, but Nordstrom pointed to the cables as evidence that was simply not true.
    Lamb said that the specialized skills contained in the forces were being acquired by Libyan forces.
    "We had been training local Libyans and arming them for almost a year," Lamb said. She also said that the extension of the SST in Tripoli "would not have made any difference in Benghazi."
    Wood pointed out that the SST had traveled to Benghazi at least twice to help protect the top U.S. official at that mission, dismissing the idea that local Libya forces could have the same specialized skills as by the U.S. security personnel that were removed.
    "We felt great frustration that those requests were ignored or just never met," Wood testified.
    Under Secretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy said he disagreed with Lamb and was inclined to support an extension of the SST mission in Libya -- before he was cut off by Issa because time had expired.
    Kennedy and Lamb were also pressed several times to explain why senior officials including U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice made statements in the days after the attack describing it as a reaction to an anti-Islam video, considering that the State Department was monitoring the events that night in real time.
    Kennedy suggested that another government agency was to blame.
    "There were reports that we received that there were protests, and I would not go any further than that," Kennedy said, citing a reluctance to go into detail in open session. Other officials, including Rice, have said that they based their comments on the intelligence community's initial, albeit caveated, assessment.
    But Wood testified that there was no way anyone who was following the events in real time could conclude the attacks were anything but a terrorist attack.
    "It was instantly recognizable as a terrorist attack. We almost expected the attack to come. It was a matter of time," Wood said. "[Al Qaeda's] presence grows there every day. They are certainly more established there than we are."
    "Always drink upstream from the herd"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #13  
    RX SemiGod
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma City - all my life
    Posts
    13,673
    Nobody and I mean nobody questioned today mentioned a lack of funding. Nobody.

    "Once the first team of [temporary personnel] expired, there was a complete and total lack of planning for what was going to happen next,"

    Lack of planning not lack of funds. Nice try Vit, one of your best, but as usual you led with your right and it was one punch and over. There are many people in the state Dept with troubled consciences whereas we all know that everyone in the WH has none. Deflection, lies, stalling for excuses, and now you point out the weakest of them all as if it trumps everything. You are out, you failed to touch second base not even a misplaced excuse like this latest WH deflection can drive you in for a run scored. I will give you credit for an infield hit but you did not cross the plate.
    "Always drink upstream from the herd"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #14  
    Long Live Goldwater! rolltide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    18,715
    Quote Originally Posted by russ1945 View Post
    Lamb to the slaughter


    Posted By Josh Rogin Wednesday, October 10, 2012 - 3:59 PM Share


    ooh, isn't she a pretty one? how the f**k hasn't some lucky guy snatched her up by now?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #15  
    RX SemiGod
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma City - all my life
    Posts
    13,673
    Quote Originally Posted by rolltide View Post
    ooh, isn't she a pretty one? how the f**k hasn't some lucky guy snatched her up by now?
    RT: A poster of her just outside of all the embassies would work like garlic for vampires.
    "Always drink upstream from the herd"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #16  
    RX SemiGod
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma City - all my life
    Posts
    13,673
    Another Attack: U.S. Embassy Security Official Killed in Yemen


    23
    1
    32



    Email Article
    Print Article Send a Tip


    by Joel B. Pollak 11 Oct 2012, 5:11 AM PDT 17post a comment
    Masked gunmen have attacked and killed a security official at the U.S. embassy in Sanaa, Yemen, Reuters reported early this morning. The official, Qassem Aqlan, was a Yemeni who led a security team at the U.S. diplomatic mission. He was attacked in his car by assassins on a motorcycle in the city center.

    The attack came just hours after Americans began to learn the full extent of security failures at U.S. diplomatic missions in Libya prior to the deadly terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi last month.
    Officials on the ground had asked the State Department for increased security, but their requests were denied or ignored by a bureaucracy that still insists it had the correct number of "assets" in place. Meanwhile, President Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and UN Ambassador Susan Rice all claimed the attacks had been the result of outrage at an anti-Islam video--not premeditated terror attacks against weak defenses.
    Today's attack on the U.S. security official--likely the work of Al Qaeda, which is battling U.S. drone strikes and counter-terror operations in Yemen--has not been accompanied by similar rationalizations, but underlines the fact that terrorists are planning and carrying out attacks against U.S. diplomatic targets. Al Qaeda pursued a similar strategy in the late 1990s, before the U.S. shifted its strategy away from a law enforcement approach. Both the Bush and the Obama administrations have carried out drone strikes in Yemen against Al Qaeda.
    The new attack is a reminder that there is more to the wave of anti-American attacks than an Internet video, and that the U.S. still faces a determined enemy in Al Qaeda despite the killing of Osama bin Laden last May.
    "Always drink upstream from the herd"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #17  
    RX SemiGod
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma City - all my life
    Posts
    13,673
    Is it just me or has what transpired on 9/11/12 and since all over the Middle East sent a signal or what. In my mind it demonstrates that the people in those countries have no respect for the U.S. and furthermore they sense that we have a weak POTUS who is floundering and pandering in the wake of an attempt to get re-elected. Another killing in Yemen, four in Libya and the Obama administration can’t even find the wagons much less circle them.

    I say that we shut cut off relations with countries who don’t meet our requirements to maintain embassies in their countries. Furthermore, no embassy no foreign aid. We should not be doling out money to countries that do not show us respect, recognize our embassies as sovereign land, and allow us to maintain our own security. That means no local security companies etc, Americans guard Americans, like it or see ya.

    Now what do all these rioters have in common. That would be the fact that they are muslims. What do muslims have in common, Sharia Law. How does Sharia law define Americans, as infidels. When are we going to recognize that we are their enemy. Why do we continue to project our morals and standards on people who have not even taken a giant step from the stone age except in attempts to build nuclear facilities.

    It is time for America to wake up to the fact that we are worse than being just “ugly Americans” we are the enemy. Nothing can change the way muslims see us because nothing in their religion has changed in all these centuries. No amount of foreign aid and no attempts to establish embassies will change the overall picture. In fact these recent attacks on our embassies show that things are much worse and that our attempts to maintain some kind of relationship with these people is all for naught.

    The muslim world sees us with weak leadership, they see our position as the world leader dropping in proportion to our declining deficit. I think we should insulate, maintain and improve our military forces, and let the world know that we are going to be vigilante and that we are not going to support muslim countries financially any more. I think we have to spend the next decade tightening our borders, reactivating NASA and putting defense capabilities into space. We need to rebuild our navy and increase security in our ports. There is nothing selfish about protecting what you have.

    Diplomacy does not work in the Arab world, just ask Israel. But in recent weeks the Arab world has sent us a message and they did not send it in a video. Obama and his administration are showing us on a daily basis that they just don’t get it. As long as Obama is the POTUS we are our own worst enemy. That is just wrong.
    "Always drink upstream from the herd"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #18  
    RX Local
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    pa
    Posts
    15,406
    spin baby spin....repubs have voted to cut funding for embassy security....just facts....no matter how many daily caller and brietbart articles you post....it doesnt change what they did.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #19  
    Life's a bitch, then you die! Dave007inVegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Henderson NV
    Posts
    13,397
    Quote Originally Posted by vitterd View Post
    spin baby spin....repubs have voted to cut funding for embassy security....just facts....no matter how many daily caller and brietbart articles you post....it doesnt change what they did.
    So you say.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #20  
    RX SemiGod
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma City - all my life
    Posts
    13,673
    Quote Originally Posted by vitterd View Post
    spin baby spin....repubs have voted to cut funding for embassy security....just facts....no matter how many daily caller and brietbart articles you post....it doesnt change what they did.
    In fact, more House Democrats – 149 of them — voted for the cuts than did House Republicans, of which 147 voted for them.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/10/de...#ixzz290FSg0sV

    Get your FACTS straight then start a thread. What a dildo.
    "Always drink upstream from the herd"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #21  
    RX Senior
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    3,350
    Quote Originally Posted by vitterd View Post
    spin baby spin....repubs have voted to cut funding for embassy security....just facts....no matter how many daily caller and brietbart articles you post....it doesnt change what they did.
    ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
    ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
    ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
    ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
    ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
    ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #22  
    RX SemiGod
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma City - all my life
    Posts
    13,673
    Politics October 11, 2012

    Congressman: Libya Security Cut While Vienna Embassy Gained Chevy Volts


    Fire it up 114



    Share

    AP Graphics
    KELLY: Libya security cut while Vienna embassy gained Chevy Volts
    Examining the State Department’s misplaced green priorities
    By Rep. Mike Kelly, Special Op-Ed to the Washington Times

