Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

The Truth About Benghazi


Shady

Recommended Posts

NO ONE SAID PROTEST! Spontaneous was the word you guys focused on maybe you should go back through the thread before you move the goal posts and change your argument. Was it a spontaneous attack? Fueled by protests in the region? That was the question better go back before you change what you have been saying.

How many times do you need to be proven wrong before you actually get it ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.foxnews.c...rity-lapses-in/

And now some fallout because of all this .. 3 people have resigned. Clinton and Rise have not testified and wont.

Three State Department officials, including a security chief, have resigned following the release of scathing report about safety lapses at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi in the run-up to the terror attack that killed four Americans.

An administration official told the Associated Press on Tuesday that Eric Boswell, the assistant secretary of state for diplomatic security, and Charlene Lamb, the deputy assistant secretary responsible for embassy security, stepped down under pressure after the release of the report Tuesday night.

The third official purportedly worked for the Bureau of Near East Affairs, but was not immediately identified, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss personnel matters publicly.

The State Department-ordered investigation of the Sept. 11 attack on the consulate in Benghazi, Libya, concluded that "systemic failures" left the facility inadequately protected.

Sure nothing to see here, let's wait for more facts.

NO ONE SAID PROTEST! Spontaneous was the word you guys focused on maybe you should go back through the thread before you move the goal posts and change your argument. Was it a spontaneous attack? Fueled by protests in the region? That was the question better go back before you change what you have been saying.

But to prove that Punked is wrong here ... from the same article.

The independent review board's report also confirmed that no protest preceded the deadly attack, as the Obama administration first told the public.
Edited by GostHacked
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.foxnews.c...rity-lapses-in/

And now some fallout because of all this .. 3 people have resigned. Clinton and Rise have not testified and wont.

Sure nothing to see here, let's wait for more facts.

But to prove that Punked is wrong here ... from the same article.

You haven't proven anything. How about your use an actual quote instead of a fox news article. Surely if this quote exists you can quote it. Remember we are looking for the word protest that isn't talking about how the attackers used PROTESTS IN THE REGION as cover for their attacks. Otherwise you are just trying to be obtuse. I'll wait for the quote. From the Obama admin that isn't from the CIA because we already know who was to blame there and he has already left his post. BTW he was a Republican. I'll wait.

Edited by punked
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You haven't proven anything. How about your use an actual quote instead of a fox news article. Surely if this quote exists you can quote it. Remember we are looking for the word protest that isn't talking about how the attackers used PROTESTS IN THE REGION as cover for their attacks. Otherwise you are just trying to be obtuse. I'll wait for the quote. From the Obama admin that isn't from the CIA because we already know who was to blame there and he has already left his post. BTW he was a Republican. I'll wait.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/10/25/CBS-Busts-Obama--and-Itself-Hidden-60-Minutes-Clip-Proves-White-House-Lied-About-Benghazi

CBS News has released a clip of an interview by Steve Kroft of 60 Minutes on Sep. 12 with President Barack Obama that indicates Obama knew the assault on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya was a premeditated terror attack--and suggests the White House later deceived the public by blaming protests against an anti-Islam video.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2012/11/05/benghazi-attack/1684503/

Kroft: Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya attack. Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?

Obama: Well it's too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/18/us/politics/questions-and-answers-on-the-benghazi-attack.html?_r=0

Mr. Obama applied the “terror” label to the attack in his first public statement on the events in Benghazi, delivered in the Rose Garden at the White House at 10:43 a.m. on Sept. 12, though the reference was indirect. “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for,” he said.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/10/25/benghazi-obamas-actions-amount-to-a-shameful-dereliction-of-duty/

The Truth-Challenged President

But the saga did not end there for the American people. The rest of us had to endure the President, Secretary of State Clinton, and UN Ambassador “explaining” to us that what really happened was that those irascible Muslims were all incited out of their minds by a previously unseen, unheard of You Tube video trailer by an unknown American immigrant, a movie that was never made outside the trailer advertising it, in Fool on the Hill style. Their protest had just got out of hand, you see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great so we agree the word protest was not used and you have no quote to support that you just really really want to re-write history. If there was a quote you would be citing in. BTW breitbart IS NOT A NEWS SOURCE. It is a propaganda site and you using them makes you look stupid.

Edited by punked
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great so we agree the word protest was not used and you have no quote to support that you just really really want to re-write history. If there was a quote you would be citing in.

Well, in the end looks like you are right. But now why did the media run with it? And why are there still so many unanswered questions regarding the security and the requests for back up that went unanswered. There is still a lot to this story even if we put this little tidbit to rest. So looks like I was wrong about this one point.

BTW breitbart IS NOT A NEWS SOURCE. It is a propaganda site and you using them makes you look stupid.

I am getting tired of this kind of thing. *.* news source sucks. ... even when the CBS and USA Today articles backed it up to some degree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, in the end looks like you are right. But now why did the media run with it? And why are there still so many unanswered questions regarding the security and the requests for back up that went unanswered. There is still a lot to this story even if we put this little tidbit to rest. So looks like I was wrong about this one point.

Why did the media report a Republican talking point instead of doing actual research? I don't know that is more a question for them and not me but I am kinda tire of it. I am all for discussing what actually happened I am just not playing into the argument the Republican side makes of some lie that never happened because those hypocrites have been the ones lying from day one.

I am getting tired of this kind of thing. *.* news source sucks. ... even when the CBS and USA Today articles backed it up to some degree.

I am willing to give most sites the benefit of the doubt but Breitbart is lying 90% of the time they say anything. I can not accept a citation from them because they are proven liars time and time again. Heck I'll even take a Redstate over Breitbart because with the former I might do a little research to find out it is a lie but the later is ALWAYS A LIE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if this has been brought up, but could it be possible that the death of the ambassador was really a sanctioned "hit?' Or the higher ups in the US just want him dead? That's why no help was sent? Who knows....maybe he knew something? I watch too many movies....

I really think it has to do with the NATO support of the rebels in Syria. The 'consulate' may have been used to funnel people and weapons to Syria. Essentially the same people NATO helped in order to take down Gadaffi. To me they all wanted to cover something up, and it seems to be working.

Possibly why no extra security was sent, because then the operation might have been exposed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really think it has to do with the NATO support of the rebels in Syria. The 'consulate' may have been used to funnel people and weapons to Syria. Essentially the same people NATO helped in order to take down Gadaffi. To me they all wanted to cover something up, and it seems to be working.

Possibly why no extra security was sent, because then the operation might have been exposed.

That's what it smells to me like too, something of a cover up. Or somebody about to blow the whistle. I mean, several marines went against a direct command to not get involved - and they went to the aid of the besieged diplomat, and they did managed to hold off for 5 hours (enough time to send a rescue team which I understand was only 2 hours away). It does really brings up a question. It doesn't add up. Perhaps we'll eventually know several years from now what really happened.

Edited by betsy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Well we finally get to hear what Clinton had to say. And the one bit with the protests, I am surprised (or not) that she acted this way.

http://news.blogs.cn...tack/?hpt=hp_t1

http://cnn.com/video...zi-fired-up.cnn

She seems mad that she is being confronted on that bit. Or mad that she is being caught in some of the lies she put out before.

Really, what does it matter about the protests? And they say they did not mislead the public on it. I guess we still have lots of questions.

[updated 10:30 a.m. ET] Sen. Ron Johnson has a heated exchange with Clinton over the immediate response to the Libya attack, saying the State Department didn't give clear answers to the nature of the threat, that what was going on in Benghazi was more than a protests.

Clinton gets angry. "What difference at this point does it make?" she says, slamming her hand on the table. "The fact is that people were trying in real time to get to the best information."

Edited by GostHacked
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not one piece of valuable information will come out of her mouth during these hearings.

But as she said 'what does it matter at this point' ???

Not to mention she is not a governor.

"Please proceed Governor" maybe look that line up that is where we are now in this argument and you look silly just as he did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look up the line watch the youtube video. We already had a trail of public opinion on who said protest and when and how. Look it up. Your side lost and look super stupid doing it. Please proceed Governor.

She is not a governor, plain and simple. He can continue to call her that, but it's wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She is not a governor, plain and simple. He can continue to call her that, but it's wrong.

I am talking to you Governor. Please proceed and look foolish.

Here the exchange where you only posted two lines.Again when we have actual contexts instead of two lines from a right wing blog you look foolish. Please proceed Governor.

Edited by punked
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or mad that some idiot is still trying to play politics with truther-like crap that makes no sense whatsoever.

Notice how the one person questioning her brought up the gun running from Benghazi to Turkey ...... her body language is quite loud.

But you are right , politicians don't lie, they are not deceitful, they are completely open and honest and transparent, nothing to question, go back to sleep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well this seems to fit here, but something looks like it is about to get ugly in Libya .. again..

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/canadians-urged-to-get-out-of-benghazi-because-of-terror-threats-1.1128947

OTTAWA -- Canada has joined several European countries in urging its citizens to immediately leave the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi.

In an advisory posted Thursday on its website, Foreign Affairs Canada also warned against non-essential travel to the country because of the fragile political situation there.

It says there is a "heightened risk of terrorism throughout Libya, including in Benghazi."

If something happens, and then officials say they had no indications that stuff was about to go down .. we can look back on this nugget.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the important question is, has the US been smuggling weapons to Turkey through Syria.....laugh.png

She's right though, in the immediate aftermath, what difference does it make? People are dead, we need to find out what happened and how to prevent it in the future. That wrong information was given, whatever that reason was, is completely irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the important question is, has the US been smuggling weapons to Turkey through Syria.....laugh.png

Which end up in the hands of the Free Syrian Army in order to take down Assad.

She's right though, in the immediate aftermath, what difference does it make? People are dead, we need to find out what happened and how to prevent it in the future. That wrong information was given, whatever that reason was, is completely irrelevant.

Well because it seems to be important into how to proceed next. Was it about a movie in which these protests came about? Was it something else that triggered the attack? Without knowing that, there is no way to prevent another incident like that.

Not to mention I would have fired her ass too for not reading the high level important cables coming from Benghazi where Stevens asked for more assistance because they felt an attack was about to happen. But you could say 'what difference does it make' there as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By Exegesisme
      2016 Election Should Debate For Real Solution On Real Issue​s
      By Exegesisme
      1 the moods of peoples may be driven by many transient factors, the social institutions have the duty to rule the moods of peoples into the efforts for a real solution of real issues.
      2 safety is always a fundamental concern for all existence, which should not be twisted to lose balance by momentum from any transient factors.
      3 a strategy of safety should always be considered as a whole solution on all issues of safety, any special issue of safety should be considered on its relative importance to the whole solution.
      4 for a whole solution of all issues of safety, I think all these factors should be considered on its importance.
      http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/usa/suicide
      5 even only to the categories of homicide, suicide and accidents, there were 180,000 deaths in 2013 in USA. The 2016 election should debate how to decrease this number as most as possible, and should not be twisted to a few rare but striking events. If the attention is twisted, a solution may be good for one reason but bad for other reasons, then as a whole the solution may not make a proper contribution to the decrease of the whole number.
    • By Mighty AC
      It seems that Harper's office is in hot water for hiding information, yet again. During the investigations into senators Duffy, Harb, Brazeau and Wallin, which has had Harper tripping over his own lies, requests were made for 28 pages of emails relating to the fab four. However, Harper's office, in usual fashion, simply withheld 27 of the pages.
      The federal information commissioner will now ask a federal court to order the documents released.
      http://www.nationalobserver.com/2015/09/14/news/information-commissioner-taking-pmo-court-over-withholding-senate-documents
      When discussing Harper's penchant for lying Preston Manning once said "words don't mean much to Stephen." When voters support a party and PM already proven to be a corrupt, lawbreaking, liar, aren't we basically sanctifying their immoral and illegal acts?
  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...