IndyPatriotsfan

When in:

2002 - U.S. Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, attacked 10 killed.

2004 - U.S. Embassy bombed in Uzbekistan 1 killed, 9 injured.

2004 - Gunmen stormed U.S. Consulate in Saudi Arabia 8 killed.

2006 - Armed men attacked U.S. Embassy in Syria 1 killed.

2007 - Grenade launched into U.S. Embassy in Athens.

2008 - Rioters set fire to U.S. Embassy in Serbia.

2008 - Bombings at U.S. Embassy in Yeman, 10 killed.

Where were the investigations? All this happened while Dubya was in office, why didn't the republicans call for investigations? No, they only want investigations when a Democrat is in charge, this happens:

2012 - U.S. Embassy in Benghazi, Lybia attacked 4 killed.

It's when this happens, suddenly the righties are outraged and demand investigations. Such hypocrites.

Wolfpack

Which of those bombings were the people begging for reinforcements beforehand, only to be denied by the president? And which of those bombings did Bush declare was all the fault of an American filmmaker and not, ya know, actually any sort of organized terrorism?

Because unless you answers those questions - and we know you won't - then your analogies are epic fail.

363839

Were there calls for help that went unheeded when they could have been helped in those other attacks?

IndyPatriotsfan

Really, the only epic fail is your typical sheepish response. We will
never know if there were ever pleas for help from the president because there were never any investigations.

Patters

Oh, the Benghazi thing is b.s. and it's going nowhere. The Republicans are running for cover while they try to figure out how to get their act together. The outrage against Benghazi is bs. Quadaffi is dead, and as Petreus explained the CIA held back its cards (though revealed in classified documents that terrorists were involved) when Benghazi first happened so as to continue gathering intelligence (according to the NYT story on the Petreus testimony). At any rate, any Republicans who seriously think the Obama administration, which has been almost impeccably clean, did anything corrupt here, are probably among those losers who felt certain Romney would win. In my opinion, Benghazi is 99% a desperate attempt by an increasingly irrevelant party to buy time while it tries to modernize. I don't think anyone but Tea Partiers are focused on the Benghazi scandal. There's no smoking gun.

IcyPatriot

Bush: 'Radical killers' behind Karachi bomb - CNN

That's from the 2002 ... there are links for all of them and there were investigations for all of them. the difference between them and this one is this one is current and there was a deliberate white washing of the facts that went on for at least 3 weeks. The others were not white washed ... it was acknowledged they were attacks - terrorist attacks at that.

So ... is it safe to say you don't mind being lied to?

The people who are angry are the people angry because they were lied to.

soon we will know who authorized the lying and the reason why.

the families of the dead deserve answers as well as the American public.

Government corruption intensifies when brave people stop asking questions.

Harry Boy

We will know some day no matter how this Obama person lies and covers up, no matter how much his protectors try to cover for him, we will know the truth, Obama has the dishonest Left Wing Media on his side, he has people like Matthews and the rest of the Obama Fawners who work at NBC, ABC, CBS, PBS, etc etc all in there doing everything they can to protect him but the TRUTH will be known.

Obama didn't try to protect America's ambassador or the other DEAD americans, Obama only thought of himself and The Old Screaming Hag Hillary helped him, the truth when it is proven will also be the end of Hillary Clinton.

The new day will come some day soon, then, we will be rid of these wretched people.

__________________
Harry Boy (Genius)

In The Absence Of Law And Order Society Will Surely Destroy Itself

Patters

Harry, it's what you've wanted to believe all along, but frankly the Obama administration has been perhaps the most honest in my lifetime. There have been no significant scandals, and this one is not a scandal either. C'mon Harry, you really don't care that much about a dead gay ambassador appointed by Obama? Do you? You never protested so loudly against Bush when troops were needlessly dying Iraq? Were you up in arms at all the failures that Indy listed above? Did you almost have a stroke when Reagan cut and ran from Lebanon after terrorists murdered 240 of our troops? C'mon Harry, be real hear. You might detest what liberals are doing to this country (making it better), but this Benghazi thing, I don't really believe it's a big deal to you. Is it?

IcyPatriot

Do you remember the 2008 campaign promise by Obama.
to be the most open and transparent administration ever?

Shouldn't that matter to citizens?

If we were deliberately lied to does that bother you?

Bush's name has no business on this topic ... the topic is the truth ... Bush is the deflection.

Patters

Actually, Icy, the thread is not about Benghazi, it's about the absence of outrage during the Bush administration. So, if anything's a deflection, it's the discussion of Benghazi.

Now that that is clear, onto your other point. Transparency is important, and as liberal the only way I can support big government is if it's transparent. Relative to state and local government, the federal government is highly transparent, and has been for the simple reason that it has the MSM, opposition parties, special interest groups, and others who are constantly watching it. Considering how big the federal government is, it's striking that one can find more news about scandals at the state and local level than at the federal level, despite the fact that the federal level has far more access through various laws including the FOI act.

That said, the federal government big and sprawling, highly political, and obviously there are classes of things that must be kept secret for security reasons and some things that are kept secret in order to deal with political realities. For instance, the administration refused to share with the Tea Party Congress confidential notes on how it would deal with Congress on issues such as the Fast & Furious investigation. Turning over one's lawyer's notes to a highly partisan prosecutor obviously does not make sense.

But, overall, the administration has done some good things, and I hope it does more. I'd like to see it work with Congress to force greater transparency throughout the system. But, my view is that the greatest political corruption in the nation is at the state and local level, not the federal level. No one pays much attention to what happens locally.

I think this article provides a balanced view on the successes and failures of Obama's transparency efforts.

Daily Dot | Open government report card: Grading Obama's transparency