    In a May 3, 2012, email, the State Department denied a request by a group of Special Forces assigned to protect the U.S. embassy in Libya to continue their use of a DC- 3 airplane for security operations throughout the country.
    The subject line of the email, on which slain Ambassador Chris Stevens was copied, read: “Termination of Tripoli DC-3 Support.”
    Four days later, on May 7, the State Department authorized the U.S. embassy in Vienna to purchase a $108,000 electric vehicle charging station for the embassy motor pool’s new Chevrolet Volts. The purchase was a part of the State Department’s “Energy Efficiency Sweep of Europe” initiative, which included hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars on green program expenditures at various U.S. Embassies.
    In fact, at a May 10 gala held at the U.S. embassy in Vienna, the ambassador showcased his new Volts and other green investments as part of the U.S. government’s commitment to “climate change solutions.”
    The event posting on the embassy website read: “Celebrating the Greening of the Embassy.”
    While the embassy in Vienna was going green, the consulate in Benghazi was getting bombed, and little was done to stop it.
    Before the terrorist attack that took the lives of Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, there were more than 230 security incidents in Libya between June 2011 and July 2012.
    Of those attacks, 48 took place in Benghazi, two at the U.S. diplomatic compound and scene of the September 11, 2012, terrorist attacks.
    This first attack on the Benghazi compound occurred on April 6, 2012, when two Libyans threw a crude improvised explosive device over the compound wall. Two months later, another IED exploded at the compound, wounding one person and leaving a hole in the perimeter wall large enough for 40 people to run through.
    The second attack was linked to the “Brigades of the Imprisoned Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman,” a jihadist, pro-al Qaeda group named after the mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. The same group was responsible for subsequent attacks on the British ambassador to Libya and the International Committee of the Red Cross, both of which took place in Benghazi just months before the September attack.
    While these steady and increasingly violent attacks on western interests mounted, the U.S. State Department repeatedly rejected requests for additional protection measures for our security teams in Libya.
    According to Eric Nordstrom, a regional security officer of the U.S. Mission to Libya from September 2011 to July 2012, the State Department not only refused his requests for greater security, but actually reduced the number of Diplomatic Security Service (DSS) agents assigned to foreign service officers based in Libya. Ironically, as the State Department withdrew security resources, it increased hazard pay for its employees based in Libya by 5 percent.



    Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/benghazi-g...#ixzz290R2OUn3
    "Always drink upstream from the herd"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #23  
    RX SemiGod
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma City - all my life
    Posts
    13,673
    As the article above shows, maybe congress is right in cutting the budget if it includes stupid shit like Chevy Volts for the embassy in Vienna instead of increased security in a muslim hotbed. The good thing is that now we get to see how Hillary rolls and beneath the surface she is right in the same league with Obama. One thing is for sure, she ain't no Bill.

    Once again Vit eats the big one as he is reaching for his last straws before his boy goes down in Nov. Oh the humanity.
    "Always drink upstream from the herd"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #24  
    RX Local
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    pa
    Posts
    15,406
    Quote Originally Posted by russ1945 View Post
    As the article above shows, maybe congress is right in cutting the budget if it includes stupid shit like Chevy Volts for the embassy in Vienna instead of increased security in a muslim hotbed. The good thing is that now we get to see how Hillary rolls and beneath the surface she is right in the same league with Obama. One thing is for sure, she ain't no Bill.

    Once again Vit eats the big one as he is reaching for his last straws before his boy goes down in Nov. Oh the humanity.

    your efforts to defend repubs is really pretty scary. You might as well be a robot. You, dave and bfl pull the same shit here everyday.....just repost nonsense from conservative media.

    It is really pretty funny that you can watch a repub rep from utah rant and rave about lack of security, while he votes to cut funding for security. And yet, you dont see a thing wrong with it.

    When obama is re-elected....i think it will hurt you the most....mostly because you only allow yourself to read conservative lies....you have no clue what the truth is...and you will not be able to accpet the fact that what you believe in....gets rejected again.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #25  
    RX SemiGod
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma City - all my life
    Posts
    13,673
    One more time

    In fact, more House Democrats – 149 of them — voted for the cuts than did House Republicans, of which 147 voted for them.

    My God man pull your head out, make the popping sound for once. This cannot be laid at the hands of the Republicans. Vit, you started a thread and had it explode right before your very eyes. Do your homework, read something other than the LSM, and maybe next time you will not be so exposed for being as unprepared as Obama. It must be in the genes.

    Your thread says that House Republicans made the cut - 149 to 147 looks like you are just as wrong as ever. You just don't get it and you never will. Obama's magic hat has run out of bunnies, his magic wand is just as impotent as your threads.
    "Always drink upstream from the herd"
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •