Journal damn_registrars's Journal: Benghazi? Tell me first about Beirut... 2
The GOP is succeeding in ramping up silly rhetoric and wasteful spending on Benghazi. Yet roughly 30 years ago we faced multiple terrorist attacks in Beirut. As the New Yorker Points out the situation is rather similar; the white house belonged to the opposite party of who held the US house, amongst other things. In Beirut, far more people died, including diplomats, CIA employees, and marines. One CIA analyst was tortured and murdered.
But was Reagan - dear, St. Ronnie - threatened with impeachment? Were members of his cabinet subpoenaed? Was there a whole series of "investigations" launched when the party in the house didn't get what they wanted from the ones released?
No. As the author of the article put it:
But was Reagan - dear, St. Ronnie - threatened with impeachment? Were members of his cabinet subpoenaed? Was there a whole series of "investigations" launched when the party in the house didn't get what they wanted from the ones released?
No. As the author of the article put it:
If you compare the costs of the Reagan Administration's serial security lapses in Beirut to the costs of Benghazi, it's clear what has really deteriorated in the intervening three decades. It's not the security of American government personnel working abroad. It's the behavior of American congressmen at home.
Beirut? (Score:1)
Oh no, that's completely different. That's what I was told when I brought it up to him. The idol worship is strong in that one. Now watch the denials come fast and furious.
And besides, those people have already said that Benghazi is the worst scandal ever, worse than Iraq, Iran/Contra, or Watergate, worse than the "original" (no, not 1973) 9/11 itself. So this will go nowhere. And nobody is going to touch the real, authentic scandals that don't get any press, like the 85 billion a month being thrown into th
Why can't we just GO BACK? (Score:2)