Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 56

Thread: Benghazi attack and coverup

  1. #31
    @ TopDogger Actually Obama insisted that the video trailer and indeed the anti-Muslim film itself was nothing to do with the US as a nation or government - as indeed it clearly wasn't. It just happened to be made in the US by some amateurs. There was no excuse for attacking US embassies and diplomatic personnel.

    I have done a U-turn since reading a report from a reporter on the ground in Libya. She says that the CIA presence was unsuspected in diplomatic and government circles, and even by a security chap at the consulate. The CIA blew their cover by the sortie to the consulate and were followed back to the annex. Within days the whole CIA presence was gone and the houses have been re-let to Libyans. The attack on the US consulate was just the last in a series of attacks on foreigners in Benghazi. If so the CIA presence was not the provocation. Merely being American seems to have been enough.

    Libyans, diplomats: CIA’s Benghazi station a secret — and quickly repaired


    Just more than a mile from the group of villas that served as the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was another set of U.S.-leased villas - an annex where the CIA had set up shop, and from where would-be rescuers set out on the night of Sept. 11 in response to the attack at the consulate. Despite speculation to the contrary, no Libyan or non-American diplomats stationed in Benghazi say they knew of the existence or purpose of the CIA annex.

  2. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by JeanM View Post
    @ TopDogger Actually Obama insisted that the video trailer and indeed the anti-Muslim film itself was nothing to do with the US as a nation or government - as indeed it clearly wasn't. It just happened to be made in the US by some amateurs. There was no excuse for attacking US embassies and diplomatic personnel.
    Of course Obama would say it had nothing to do with the US. That would undermine his storyline that his foreign policies are working. He would probably also say that the attack happening on 9/11 was just a coincidence. The phoney video story that was not supported by any facts, but was repeated over and over by Obama and his team for two weeks, is what I take exception to.

    The problem with getting down to the truth with any of this is the fact that the press really are the "useful idiots" that Karl Marx referred to.

    I think Obama really believed that by apologizing for the USA and showing preferential treatment to Muslims was going to solve all of the problems in the Middle East. There is a lot of hatred and unrest in the Middle East. The fact is that this is not the first Muslim uprising and it won't be the last. It has happened many times in the past. Unfortunately, the only thing that has ever squelched a Muslim uprising is brute force. I'm still waiting for the peace-loving Muslims to take control of their religion. When that happens, there will be a good chance for peace and prosperity for all in the Middle East.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." -- Benjamin Franklin


  3. #33
    Golly TopDogger! You certainly have a deep fondness for your duly elected president. Sir Dominic Dominic Asquith, Britain's envoy to Libya, survived a rocket attack on his convoy as it drove through Benghazi on June 11 but two of his bodyguards were injured. Do you see the British press screaming that David Cameron's Middle East policy is a failure? Of course it is, if what you expect is instant peace to fall over the globe the minute you smile at people nicely and shake a few hands. But who expects that? Nobody who knows anything about the Middle East. Obama is at least as well clued up as Cameron (whose party I did not vote for and whom I don't particularly like). They know perfectly well that Muslim extremism is not going away tomorrow. Bombs won't kill it. Education might.

    A 15-year old girl who got shot in the head by the Taliban in Pakistan for campaigning for schooling for girls is currently recovering in hospital in Britain. I'll give Cameron that.

  4. #34
    I grew up in Chicago and I know how these guys operate. There is an extremely deep-rooted form of corruption in Chicago politics that you will probably not see in very many places in the USA (well, perhaps in Washington DC). With Obama, you have to watch want he does, not what he says. There are rarely the same. Nothing that I have ever experienced anywhere in any of the places that I lived around the USA has ever compared to the level of dishonesty that has ALWAYS been a core component of Chicago politics. Lies roll off of the tongues of Chicago politicians much more easily than the truth.

    As my hard-core Democrat brother-in-law (who lives in Chicago) described the Obama administration, "What do you expect when you take the crooks out of Chicago and move them to DC?"

    I recently watched a PBS American Experience mini-series on DVD about the history of Chicago. What came through load and clear throughout the series was that Chicago has always been deeply corrupt throughout its history. It is part of the fabric of the city.

    Jean, no offense intended , but you must have skipped the debates. According to Obama, his Middle East policies are working brilliantly and relationships with Middle East countries have never been stronger, including the relationship with Israel. I think that is the delusional storyline that he had to maintain.

    As far as being duly elected, I have said all along that I didn't think he could win the election without massive voter fraud. The details of the depth of the voter fraud are just start to come out. The stories will of course be buried by the liberal media.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." -- Benjamin Franklin


  5. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Jean
    Golly TopDogger! You certainly have a deep fondness for your duly elected president.
    Can't speak for everyone, but I wouldnt piss on his head if his hair caught fire.

    Our military has a policy of not leaving men behind. Our administration for whatever reason made no attempt to bail out a couple of guys who held the bad guys at bay for around 5 hours+ all by themself. Our honchos in DC watched the fight in real time on live feed, and we got a BS explanation from the secretary of defense saying it was just too dangerous. Guarantee you there were things they could have done in the time allotted, but just they let them die.

    The next morning the president jets off to party in Vegas.

    Then all the men in leadership positions who could have helped start getting yanked from position... Rear Admiral Raouette, General Ham, now Geleral Petraeus and his supernumary. And Hillary suddenly can't be here for the hearings on the subject because she has an urgent wine tasting tour in Australia and Petraeus is supposedly ineligible after the FBI inexplicably leaned on him about sex life.

    Atty Gen Holder reportedly knew about the sex scandal at the end of summer and sprung it on Petraeus right before the trial on Benghazi? Why do I suspect there may have been an attempt to lean on him? When did the FBI get to start reading people's email without a court order? They can under the NDAA, but that's if they suspect terrorism, not for general purposes.

    Bottom line I don't trust this administration as far as I could throw that graceless farm animal with a free vacation fetish Obama is married to.

    ADDE The Petraeus sex scandal has "Chicago" all over it. I take it personally that Holder uses the FBI as a personal hit squad, and this looks like an attempt to discredit a hostile witness. I might add that the press is similarly underwhelming. They didnt want to utter the word "Benghazi", but when Petraeus live bod was tossed to them in the form of a sex scandal they're all over it like swarming zombies.
    -- Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup. --

  6. #36
    Our honchos in DC watched the fight in real time on live feed
    We are talking about real life here, not Sci-Fi. I know that claim and much other propaganda was broadcast by Fox and hopeful Republicans pre-election, with the painfully obvious hope of unseating Obama. It didn't work, so let's get back to reality. In real life people generally haven't got a clue what's going on in an emergency and it can take hours or days after it is all over to piece together the stories of those close to the action and get the overall picture to make sense. The reality would be someone in some backroom of the CIA getting a frantic call from Benghazi in the time that could be spared from trying to get together some response to the attack on the consulate. Eventually that call would get fed up the chain of command if and when your CIA contact in the back room could get some sense that there was a real emergency. Eventually various top brass would be mustered to consider what to do. By that time the first response team (CIA) had presumably arrived at the consulate and confirmed the emergency. It seems CIA aid was summoned from Tripoli. A drone was sent (for all the good that could do!) By the time military from further away could arrive it was all over.

    I can easily believe that some spokesperson went on the defensive when asked if help could not have arrived earlier and talked of dangerous situations. Clearly there was a delay in the CIA first response arriving at the consulate. For all we know that half-hour may have cost the Ambassador his life. In retrospect it is easy to blame the team concerned for wasting time trying to get back-up from the militia, since it seems it did not succeed (or only partially*), but hindsight is a wonderful thing. *From all I can gather they did have three Libyans fighting with them, which Chinese whispers turned into detainees that they were holding. No doubt all the details will emerge from the hearings.

    As far as I can see the real issues are not what went on in Washington (much as you would dearly love to pin the rap on Obama), but whether there were intelligence and security failures in Benghazi. If the attack on the consulate was planned, then clearly the CIA will get blamed for not knowing about it - a possible reason for Petraeus to stress spontaneity even after Obama had mentioned the possibility that this was a terrorist attack in an early statement. But as you have pointed out, the local situation was so obviously unsafe that the consulate should have been closed as a precaution anyway. The real tragedy here seems to be submerged under the weight of political point-scoring at the moment.

  7. #37
    @Jean: I'm sorry, I am simply not limber enough to complete the mental contortion required to make your explanation fit with what we now know. Too many facts get in the way.

    1) We KNOW repeated requests were made for upgraded security by the Ambassador and his people
    2) We KNOW those requests were ignored
    3) We KNOW the firefight lasted 7 hours
    4) We KNOW not one but two drones were rerouted to monitor the entire thing, meaning someone was awake in Washington
    5) We KNOW the president farmed out security for the consulate to a local militia in a newly revolutionized country filled with Islamist and Al Queda
    6) We KNOW an Al Queda linked group took credit for the attack within hours, and that this information made it to the US chain of command
    7) We KNOW the Libyan leadership called it an organized terrorist attack the next day.
    8) We KNOW from CIA and State Department testimony that they knew it was a terrorist attack the next day
    9) We KNOW that various representatives of the Obama admin, including UN Ambassador Rice, Sec. of State Hillary Clinton, President Barack Obama, Gen Petraeus, Press Sec. Jay Carney, and others repeatedly mislead the American people to either not know if it was or was not a terrorist attack, or worse, openly stated it was the result of a spontaneous protest of some poorly made film.

    These are the facts that describe what we KNOW of the leadup, the followup, and the incident itself. To dismiss these facts "political point scoring" is to say you just don't care about the truth. Its ridiculous.

    Your post also implied that Petraeus' CIA was somehow chartered to be first responders for attacks on the Embassy, and that failure to fulfill that charter might have caused Petraeus to concoct the rest of this nonsense. Its a bit like blaming the police when the fire department fails to respond while your house burns to the ground. I have a growing suspicion that Obama will try and lay this whole thing at the feet of Petraeus. It was only 6 years ago when Obama's minions were busily calling the man General "Betray us", so it isn't a leap.

    I can agree there is a lot we don't know, and I fear that, without a bi-partisan special investigation, there will be things we will never know. The media wont press on it. The Senate wont press on it. It will be like Fast and Furious, where the top people in the Obama admin stick to an entirely unbelievable story line while refusing to hand over documents to Congressional subpoena's, hiding behind executive privilege or pleading the 5th. They will just entertain and distract the American people with stories of sex, because they know the public is a bit like a two year old, with a very short attention span and a love of things that are shinny.

    To me, that leaves us in the land of what we KNOW, and what we KNOW, by almost any definition, leaves this administration incompetent at best, and criminally responsible at worst.

  8. #38
    I'll be brief cause i need to be elsewhere in a minute... But the fact the CIA tried to assist doesnt make them the party responsible for diplomatic security. The ambassador is an employee of the state dept, not the CIA, and he'd been asking for security from the state dept or months and expressing his belief that he and his mission were in danger. That in no way is the CIAs purview, and his requests were turned down at State, not by he CIA.

    As for the events on 9/11, contrary to the conventional wisdom often peddled by our left wing, Fox is not unreliable as a news source. Even another network normally dismissive of Fox gave kudos to the investigative reporting Catherine Herridge has done on this... And other networks have reported on some of the anomolies outta DC with regard to that night. This is not an issue manufactured by Fox News.

    We already have the Secretary of Defense (Panetta) saying he was aware of the situation early on and had generals involved in the decision process. Thats per his own statements. It appears the current plan is going to be to somehow blame the CIA for the events of that night, though it doesnt fit with the statements already made by Panetta.

    The sad part is the CIA is the only group that rendered aid that night, with that aid being instrumental in saving the balance of the diplomatic team except the ambassador (they couldnt find) and the one body they took back from the consulate. The administration initially tried to throw Hillary under he bus until Bill lawyered up for a fight... Then suddenly the focus went to the CIA and the doj conveniently has a salacious affair investigation going against the head of the cia.

    The president went into rage mode at a news conference yesterday about benghazi for the first time... But not at those that did it. He was mad at senators asking whybthe hell the un ambassador was sent out on a disinformation campaign that misled us about the actions of that night on FIVE different news programs. I'd have appreciated a little rage at the attackers, not at our own senators trying to get to the truth.

    But the good part, in his anger obama pointed out that the white house gave the un ambassador that info. The info was, in a nutshell, a lie, acdiversion, and we now know it came from the white house.

