In response to:

Benghazi -- No Mere 'October Surprise'

Old Geezer Wrote: Oct 31, 2012 9:37 AM
Benghazi? Is that in Arizona? Americans and American Soil under attack. Americans dying in both cases. The same response from the White House in both cases.
USNbubblehead Wrote: Oct 31, 2012 9:51 AM
In both cases, weapons were being put into the hands of people who are dangerous to the U.S.

The Ambassador was in Benghazi to work out a deal with the Turks to transfer SA-7 handheld antiaircraft missiles from Libyan extremists to Syrian extremists. Maybe the Libyans didn't want to give them back. this is all another illegal weapons transfer cover-up. This time FOUR people got killed, including a U.S. Ambassador. This makes Iran-Contra look like a game of checkers. I simply can't believe it.

Remember Benghazi!
jsenner Wrote: Oct 31, 2012 3:03 PM
While I agree that this is one of the many possible scenarios, you are speculating about the transfer of SA-7's. What makes you think that the transfer, if it did take place, was illegal? A Presidential Finding could cover this. The agency doesn't fart without one. The cover up, yes, would be illegal.
USNbubblehead Wrote: Oct 31, 2012 6:46 PM
This transfer, to my knowledge, did not go through channels, unless I missed something. If so, you tell me what that was, with links to documents please.
If you want to understand why conservatives have lost faith in the so-called mainstream media, you need to ponder the question: Where is the Benghazi feeding frenzy?

Unlike some of my colleagues on the right, I don't think there's a conspiracy at work. Rather, I think journalists tend to act on their instincts (some even brag about this; you could look it up). And, collectively, the mainstream media's instincts run liberal, making groupthink inevitable.

In 2000, a Democratic operative orchestrated an "October surprise" attack on George W. Bush, revealing that 24 years earlier, he'd been arrested for drunk driving. The...