us warned of embassy attack but did nothing

1. 61

   JSChamsposted 12 years ago

   http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world … 35797.html
   
   I thought George Bush left the White House! How can this be?

   replyreport
2. 61

   JSChamsposted 12 years ago

   Why is this only an issue if George Bush is reading a book to school children?

   replyreport
3. 65

   psycheskinnerposted 12 years ago

   I bet they get these warnings all the time, it's a dangerous place.
   
   What this has to do with Bush, I have not idea.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      JSChamsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Well the big thing on 9/11 2001 was that they had intel before hand and evil George Bush let people die.

      replyreport
      1. 65

         psycheskinnerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I think it odd that you seem to consider most people believe that--I would consider it an extremely fringe conspiracy belief.  And it has nothing to do with when he was reading to kids, that was after it had already happened.
         
         These people get warnings all the time and they don't always correctly detect which are an imminent threat.  The signal/noise ratio is difficult.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            JSChamsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            While you are right I am sure, you will find those on HP who believe all that in 2001 was a set-up. The knowing of intel is part of that and they will be happy to tell you all about it.

            replyreport
            1. 65

               psycheskinnerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               If you scan the threads you will find it is 1 or two obsessed people.  Not the norm.  Letting those who shout loudest be the "majority" is what makes discourse get even less rational.

               replyreport
4. 69

   innersmiffposted 12 years ago

   The US really has no incentive to prevent attacks on its embassies in the middle-east when unrest in these countries is what justifies their continued occupation.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      JSChamsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I don't know about 'incentive" but at least the Marines could actually have ammo. That works best in weapons.

      replyreport
   2. 65

      psycheskinnerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The US in a sovereign nation (no matter how chaotic) needs to avoid carrying out acts that would start a war.
      
      If the diplomats cannot be their safely, they need to leave.

      replyreport
5. 61

   JSChamsposted 12 years ago

   

   replyreport
6. 60

   knolyourselfposted 12 years ago

   "The Salafi-jihadis - with whom Washington, London and Paris were unashamedly in bed during their humanitarian bombing campaign - are based in Cyrenaica, eastern Libya. Some have come from Iraq. Some are shuttling back and forth to and from Syria, aiming to destroy yet one more secular Arab republic.
   
   They include the heavily armed gang that attacked the US consulate - the self-described Imprisoned Omar Abdul Rahman Brigades, which surfaced only four months ago. Three months ago, hundreds of AK-47-equipped Salafi-jihadis held Benghazi hostage demanding sharia law."

   replyreport
   1. 68

      maxoxam41posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The Americans are still in bed with the Salafi muslims. They come from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Pakistan... The assassination of a Sufi Muslim (the soft branch of Islam) mullah in Russsia who tried to rally both branches for a peaceful relationship is an indication of what higher spheres want. Meaning the hatred between the two beliefs.
      It is interesting to notice that every time the U.S is involved in the secular country (as you well said it), it becomes a theocracy to the expense of the population. Does the U.S. really want them to become democracies? It is doubtful.

      replyreport
7. 61

   JSChamsposted 12 years ago

   

   replyreport