PDA

View Full Version : Security at the Libyan Embassy in Benghazi



Pages : [1] 2

Marvin S
10-14-2012, 10:20 PM
Does any one else on this forum find it confusing that the unionista's & the progressives on this forum make big issue with those who offshore production while attempting to control costs yet give those who offshored the security at the embassy a virtual pass on the subject. Or are they not capable of equating the similarities?

Security was offshored to a Scot-Welsh company which in turn hired locals as the cost for a years security was a little over $300K or about the amount it would have required to keep one American there. I have issues with this:

1) Why would you hire people for security if you don't know if you can trust them?

2) Why should we be there if we can't afford to be?

There is something about this whole statesman thing that reeks of really bad BS :(.

gmhr1
10-15-2012, 08:52 AM
My question is why does our Pres VP and Hillary Clinton NOT know anything! whose running the country the clerks at the state Dept. The Pres is briefed EVERYDAY there is no reason he was not kept informed.

huntinman
10-15-2012, 08:56 AM
My question is why does our Pres VP and Hillary Clinton NOT know anything! whose running the country the clerks at the state Dept. The Pres is briefed EVERYDAY there is no reason he was not kept informed.

They all knew. It was filmed by a drone in addition to the cameras at the site. They are just trying to cover their own butts.

gmhr1
10-15-2012, 09:19 AM
Either they knew or they are lying either way its Bad. I believe they knew now they just play dumb. Susan Lamb does not run the Country. This is a HUGE coverup and I hope we get it exposed quickly. We have NO leadership thats why we were hit on 9/11 and we will be again unless things change Biden has to stay locked in a room he didnt even go to the UN which is his job if the Pres doesn't not Hillary. He is totally incompetant. The whole group is a bunch of buffoons

youngblood
10-15-2012, 10:02 AM
1) Same reason we pulled troops out of Iraq and replaced them with contractors; appearences.

2) We shouldn't be. We should be focusing on America first.

helencalif
10-15-2012, 12:59 PM
At the hearing Ms. Lamb was asked if she alone denied the security requests. She said no. She was asked who were her superiors who made the decision. She named them, but I missed the names. It seems to me that those two superiors should be questioned by the Oversight Committee as well.

The chain of command in the State Dept. goes higher... but how high? At some time protocols were established. At some time determinations were made as to how many security personnel was "enough". At some time it was decided that the host government was responsible for providing the bulk of the security. We need to know if the same rules apply to a "safe" country as they do to an "unsafe" country. As has been said, Paris had a contingent of marines. Benghazi did not.

Helen

Gerry Clinchy
10-15-2012, 09:52 PM
Looks like Hillary is taking the fall for Obama ... from the Washington Times


LIMA, Peru (http://www.retrievertraining.net/topics/peru/) (AP) — U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton (http://www.retrievertraining.net/topics/hillary-rodham-clinton/) is taking responsibility for security at the U.S. consulate in Libya (http://www.retrievertraining.net/topics/libya/) where an attack by extremists last month killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans.

Pushing back against Republican criticism of the Obama administration (http://www.retrievertraining.net/topics/barack-obama/) for its handling of the situation, Clinton (http://www.retrievertraining.net/topics/hillary-rodham-clinton/) said Monday in Lima, Peru (http://www.retrievertraining.net/topics/peru/), that security at all of America’s diplomatic missions abroad is her job, not that of the White House (http://www.retrievertraining.net/topics/white-house/).
In television interviews, Clinton (http://www.retrievertraining.net/topics/hillary-rodham-clinton/) said she is responsible for State Department (http://www.retrievertraining.net/topics/department-of-state/) security and “for the more than 60,000 people around the world.” She told Fox News that “the decisions about security are made by security professionals.” She also made similar comments to CNN about taking responsibility.



Read more: Clinton says consulate security her responsibility - Washington Times (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/15/clinton-says-consulate-security-her-responsibility/#ixzz29QUbG1Lv) http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/15/clinton-says-consulate-security-her-responsibility/#ixzz29QUbG1Lv
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rw?id=ctd-fI3Dar4z1uacwqm_6r&u=washtimes)

helencalif
10-15-2012, 10:56 PM
Gerry,

I don't think Hillary is taking the fall for Obama. She's taking responsibiity for the security,,, non-security situation. She says the State Dept will be looking into their protocols to see what should have been done differently.

I think what they learned was, the US should not depend on hired locals nor the host government to provide security when the country and the government is influx and not secure. It was really a stupid, stupid part on the State Dept.

She did not take responsibility for the reason for the attack ("it was a spontaneous revolt based on a video"). She did say that when the caskets were brought home. She knew at that time that it was a terrorist attack, but I don't think she included that in her "the buck stops with me".

The big question is ... who sent the UN Ambassador out to 5 talk shows to spread the lie? Was it Hillary and the State Dept. or was it Obama?

Helen

charly_t
10-15-2012, 11:12 PM
Looks like Hillary is taking the fall for Obama ... from the Washington Times

Poor woman ! The men in her life are just plain old scum bags. Wonder if she thinks this will get her a step up in the party. Or is she just so attached to the party that she will do anything for the party.

Hiding behind a woman's skirt won't make us like those in power any better. In fact I would guess for the women who see this for what it is it may just change their vote. In places there is a "war on women". Can we all say "good ole boys club". I am not fond of Ms. Clinton but I'm not sure that this was her fault. She has guts .......... or something !!! Maybe she is smart like a fox.

Marvin S
10-15-2012, 11:33 PM
Poor woman ! The men in her life are just plain old scum bags. Wonder if she thinks this will get her a step up in the party. Or is she just so attached to the party that she will do anything for the party.

Hiding behind a woman's skirt won't make us like those in power any better. In fact I would guess for the women who see this for what it is it may just change their vote. In places there is a "war on women". Can we all say "good ole boys club". I am not fond of Ms. Clinton but I'm not sure that this was her fault. She has guts .......... or something !!! Maybe she is smart like a fox.

charly - are you aware that hillary was a trooper on the Goldwater campaign? IMO she has come down a long way - she don't have the looks to make it as a hooker so she is making money the next best way ;-).

Gerry Clinchy
10-15-2012, 11:41 PM
Gerry,

I don't think Hillary is taking the fall for Obama. She's taking responsibiity for the security,,, non-security situation. She says the State Dept will be looking into their protocols to see what should have been done differently.

I guess so! Wonder if Hillary is counting the hours till she finishes her stint as SOS?

I think what they learned was, the US should not depend on hired locals nor the host government to provide security when the country and the government is influx and not secure. It was really a stupid, stupid part on the State Dept.

They had to learn that in a country in such chaos as Libya?

She did not take responsibility for the reason for the attack ("it was a spontaneous revolt based on a video"). She did say that when the caskets were brought home. She knew at that time that it was a terrorist attack, but I don't think she included that in her "the buck stops with me".


The big question is ... who sent the UN Ambassador out to 5 talk shows to spread the lie? Was it Hillary and the State Dept. or was it Obama?

If Hillary knew the real cause of the attack, prior to Rice's talk show tour, H was at least complicit in the cover-up.

Helen
Reading a transcript of the Rush Limbaugh show today ... a caller cited a Lt. Col. David Hunt (retired, I believe, but maybe not) who stated that all embassies have a "panic button" in the event of an attack. That there are 12 monitoring centers that monitor this 24/7. Rush questioned whether the panic button might not yet have been installed in what was a rather new consulate.

So, another question arises, if there was an alert sent from the consulate, and if the battle lasted 6 hours, why didn't help arrive sooner? I recall mention of a plane (used for such purposes of transport) that had just been removed from service there, causing a delay. The level of incompetence evidenced in lack of preparedness for such a situation seems inconceivably dumb. It's not like this is the first time there has been an embassy in an unstable country.

Ken Bora
10-16-2012, 08:32 AM
Hillary on the morning news right now taking FULL responsibility.
Kinda feel sorry for her. She knows were the buck stops.
I think the White House should follow her lead.
I think she has a "bigger set" than the President, in the way she Maned up just now.
'speshaly the morning of the comming debate.
hope sombody in the town hall has a good question.

BonMallari
10-16-2012, 08:39 AM
Hillary on the morning news right now taking FULL responsibility.
Kinda feel sorry for her. She knows were the buck stops.
I think the White House should follow her lead.
I think she has a "bigger set" than the President, in the way she Maned up just now.
'speshaly the morning of the comming debate.
hope sombody in the town hall has a good question.


its all a calculated mea culpa...it was done the day before the debate and gives BHO some wiggle room, the media still loves their Hillary gal, they will gloss this over and say that she was being the true statesmen


Too Little Too Late

gmhr1
10-16-2012, 09:35 AM
Shes the head of the state dept of course shes responsible now lets hear her boss say he is responsible for her! She kept him informed every step of the way

M&K's Retrievers
10-16-2012, 09:39 AM
Shes the head of the state dept of course shes responsible now lets hear her boss say he is responsible for her! She kept him informed every step of the way

That's not gonna happen.

gmhr1
10-16-2012, 09:51 AM
She cant go down without it affecting him we still dont know who came up with the video lie. Obama repeated it over and over again even after Hillary stopped. He stood there on the apology ad he stood there over the dead bodies lying. Repubs will investigate this and hes going down just like nixon. As a boss you have the duty to know whats going on with your employees if your to busy and cant handle it than your fired! Thats what he gets for skipping intel briefings

Sundown49 aka Otey B
10-16-2012, 10:15 AM
Like I said in an earlier post when in charge you are responsible for everything DONE or Not Done .........Obama is Commander in Chief and he is also President so he is responsible. ....PERIOD.

duckheads
10-16-2012, 10:43 AM
Stan said it many many moons ago. Obama will take all the credit for the good but will not accept any responsibility for anything bad! Not his exact words but you get the jist.

charly_t
10-16-2012, 01:43 PM
charly - are you aware that hillary was a trooper on the Goldwater campaign? IMO she has come down a long way - she don't have the looks to make it as a hooker so she is making money the next best way ;-).

If I had heard that it is gone from my brain now :-( She has had a very busy adult life hasn't she, vbg.
!!!!!!

gmhr1
10-16-2012, 05:31 PM
In 2008 Hillary said "the buck stops in the oval office" now it stops with her :confused:

Gerry Clinchy
10-18-2012, 01:13 PM
Interesting analysis by Ed Klein in The Daily Caller dated today. He writes that his source (in the Clinton circle) indicates Clintons found cables from Hillary ordering increase in security at Benghazi, but her instructions were not followed. The piece implies that someone in the WH dropped the ball on the instructions being implemented. He suggests that if this information comes out (or is leaked), it will place responsibility firmly in the WH for this failure.

That might save Hillary to campaign another day ... but not so good for Obama. Maybe Obama also knew about these cables, and that made him offer some responsibility in advance (at the 2nd debate)? Then, later, he can say that he always took full responsibility.

These are two (three, if you count Bill guiding Hillary's actions) very sly politicians, very experienced in finest CYA. Did anyone really think Bill and Hillary would ever forgive their treatment at the hands of Obama and his group? Right from snatching the nomination in 2008 through to lack of personal contact since Obama moved into the WH.

Funny how things unfold, isn't it? If Hillary had been nominated and won in 2008, with Bill's cagey assistance, she might have come through 4 years looking competent enough to get a second term. With the Obama debacle unfolding more each day, a win now for Romney might still give the needed time to stop the bus from going over the cliff.

gmhr1
10-18-2012, 07:43 PM
JUST A BUMP IN THE ROAD! Almost immediately after pool reports indicated that President Barack Obama called the deaths of U.S. Ambassador ChrisSteven and three other Americans in Benghazi “not optimal” during the taping of “The Daily Show,” social media exploded with outrage over the president’s remarks.
The backlash was almost instantaneous — and it was brutal.

smillerdvm
10-18-2012, 10:59 PM
We have NO leadership thats why we were hit on 9/11 The whole group is a bunch of buffoons

So you are saying that the attack on us on 9/11 was due to "NO leadership"

Would you go so far as to say that Pres Bush and his "bunch of buffoons" should be prosecuted for their "NO leadership" that resulted in the great tradgedy and huge loss of American lives in the 9/11 attack

Uncle Bill
10-19-2012, 08:30 AM
So you are saying that the attack on us on 9/11 was due to "NO leadership"

Would you go so far as to say that Pres Bush and his "bunch of buffoons" should be prosecuted for their "NO leadership" that resulted in the great tradgedy and huge loss of American lives in the 9/11 attack


Imagine this, Russ. A fellow veterinarian wanting to make a case that 9-11 is comparable to:

Obama not even aware that he just 'might' have made too big a deal about HIS killing of Osama...

Obama not even aware of how the jihadists like to blow things up on anniversaries of 9-11...

Obama too busy campaigning to consider he's responsible for the protection at the various U.S. embassies in the Islam world...

And of course, after 9-11, Bush used a home-brewed movie as his excuse for what happened...

Comparing apples to oranges may be your way of excusing your messiah, smillerDVM. But only a complete sycophant continues to place his head where the sun don't shine, so he can avoid having to accept the fact that what he voted to put in the White House in '08, was a total inept fiasco.

UB

Eric Johnson
10-19-2012, 11:51 AM
I don't particularly hold President Obama responsible for the weak security at a just recently opened consulate. Good lord. There are so many issues bigger than that such that no one person can have a running memory of them all. That said, he is clearly responsible for the lack of an affirmative response and for the absence of an immediate and credible investigation as to what went wrong and how this can be avoided in the future.

How lucky we all are that the same group didn't try this again within the past month because the Obama administration doesn't seem to know yet how it could have been avoided.

gmhr1
10-19-2012, 11:58 AM
A boss is supposed to know what his people are doing & he is the one Responsible. He said he was he's the BOSS! Hillary works for him he should have gone to the DAILY Intel meetings they were more important than Whoopie and Joy! Just saying Im sorry isnt good enough when you stand in front of America the friends, familys, of those 4 dead Americans and blame a you tube video. Hillary should step down NOW and Obama should follow.

Eric Johnson
10-19-2012, 12:17 PM
Here's more....

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20121019/DA20G2701.html

Oct 19, 3:28 AM (ET)
By KIMBERLY DOZIER

WASHINGTON (AP) - The CIA station chief in Libya reported to Washington within 24 hours of last month's deadly attack on the U.S. Consulate that there was evidence it was carried out by militants, not a spontaneous mob upset about an American-made video ridiculing Islam's Prophet Muhammad, U.S. officials have told The Associated Press.

It is unclear who, if anyone, saw the cable outside the CIA at that point and how high up in the agency the information went. The Obama administration maintained publicly for a week that the attack on the diplomatic mission in Benghazi that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans was a result of the mobs that staged less-deadly protests across the Muslim world around the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks on the U.S.

-more-

Uncle Bill
10-19-2012, 01:21 PM
This obfuscation by the regime will eventually turn into a bigger fiasco than Watergate was. Only taking longer because the MSP is so beholding to the phoney they put in the White House. But even some of them are beginning to realize their future professionalism is on the line, and they have had enough.

This is just now starting to become far bigger than the Eric Holder cover-up, because even the most toady journalists are getting fed up carrying the water for this empty suit. When more of the cover-up of the Benghazi raid unfolds, a lot more of the MSP will start reporting the facts like a national press should.


UB

charly_t
10-19-2012, 02:23 PM
.................................................. ........................When more of the cover-up of the Benghazi raid unfolds, a lot more of the MSP will start reporting the facts like a national press should.
UB

We can hope !

Uncle Bill
10-19-2012, 03:06 PM
More on the topic. As this continues to snowball, there are bound to be some MSP journalists that will find enough to get the facts correct and start telling the proletariat what really happened, and how their messiah covered up the truth with that phoney video concoction.

UB
Rumsfeld: Blame for Benghazi 'Does Stop' With Obama
 
By Greg McDonald
 
Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld dismissed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's claim Monday of responsibility for the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, saying blame for the security failure in Libya "does stop" with President Barack Obama.
"It does stop with the president, which she is not," Rumsfeld told Fox News' Sean Hannity Monday night. "On the other hand, the buck with respect to providing security is certainly within her area of responsibility, and it was a failure."

Rumsfeld was referring to Clinton's statement in which she claimed "responsibility" for the failure to defend against the assault that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.

"I want to avoid some kind of political gotcha," Clinton told reporters, referring to efforts by Republicans and the Mitt Romney campaign to undermine the president's re-election effort with charges of a cover-up.

Rumsfeld said Clinton's statement that the blame should go no further than her office does not dismiss "responsibility for the way the White House has tried to cover this up and to manage it in a way that suggested that at first . . . it was a YouTube [video], that it was not anything to do with 9/11, that it was not anything to do with a planned attack with heavy weapons.

"I think the responsibility for that, as well as the responsibility for the secretary of state not providing appropriate security, does, in fact, fall to the president," he added.

Rumsfeld said the security failure in Benghazi was indicative of what he described as other failures of administration foreign policy, ranging from unfinished trade agreements with Latin American countries to the lack of a status of forces agreement with Iraq.
Rumsfeld also said it was just "not believable" that there was so much confusion between the State Department, the National Security Council, and intelligence community about what happened in Benghazi.

But he added "it is probably credible that the president may not have known, at least for a period of day or so, because he went off to Nevada for a campaign fundraiser" right after the attack.
 
"Can you imagine?" Rumsfeld asked, saying the president's decision to continue with his campaigning rather than focusing immediately on responding to the attack "suggests that that was his priority."

"He, obviously, was dismissive of the fact that four Americans had been killed and we'd seen what obviously was a terrorist attack," Rumsfeld said.

Gerry Clinchy
10-20-2012, 08:44 PM
A piece on American Thinker points to the fact that Valerie Jarrett, an WH staff member has a Secret Service contingent of SIX around the clock, that follow her shopping, hobnobbing around DC, and even on vacation. Even cabinet members do not get six SS fellas protecting them.

Yet the ambassador to Libya, during a chaotic, dangerous transition period, got only TWO security personnel, and even those two seemed to have gone AWOL when the chips were down.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/10/our_ambassador_is_dead_but_obamas_political_guru_i s_safe.html

Gerry Clinchy
10-26-2012, 01:11 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/26/cia-operators-were-denied-request-for-help-during-benghazi-attack-sources-say/

This is shocking. Raises a couple of questions in my mind. The first one being that if Fox can get this detailed information on what occurred that night, how could the administration have been so uninformed? If help was so nearby, how could anyone refuse to allow the help to civilian personnel?

By this time, the administration should know as much as Fox about these details. It's no wonder the investigation will not be complete until after the election. If Obama is re-elected, will all the details ever come out ... or will executive privilege take care of that?

Good thing these fellas were not managing D-Day. We'd all be speaking German now.

gmhr1
10-26-2012, 01:16 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/ father of dead navy seal speaks out.

http://www.foxnews.com/ 3 times during attack help was asked help 3 times it was denied. Told to stand down.

90 minutes after this attack started Hillary Obama and Panetta met in the WH and knew it was a planned terror attack.

road kill
10-26-2012, 01:19 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/26/cia-operators-were-denied-request-for-help-during-benghazi-attack-sources-say/

This is shocking. Raises a couple of questions in my mind. The first one being that if Fox can get this detailed information on what occurred that night, how could the administration have been so uninformed? If help was so nearby, how could anyone refuse to allow the help to civilian personnel?

By this time, the administration should know as much as Fox about these details. It's no wonder the investigation will not be complete until after the election. If Obama is re-elected, will all the details ever come out ... or will executive privilege take care of that?

Good thing these fellas were not managing D-Day. We'd all be speaking German now.
How is your Arabic?:cool:

BonMallari
10-26-2012, 01:26 PM
whoever told Woods and Daugherty to stand down, had better get their affairs in order, because their blood is on his/her hands...In military terms whoever gave that order is about to face a general court martial, not just get their butt reamed in the court of public opinion

Gerry Clinchy
10-26-2012, 03:17 PM
Just when you think that this whole thing could not be more reprehensible ... it does.

Sure made it sound like it was Panetta who was in the situation room pulling the strings.

Interesting, too, how Hillary told one of the SEAL's dad that they would arrest and prosecute ... the person who made the offensive video! As for Joe Biden, his comment to the father is beyond stupid and boorish. If I lived in Delaware, I think I'd have to move, I'd be so ashamed of him. Wonder how he would react if it was his son's death that was being taken so lightly?

Julie R.
10-26-2012, 03:42 PM
The more the information about how our government handled the Benghazi attack, the more horrified I am. And yet...just now heard another of the Obama blitz of ads bragging on how "he" killed Osama bin Laden. And wow, just wow.....what Biden said to that dead Navy Seal's father is simply too boorish to even comprehend. That remark and how Biden acted at the VP debate makes me think he's a drunk.

Gerry Clinchy
10-26-2012, 08:31 PM
Is it interesting that in the Presidential debate Obama said, "The minute I found out what was happening ..." that is the present tense ... he did not say "what happened" in the past tense.

gmhr1
10-26-2012, 09:21 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/26/senators-demand-white-house-declassify-libya-video/

Obama said as information became available he would release it to the public so where's the video?

Julie R.
10-26-2012, 09:52 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/26/senators-demand-white-house-declassify-libya-video/

Obama said as information became available he would release it to the public so where's the video?

With his birth certificate, college transcripts and part of his 08 campaign promise for a more open, transparent government. :barf:

Gerry Clinchy
10-26-2012, 09:52 PM
I just visited CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, and Yahoo News websites ... not a single one of them has anything, in their "breaking news", not even a mention of Benghazi or Mr. Woods' statement today.

I begin to believe that this mainstream media is, indeed, complicit in this coverup ... I guess they can say that they don't think it should be politicized ...

gmhr1
10-26-2012, 09:58 PM
I watched nbc not a word about Libya, all they talked about was the storm.

Eric Johnson
10-26-2012, 10:22 PM
whoever told Woods and Daugherty to stand down, had better get their affairs in order, because their blood is on his/her hands...In military terms whoever gave that order is about to face a general court martial, not just get their butt reamed in the court of public opinion

There's no indication that the military was involved...is there? It would be State or CIA that gave the order and they aren't subject to court martial.

Gerry Clinchy
10-27-2012, 11:57 PM
And this is a bombshell ...


Clinton asked for more security in Benghazi, Obama said no
BY CHRISTOPHER COLLINS

Last night, it was revealed that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had ordered more security at the U.S. mission in Benghazi before it was attacked where four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens were murdered by Al-Qaeda but President Obama denied the request.

