Army Husker

Wow, has every game this year been this hard to watch???

Well, that sux. Perfect time to turn the ball over.

Pretty sure i'm jinxing it right now by watching...

Got away with a holding call there...

Wow...bought that play fake

Guess if we keep up this "pass rush", we might keep getting the holding calls...

that wont last 14-0 aTm now

Doesn't get any luckier than that. Defense needs to figure something out on the bench now.

dont know if i'm happy for 3 points or not.

Really with that hit in the back...wtf stupid penalty

So close to getting that sack...dammit

Excited to be off and AFN showing the game...hoping for a good one.

I think this will make it's rounds at SCOTUS like the Patriot Act did. Didn't they rule that electronic surveillance still had to abide by the 4th and 5th amendment? I'd have to look those up.

Disregard...he won't be testifying.

Mentioned that at the end of the Libya Part Dos thread. Wonder if he will still be required to testify in the congressional hearings next week...couldn't find anything that said he would be there or not.

David Petraeus, who was scheduled to testify next week during the congressional hearings regarding Benghazi, just resigned citing an extra-marital affair. Wonder if he will still be required to testify. Edit: Nevermind; he won't be testifying.

Another rumor to add to the mill: General Carter Hamm, the AFRICOM Commander at the time, was relieved immediately following the attack. Rumor has it that Gen Ham defied SecDef Panetta's orders, sending rescue aid to Banghazi when told not to. This is floating all around the military community and some blogospheres (all conservative), but nothing mainstream media.

I'm somewhat glad I can't watch this mess...sounds terrible.

Are you talking about intentions from people physically located in the jurisdiction of the US? Hostile Intent is definitely prosecuted overseas.

Missed this gem in the article...

This is why i'm curious about green on blue. Not sure if mainstream America is up on that term, but it is all over the place here. We just had another one here 2 days ago which killed 7 friendlies. I don't think Americans know green on blue. I had to look it up. The issue over in Libya is, who's green? There are something like 100 militias in the Benghazi area alone. It's hard to say who did this, and what motivation they had. I don't think there's any link between the militia named in that article and our own forces, but the situation is so fluid, who knows? That's what makes these political nonsense accusations about whether it was or wasn't a terrorist attack so frustrating - we haven't a clue who did what, or why, and we're wasting time quibbling over minutiae. Stupid. Yeah, my apologies...will briefly explain that for others too. Green on Blue is a term used in Afghanistan, in which coalition forces (US, Aussie, British etc.), labeled "Blue" are killed by local forces (ie. Afghan National Police, Afghan Uniformed Police or Afghan National Army), labeled "Green". Since a majority of operations here are shifted towards training local forces and having them up front in the fight, coalition forces often plan and sleep in the confines of the same patrol bases as locals. During these normal day to day activities, friendlies aren't looking inside the wire for an attack. A local, who will have some ties to Taliban or AQ thru family, or is a Taliban or AQ simpathizer, will turn his weapon on unarmed or unknowing soldiers and kill them before most often getting put down by friendlies. This is a broad generalization, put the act has picked up in frequency throughout Afghanistan. So I just used this act as generally US Forces who are working along-side local security forces, and wondered if there was something similar that occured in Benghazi. A quick google of Blue Mountain, the British security firm hired to secure the embassy produced this article... http://news.yahoo.com/benghazi-diplomatic-security-u-relied-small-british-firm-014650742.html So now we have local security people that have access to the embassy, making it a little easier for "terrorists" to gain access if persuaded. I know it's very conspiritorist of me, but how embarrassing would it be for the administration if that was in case what happened. And to throw fuel on the fire, maybe a reason why the administration said an act of terror, and left it at that. (Sorry Carl)

This is why i'm curious about green on blue. Not sure if mainstream America is up on that term, but it is all over the place here. We just had another one here 2 days ago which killed 7 friendlies.

I'm still reading up on this...i'm waiting for something to come out saying that it was a "green on blue" type attack. The whole thing seems odd.

Interesting read on what did and didn't happen at Benghazi...might answer some questions, or raise some more. http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/10/16/the_ground_truth_from_benghazi?page=0,0 And more questions in the article...

Can't say I see a glaring similarity between the 2 attacks. One involved at least 2 presidential administrations (depending on where you believe 9-11-01 could have been prevented) and several failed organizations (CIA, State Dept and FBI for starters). Can't say where the point of failure occurred in the recent event...if I had a guess, I would say outsourcing embassy security, which isn't an uncommon thing these days. No proof on that, just a hunch. After reading the article, I summed it up as nothing but an election year counter by the left to an election year accusation by the right.