Republicans cut embassy security funding long before Benghazi happned

I notice none of you wing nuts with your 50, 000 Benghazi threads are talking about the real problem that led to the issue at hand.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) voted to cut back on funds for embassy security. (AP Photo/J. Scott)
Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) acknowledged on Wednesday that House Republicans had consciously voted to reduce the funds allocated to the State Department for embassy security since winning the majority in 2010.

On Wednesday morning, CNN anchor Soledad O'Brien asked the Utah Republican if he had "voted to cut the funding for embassy security."
"Absolutely," Chaffetz said. "Look we have to make priorities and choices in this country. We have…15,000 contractors in Iraq. We have more than 6,000 contractors, a private army there, for President Obama, in Baghdad. And we’re talking about can we get two dozen or so people into Libya to help protect our forces. When you’re in tough economic times, you have to make difficult choices. You have to prioritize things.”

For the past two years, House Republicans have continued to deprioritize the security forces protecting State Department personnel around the world. In fiscal year 2011, lawmakers shaved $128 million off of the administration's request for embassy security funding. House Republicans drained off even more funds in fiscal year 2012 -- cutting back on the department's request by $331 million.
Consulate personnel stationed in Benghazi had allegedly expressed concerns over their safety in the months leading up to the Sept. 11 attacks that killed four Americans, including Amb. Chris Stevens. Chaffetz and Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), who chairs the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, claim those concerns were ignored.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...n_1954912.html

This has already be debunked by the Obama crowd. Didn't you get the memo? State had money. They were giving away hybrid cars in Germany for their staffers and those cost what??? over a hundred thousand a piece.

Even your pathetic excuse about money does not change the fact that military was told to stand down from helping. Obama let them die for his political gain. Obama=the American Caligula

Even your pathetic excuse about money does not change the fact that military was told to stand down from helping. Obama let them die for his political gain. Obama=the American Caligula Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

According to you. Talk about not getting the memo. Your crap has been debunked, not that you care.

Obama let them die for his political gain. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

This statement alone is one of many that PROVES you should have your teaching certificate revoked, Barleybrains!

Please tell us how Obama is gaining politically from their deaths, Moron!

This has already be debunked by the Obama crowd. Didn't you get the memo? State had money. They were giving away hybrid cars in Germany for their staffers and those cost what??? over a hundred thousand a piece.

Even your pathetic excuse about money does not change the fact that military was told to stand down from helping. Obama let them die for his political gain. Obama=the American Caligula Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

poor JD, like I keep telling you, you need to get out more ..


A senior U.S. intelligence official emphatically denied that the CIA refused repeated requests from its officers on the ground in Benghazi, Libya, to assist the Americans under attack at the U.S. mission there.

Just five days before the presidential election and in a rare briefing to reporters, the official Thursday offered almost a minute-by-minute account of what happened that night.

According to a Fox News report last Friday, citing an unnamed source, CIA officers working at an annex about a mile from the mission were told by officials in the CIA chain of command to "stand down" after receiving a call from the mission asking for help.

"There were no orders to anybody to stand down in providing support," the senior intelligence official said, offering a passionate defense of the actions taken by the CIA officers on the ground during the September 11 attack that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.

The official insisted the agency operators at the annex were in charge of their movements and the safety of those who were preparing to respond to the initial attack on the mission compound.

There was "no second guessing" their decisions, the official said.

The facts are lined up against the Kool Aid League. Their arguments to deflect are bogus.

In testimony Wednesday [10 October 2012] before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Charlene Lamb, a deputy assistant secretary of state for diplomatic security, was questioned:

“It has been suggested that budget cuts are responsible for a lack of security in Benghazi, and I’d like to ask Miss Lamb,” said Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R., Calif.). “You made this decision personally. Was there any budget consideration and lack of budget which lead you not to increase the number of people in the security force there?”

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Lamb responded, “No, sir.”

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...katrina-trinko

I thought we had put this issue to bed a long time ago. Funding had nothing to do with what happened in Benghazi. As IB has pointed out several times, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Charlene Lamb, has said as much in her testimony before Congress.

But if you liberals still want to talk about funding for embassy security, let's look at the record. Worldwide Security Protection funding is more than double what it was a decade ago. For FY 2012, when you add in the Overseas Contingency Operation funds, funding available for embassy protection was actually a slight net increase over the funds available for FY 2011. http://blog.heritage.org/2012/10/11/...t-responsible/

Thank God. You had your ass set straight again. NOW PLEASE STFU.

Just to reiterate the hypocrisy on the right:

BENGHAZI - Some of you Teapublicans need to STFU You Morons have lost all perspective on Benghazi!

While it is sad and disheartening when a US Embassy is attacked and lives are lost, it does happen. Most sensible people don't use it as political fodder.


However Fox "News" and the idiotic wing nuts on this site seem to be intent on making this attack another failed rallying cry to use to manipulate Low Information Voters.

In a flagrant show of stupidity, the creeps here continue to copy and paste their desperate, baseless right wing crap about Benghazi on this board.


Where were your righteous demands for investigations after the 11 US Embassy attacks under W?

Do you need to read this? I guess so... Obama has made much of having whipped Al Queada. Osama is dead and Al Queada is in retreat. This proves otherwise if they announced that this was a terrorist attack. It makes him look like a fool. This is his mission accomplished moment. That much cannot be denied. Too much video to deny.

Now if you want to get into October surprise kind of things. What is our ambassador was kidnapped and not killed. It took a long time to get to him and he died of smoke inhalation. We have seen the video where the terrorists were glad Stevens was alive. So they wanted him alive and under their control. What then? The president of Egypt has been saying that he wants the blind sheik turned over to him. Our buddy Barack could have personally intervened and announced that he got the ambassador back safe and sound. We only had to give up an old terrorist. It would have demonstrated Barry's experience in foreign policy.

That's two ideas; one is irrefutable and the other is a great story that covers all the salient points.

That's two ideas; one is irrefutable and the other is a great story that covers all the salient points. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

You're a blithering idiot! You know that U.S. policy doesn't permit that trade publicly.

Second, the contraction "that's" is short for "that is". That is SINGULAR as used here. The proper grammar for a TEACHER to have used would have been "There are two ideas".

Go back to school and quit trying to impress the dumb asses here that are dumber than you. The people here that you out-think can be counted on two hands with fingers left over.

Please tell us how Obama is gaining politically from their deaths, Moron! Originally Posted by Little Stevie

He didn't say Obaminable IS gaining ... that was his motivation. It backfired.

Just like "Obamacare"!

If the Libya fiasco were "nothing" you all wouldn't be dragging up bullshit to fill the air between now and Tuesday.

The media is talking about NE devastation and you all ....

... Republican bullshit that is a distortion of the truth.

This was asked before .. and NOT ANSWERED ..

Name the Bill that was passed by the Republicans and signed by the President that ...

... reduced spending on embassy security post 2010.

Pssst .. I'll save you some time. Weren't none!

You all read Puffington's headlines and go ape-shit. And you don't even read the body of the article. Obaminable has 1,000's of "contractors" in Iraq (where the "war is over") and he can't spare 200 to protect the embassy in Libya where he knows there are training camps and attacks have occurred. 2011 voting is utter bullshit ...... pick up the phone and tell the boss in Iraq to transfer 200 to Libya.

another outrageous claim that any POTUS would wish death on his own for political gain.

This pattern of hateful posting has been gong on for weeks now and is wearing thin.

why don't you assholes take the weekend off and watch football, WWE or whatever you morons do with a cold one resting on your bellies.

another outrageous claim that any POTUS would wish death on his own for political gain. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

I didn't see anyone say that but you. Typical of ignorant people with nothing of substance to say ... they create an "outrageous statement" from thin air and then argue how "outrageous" it is ... all the while pretending that someone actuall said it.

But don't feel along YR, several on here do it frequently just to try to look smart.

Why do you do it?

Same reason that Chihuahua's bark all the time?

To get attention?

BTW .. has anyone found that BILL yet that the "Republicans" passed, got through the Senate, and had the President sign that CUT SECURITY FUNDS for the U.S. embassy in Lybia that resulted in inadequate levels of protection for Ambassador Stevens causing his death?

1001 ... 1002 ..... 1003 .... Didn't think so.

I definitely am not along in this forum, pantywaist.

and why do you defend the hate?

Same reason why a dog licks his balls?