    It's not the misdeeds and mistakes that nail guys in DC for their actions, it is the intentional coverups of them that lead tona fall. If obama doesnt face an impeachment hearing over benghazi we owe a huge apology and absolution to Richard Nixon. Nobody died at Watergate.
    -- Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup. --

  9. #39
    Rob - I have just found the Wikipedia page on the event, which is very detailed. It makes you right on the video feed (from the drone) from 5:11 Eastern. How much data Washington would get from that I don't know, or which of the two sites it was watching. But a feed there was.

    I agree that the CIA should not be held responsible for diplomatic security. In the normal course of things they would just be responsible for intelligence.

    I saw the coverage of Obama's remarks. I don't take them to be an admission of lies or evasions. There were indeed widespread demonstrations against the anti-Muslim video, though in the case of Benghazi that can now be seen to have been a front for something much more sinister. From Wikipedia:

    The area outside the compound before the assault was quiet; one Libyan guard who was wounded in the attack was quoted as saying “there wasn’t a single ant outside.”[26] One witness said he saw the militants before the assault "gathering around 20 youths from nearby to chant against the film."
    On September 16 the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice appeared on five major interview shows, stating that the attacks began as a "spontaneous reaction" to "a hateful and offensive video that was widely disseminated throughout the Arab and Muslim world." "I think it's clear that there were extremist elements that joined in and escalated the violence. Whether they were al Qaeda affiliates, whether they were Libyan-based extremists or al Qaeda itself I think is one of the things we'll have to determine."[114][115][116][117][118] Ms. Rice later stated that her statements were based on a report prepared by the C.I.A.[119]
    Now I see that you are hoping for impeachment, I see why the political drama is still raging after the election. I don't think there is the least hope/fear of impeachment, but if four more years of Obama seems to you a fate worse than death, you could always emigrate temporarily. Wales welcomes its far-flung sons, especially if they have the gift of the gab and a good singing voice.

  10. #40
    Appreciate the thought, but I doubt they'll let me bring my arsenal. Was already planning a move to the mountains of Colorado before the election. Need room to manuever on terrain that favors horseback over MRAPs. Just in case.

    IMO, even if our government doesn't go all internment camp for political dissidents on purpose {which incidentally they've clearly armed for, I can verify that on government websites oddly enough}, our economy is so close to collapse I don't want to be trapped in the immediate vicinity of a large metro area when that takes place. Our politicians are not willing to live inside anything close to our means and if the economy fails it'd get ugly fast.

    I've always laughed at the guys that talk about either eventuality, but it doesn't take a tinfoil hat wearing loon to see we're on the precipice of some potentially dark events in this country. We're hopelessly polarized and economically running on empty while spending in a way that drunken sailors are taking umbrage at the comparison. I don't see it ending well.

    In the middle of fighting a war against muslim terrorists we elected an administration that's a convoluted mixture of Marxists, Muslims, former members of groups that took university buildings by force of arms, members of the most corrupt political mob in current history {Chicago's Daly machine}, with ties to domestic terrorists once on the FBI's most wanted list. Yeah, who could possibly have spotted the flaw in that plan?

    Orwell's 1984 is being used not as a warning but an instruction manual. Not real sure we come back from this. I'd bet you a steak dinner there's an enemy of the state list that puts Nixon's to shame, cross-referenced and indexed database in the offices of Napolitano and Holder that fills a fair sized hard-drive. You only have to look at statements by Valerie Jarrett to get chills up your spine.

    After we win this election, it’s our turn. Payback time. Everyone not with us is against us and they better be ready because we don’t forget. The ones who helped us will be rewarded, the ones who opposed us will get what they deserve. There is going to be hell to pay. Congress won’t be a problem for us this time. No election to worry about after this is over and we have two judges ready to go.”
    FTR - It isn't paranoia if they're really doing it.

    ---------- Post added at 10:40 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:07 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by robjones View Post
    Orwell's 1984 is being used not as a warning but an instruction manual. Not real sure we come back from this. I'd bet you a steak dinner there's an enemy of the state list that puts Nixon's to shame, cross-referenced and indexed database in the offices of Napolitano and Holder that fills a fair sized hard-drive. You only have to look at statements by Valerie Jarrett to get chills up your spine.
    On a related note: Google Says Government Surveillance Growing - Government - Policy &
    -- Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup. --

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •