Quantcast

Comments about ‘Benghazi review slams State Department on security; three resign’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Dec. 19 2012 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Red
Salt Lake City, UT

We may never know the real reason that Obama hung our guys out to dry because of the secret combinations they have, but if this isn't a huge flag to American citizens than I don't know what is.

The game is changing. The boldness of the deceit is increasing.

OC Fan
Orange County, CA

It was all about the election.

KDave
Moab, UT

It,s a good thing the press kept this under wraps until the election was over.

Badger55
Nibley, Ut

"Systematic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department resulted in a Special Mission security posture that was inadequate for Benghazi and grossly inadequate to deal with the attack that took place," the panel said.

What and whose agenda was the State Department following? who decides the special mission security posture? the panel cited "Systematic failures and leadership and management deficiencies" Well they got the leadership part right(or the lack there of). Obama himself said that he is responsible for everything the State Department does. We will see if that holds up.

Jim1027
St. George, UT

Hillary Clinton has avoided telling the truth about Benghazi.

1. She kept repeating the "video" reason even when she knew it was false.
2. She left on a trip to Austrailia to avoid questions.
3. Now she has a "concussion" conveniently at the time she's supposed to testify.

I'm pretty sure when she's nominated for president she'll have an upset stomach when asked about the incident.

FT
salt lake city, UT

KDave-The press kept could not report on conclusions for an investigation that was not complete. Only the tin foil hats and black helicopter crew thinks this event alone was going to swing the election.

VST
Bountiful, UT

The reason why there was a breakdown in providing the needed security, that Ambassador Stevens pleaded for, was because this Administration, especially the State Department, did NOT want to paint an image that al-Qaida was still alive and resurging. It did not fit the political campaign narrative that "bin-Laden is dead and so is al-Qaida."

WHAT NOW?
Saint George, UT

@Red

Two can play...

We may never know the real reason that bush hung 3000 American Citizens out to dry (9/11/2001) because of the secret combinations he had, but if that wasn't a huge flag to American citizens than what other huge flag was necessary.

The game never changed.

John Bolton, currently a republican spokesperson on fox news, was the undersecretary of state for arms control and international security (sworn into his position 5/11/2001)(serving from 2001–05) and ambassador to the UN (2005–2006).

The republicans promoted the man in charge of international security (2001-2005) to be the ambassador to the UN (2005-2006).

The boldness of the deceit simply increased.

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

To "WHAT NOW?" nice try, but if you bothered to read the 9/11 commission report (similar to the Benghazi report), you find that the Bush Administration was not found to be at fault.

Doesn't it bother you that your beloved democrats have been caught with their pants down, and now all your ilk can do is defend their actions or else ignore it? If this had been a Republican there would already be calls for public floggings of anybody remotely associated with the State Department.

worf
Mcallen, TX

Seems all our leaders do is deceive, and spend money.

A sports team reflect their coach, and our society is reflecting our leaders.

Look at Detroit, California, Chicago as we transform into a Cuba.

Our liberals friends will get what they voted for.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments