% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Bristol-Myers Squibb Company Message Board

  • toast22342000 toast22342000 Feb 11, 2014 5:02 PM Flag

    so Faux lied 85 times

    "As Media Matters reports, Fox News cited reports of a stand-down order no fewer than 85 times during prime-time segments as of June 2013. As the new report — which the Republican majority of the committee authored –makes very clear in its findings, however, no such order ever existed."

    Will there be a retraction? No. Will Faux do what any responsible news outlet would do and correct the record? No. Will anyone at Faux be held accountable for reporting misinformation (lies)? No.

    Because lying is what they do.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • And they continue to lie.

      Fox News continued to push the false narrative that the Obama administration politicized early intelligence assessments about the Benghazi attack by purporting to provide "new data points" which are contradicted by the findings of a bipartisan Senate Select Committee on Intelligence report released in January.

      On February 13, Shannon Bream introduced a report from Fox national security correspondent Catherine Herridge by saying, "Tonight, two new data points in the Benghazi timeline [are] raising new questions about whether early intelligence was indeed politicized." Herridge began her report by claiming CIA leadership had been informed twice that the anti-Islam video "played no role" in the Benghazi attack, before former UN Ambassador Susan Rice appeared on the Sunday news shows and provided information about the attack based on talking points that represented the best assessment of the intelligence community at the time.

      But nowhere in the segment is there evidence that anyone was told that the anti-Islam video had no role in inspiring the Benghazi attack. Instead, Herridge presents evidence and quotes from Republican lawmakers that there was no demonstration that took place before the attack -- which is not the same thing.

      The very Benghazi report Herridge cites in her appearance contradicts her claim that the video "played no role."

    • ok, ok, ok (it). we can read. we get that you post this stuff hot off of the msnbc press where democrats live in their own world of motor mouth political propaganda.

      Just yesterday the L chick said the rep's were dragging their feet on immigr'n with a bunch of phony excuses. She went thru a list of them and how they were not valid. One was to secure the border first. She would have her audience accept the fact that more deports and money spent on border control under Obama than under Bush. As If That Is Supposed To Indicate A Secured Border Under Complete Control.

      Slop a hog if you like but please don't splash any of it onto me .

      • 1 Reply to nanospeak
      • "we get that you post this stuff hot off of the msnbc press where democrats live in their own world of motor mouth political propaganda."

        I must say that is a curious and telling reply to a statement of fact............ Faux lied to you 85 times ON ONE ISSUE..............which apparently doesn't bother you...............and you go on to claim Dems live in their own world. The level of denial it takes to respond in that way is stunning. Not that it surprises me any more than Faux lying does.

    • Keeping track is good, as it tends to keep people honest. But, Do you keep track of Obama and Holder's too?

    • Bring on Billary: "What difference does it make?"
      Our military did not respond in force.
      What did Obama tell the U.N. a few days after the slaughter?
      Where was Obama during the slaughter?
      Where was Obama "the morning after"?

      Stand-down order? We did Not respond. Semantics or reality?
      Fact. Benghazi was a slaughter. Obama and Billary preoccupied?

    • A House committee report released Tuesday refuted claims that any stand-down order was given to prevent military support from reaching Benghazi, dismantling a central story in right-wing media mythology of a Benghazi cover-up.

      The House Armed Services Committee report, released February 11, concluded that "There was no 'stand down' order issued to U.S. military personnel in Tripoli who sought to join the fight in Benghazi." As The Washington Post explained, the report further determined that "no U.S. military assets could have arrived in Benghazi in time to affect the outcome of the attack, according to committee staff members who briefed reporters on the report."

      The determination devastates one of right-wing media's favorite Benghazi hoaxes.

      Fox News has persistently pushed the myth that the administration withheld military assistance during the Benghazi attack by issuing a "stand down order" to backup forces in Tripoli -- by June 2013, the network had repeated the charge at least 85 times in primetime segments. The accusations were vitriolic: In October 2012, Fox legal analyst Peter Johnson, Jr. asked if there was a "political calculation that was made to sacrifice Americans on the ground so we didn't kill innocents in front of the consulate," while the network's national security analyst, K.T. McFarland, claimed the supposed absence of aid to the consulate was "probably" politically motivated. Fox host Kimberly Guilfoyle claimed that the administration had decided that Americans targeted in Benghazi "were expendable." And the allegations didn't stop there.

      The House report is not the first investigation and testimony to debunk the claim that a "stand down" order was issued. A January 2014 Senate Committee on Intelligence review of the Benghazi attacks determined there was no evidence that any "stand down" order was given to responding units during the attack.

    • even if it was true,it is harmless compare to when commander-in-chief and Secretary of State lie

60.72+1.09(+1.83%)Feb 8 4:00 PMEST