The news broke on TheBlazeTV’s “Wilkow!” hosted by Andrew Wilkow, by best-selling author, Ed Klein who said the legal counsel to Clinton had informed him of this information.

Klein also said that those same sources said that former President Bill Clinton has been “urging” his wife [Hillary] to release official State Department documents that prove she called for additional security at the compound in Libya, which would almost certainly result in President Obama losing the election.

Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/hillary-clinton/2012/10/26/report-hillary-asked-more-security-benghazi-obama-said-no#ixzz2AZ8OO9TR


If Hillary called a press conference or released this documentation to all the media, that's probably correct: the election is "game over" for Obama. I don't believe that the DNC would ever forgive her for that. And her political career would probably be over, too, since it would be obvious that she played along for as long as she did. Obama just said in an interview that he was unaware of any requests for additional security in Benghazi. The alternative explanation would be that someone in his administration denied the additional security, without informing the POTUS. Still, almost as bad for POTUS, that he would have chosen a staff member who would overstep his/her authority in a matter of this importance.

Gerry Clinchy
10-28-2012, 09:24 AM
From American Thinker ... based on reporting by Associated Press



The White House on Saturday flatly denied that President Barack Obama withheld requests for help from the besieged American compound in Benghazi, Libya, as it came under on attack by suspected terrorists on September 11th.

"Neither the president nor anyone in the White House denied any requests for assistance in Benghazi," National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor told Yahoo News by email.

Fox News Channel reported Friday that American officials in the compound repeatedly asked for military help during the assault but were rebuffed by CIA higher-ups (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/26/cia-operators-were-denied-request-for-help-during-benghazi-attack-sources-say/). At a press briefing one day earlier, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, asked why there had not been a quicker, more forceful response to the assault, complained of "Monday-morning quarterbacking." Panetta said he and top military commanders had judged it too dangerous to send troops to the eastern Libyan city without a clearer picture of events on the ground.

The "basic principle is that you don't deploy forces into harm's way without knowing what's going on; without having some real-time information about what's taking place," he said during a joint question-and-answer session with Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff General Martin Dempsey.
[...]

But Weekly Standard Editor Bill Kristol, in a post published Friday, doubted Panetta's explanation (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/petraeus-throws-obama-under-bus_657896.html) and said the fault must lie with Obama himself. "Would the secretary of defense make such a decision on his own? No," Kristol wrote. "It would have been a presidential decision."

"He's wrong," said Vietor.
Passing the buck back to DoD. But the Pentagon has denied it turned down any requests also, as did the CIA.

Just who in hell is in charge over there?



Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/10/obama_did_not_deny_request_for_assistance_from_ben ghazi_diplomats.html#ixzz2AbQTRRWS


At a total loss here ... did everybody keep saying "no" because nobody wanted to take responsibility if something went wrong if they said, "yes"?

What kind of message does this send to our soldiers putting their lives on the line every day?

BTW, it seems like the WH has been reading Fox and other conservative news outlets ... since they would not have made this statement based on what the rest of us are seeing in the mainstream media (i.e. nothing). Does this mean he acknowledges that what has been reported actually IS true? Or is the wording of the denial such that they can later spin it differently?

BonMallari
10-28-2012, 09:46 AM
Plausible deniability



Plausible deniability is a term coined by the CIA during the Kennedy administration to describe the withholding of information from senior officials in order to protect them from repercussions in the event that illegal or unpopular activities by the CIA became public knowledge.

The term most often refers to the denial of blame in (formal or informal) chains of command, where senior figures assign responsibility to the lower ranks, and records of instructions given do not exist or are inaccessible, meaning independent confirmation of responsibility for the action is nearly impossible. In the case that illegal or otherwise disreputable and unpopular activities become public, high-ranking officials may deny any awareness of such act or any connection to the agents used to carry out such acts. It typically implies forethought, such as intentionally setting up the conditions to plausibly avoid responsibility for one's (future) actions or knowledge.

In politics and espionage, deniability refers to the ability of a "powerful player" or intelligence agency to avoid "blowback" by secretly arranging for an action to be taken on their behalf by a third party ostensibly unconnected with the major player. In political campaigns, plausible deniability enables candidates to stay "clean" and denounce third-party advertisements that use unethical approaches or potentially libellous innuendo.

MooseGooser
10-28-2012, 11:03 AM
Did any of you watch Meet the Press this A.M.?

They talked about Integrity,, and who the military and citizens could "trust"as the Commander in Chief.

The Republican participant(Carly Fiorina) in the discussion, tried to bring up the middle East,, particuarly Benghazi,, and the moderator
( David Gregory) cut her off at the knees, telling her they werent talking about that topic,, and moved on to another panel member..

road kill
10-28-2012, 11:25 AM
I wonder if they had popcorn while they watched our citizens and soldiers BURN!!!

I said earlier I would serve today if called...........I have changed my mind.
I would NOT serve under the current Commander and Cheif.


And I most certainly would (and have) NOT hang my men/women out to dry!!
I would (and have) go get them!!!!


Those SEALS are true American hero's.
Those who watched are not!!

What a disgrace!!!!

Uncle Bill
10-28-2012, 11:56 AM
In my lifetime, I have never seen such a sycophantic press. This same batch of FOOLS would be screaming for impeachment, had this been anyone but their installed messiah. Obama the Amatuer...at anything he's involved with that doesn't have a teleprompter to guide him as to what to say.

BTW, I suggest you get that book..."AMATUER" by Ed Klein. Helps to understand why this stuffed suit got in, and who put him there.

UB

BonMallari
10-28-2012, 01:37 PM
I wonder if they had popcorn while they watched our citizens and soldiers BURN!!!

I said earlier I would serve today if called...........I have changed my mind.
I would NOT serve under the current Commander and Cheif.


And I most certainly would (and have) NOT hang my men/women out to dry!!
I would (and have) go get them!!!!


Those SEALS are true American hero's.
Those who watched are not!!

What a disgrace!!!!

Raises the ole BP just imagining the scenario...I hope the reports are wrong but I fear they are true, its almost like something out of the Harrison Ford movie ....

gman0046
10-28-2012, 08:42 PM
I really believe the stink over Benghazi will only get worse as time goes on. It's getting more and more strange as additional information comes available. I'm sure by now most of you have read or heard that the deceased Navy Seals at Benghazi used a laser pointer to pin point the terrorists for U.S. aircraft. NO Navy Seal in their right mind would ever do that if there were no U.S. aircraft over the Benghazi Consulate. It's beginning to look as if there were AC130 gunships over the Consulate but for some reason they did not fire on the insurgents. There is also information out there about four star General Ham being fired as part of the cover up. If he does, he may spill the beans. Too bad the messiah doesn't have the cohones to come clean to the American people. Eventually some career government individual will in fact set the record straight.

Gerry Clinchy
10-28-2012, 10:44 PM
gman, yes, I read those reports as well. A Navy admiral and Marine general also have been re-assigned, almost simultaneously with Ham.

There are two rumors proposed for why the WH didn't want to bail out the ambassador. One is that it was a plan to kidnap Stevens, and then trade him for the blind sheik. Somehow, that plan went awry and Stevens got killed instead of kidnapped. The second rumor was that it revolved around arms being transferred to Syrian insurgents, which may have included some Stinger missiles, and Assad got wind of it, and "taking out" the ambassador was his revenge.

In either scenario, the speculation is that the administration didn't want any witnesses. But there WERE witnesses, as there is mention of "injured" who were eventually evacuated. However, if they were all Libyan survivors, I doubt we'll ever hear of them again. The information was that Woods took two people with him from the CIA annex; one of whom was Doherty. If Woods or Doherty had survived, I would doubt that we'd have to speculate much. Woods' father seems very determined to get at the truth.

If either of those two scenarios (a failed kidnapping or arms running) were true, and had come to light, it would not have looked good for Obama's administration. As it turns out, the way the Benghazi situation evolved, it's probably going to be just as detrimental to the administration as either of the other two speculated scenarios.

Then there was mention of a meeting of Panetta, Biden and Obama around 6 pm at the WH ... which would have been about two hours after the attack began on the Benghazi mission. Would they have been meeting about something else? Could the attack have been going on for two hours, and Panetta still had no information? This would destroy Biden's whole story about "we didn't know."

Panetta made a statement about not putting assets in harms way without having accurate intel. Is this an admission that Panetta actually knew something was going on? Or was it carefully worded to make it sound like a "generalization"? If truly no one in DC knew what was going on, then God help us if somebody launches a larger attack somewhere. It would take 7 hours to mobilize? (It was mentioned that it took 7 hours before relief came to Benghazi to remove the dead and injured.) Even two hours could be life or death results.

I can't believe that Petraeus didn't have some of this information, before he publicly supported the video story. What a sordid end to what had been a heralded military career. I bet McChrystal is glad he got out when we did.

It seems, though, that the media "blackout" on the whole mess is doing a good cover for Obama. That may even be for their own benefit ... it won't look good for their blind loyalty if they had to admit this POTUS snookered them, along with everyone else. However, this will eventually come out, and it they will look even worse for ignoring it all.

Makes me wonder who is Obama's "Deep Throat" ... who is releasing these damning details? Someone who has a shred of conscience left? Based on the military detail, it sure seems like it's someone in the inner circles of intel, military, or CIA. With the original "Deep Throat", his identity wasn't revealed until he died.

Also interesting is that the media haven't even listened to Woodward, "one of their own" so to speak. Have to give Woodward some credit for being as objective about this POTUS as he was about Nixon's double-dealing.

road kill
10-29-2012, 07:33 AM
There are now leaks that Panetta and Obama watched this happen in the "situation room."

Only Obama can approve military action, that is the chain of command.
Panetta could have given the order, but only Obama can say yeah or nay!!

These folks who died that day in that embassy gave every ounce of their hearts and souls for America, and when they called for help, Obama turned his back!!!
Ladies and gentleman, this man does not deserve to be President of the United States, a country proud and known to take care of our own.

I have NEVER been more ASHAMED to be an American than right now!!
What a disgrace...........


Can you Obama supporters spin this for me?????


ps: to those BRAVE HERO SEALS that gave it all for America and saved as many as they could, God Bless You SAILORS!!!! WELL DONE!!!!
http://i704.photobucket.com/albums/ww42/sbx1/salute.jpg

Ken Bora
10-29-2012, 08:31 AM
.

Makes me wonder who is Obama's "Deep Throat" ... who is releasing these damning details? Someone who has a shred of conscience left? Based on the military detail, it sure seems like it's someone in the inner circles of intel, military, or CIA..

I was pondering this very thing just now while on the telephone.
Who could it be. Secretary of State's husband? hhmmm?

Ken Bora
10-29-2012, 08:34 AM
There are now leaks that Panetta and Obama watched this happen in the "situation room."



and "They" say Hillary did request additional security.
has she finaly had enough?
Hell hath no fury . . and all :confused:

gman0046
10-29-2012, 11:38 AM
Fox News has just reported new information has surfaced saying Obama was in a briefing 48 Hours after the attack. What I don't understand how someone can still be involved in a presidential race after telling so many bald faced lies. What really bothers me is the ignorance of the American public allowing this clown to pull the wool over their eyes. I really hope enough of them come to their senses before November 6. If he's doing this now can you imagine what he will do in a second term.

smillerdvm
10-29-2012, 04:23 PM
I have NEVER been more ASHAMED to be an American than right now!!
What a disgrace...........


http://i704.photobucket.com/albums/ww42/sbx1/salute.jpg

We have indeed come full circle

Michelle Obama is proud to be an American, & Roadkill is Ashamed to be an American

Franco
10-29-2012, 04:53 PM
I am still curious as to why Fox News got the supposed scoop. If I had some really news worthy intel, I would leak it to one of the major networks and not to a cable outlet with a questionable reputation. Lets face it, the owner of Fox News is in a lot of trouble regarding ethics in England and thier news channel here does not have a reputation for being accurate. Probably why most other news outlets have barely touched that story other than Yahoo, which gave credit to Fox News.

In fact, why not realease that information to all the media? And again, why only Fox?

Ken Bora
10-29-2012, 04:57 PM
could it have been leaked to all... and only 1 ran with it?

Franco
10-29-2012, 05:10 PM
could it have been leaked to all... and only 1 ran with it?

Possibly. And, if it did then the story's sources didn't pass the smell test. That's because all news outlets are hungry for big juicy stories. Doesn't matter who gets destroyed by the info except for NBC, MSNBC(because of the amount of govermnet contracts that the administration is giving to NBC parent company, General Electric.

ABC, CBS, even CNN would have been all over this story like a cheap suit if the story was leaked to all media and the sources checked out to be solid. Also, consider that none of the media wants to or is willing to give Fox any credit for the story if it is true. Too much hate for the competition is all News media. That is why I don't understand why this story wasn't leaked to a bigger News outlet like CBS or all the media at once so they wouldn't have to credit Fox in thier coverage. Something is fishy with this leak.

road kill
10-29-2012, 05:48 PM
Possibly. And, if it did then the story's sources didn't pass the smell test. That's because all news outlets are hungry for big juicy stories. Doesn't matter who gets destroyed by the info except for NBC, MSNBC(because of the amount of govermnet contracts that the administration is giving to NBC parent company, General Electric.

ABC, CBS, even CNN would have been all over this story like a cheap suit if the story was leaked to all media and the sources checked out to be solid. Also, consider that none of the media wants to or is willing to give Fox any credit for the story if it is true. Too much hate for the competition is all News media. That is why I don't understand why this story wasn't leaked to a bigger News outlet like CBS or all the media at once so they wouldn't have to credit Fox in thier coverage. Something is fishy with this leak.
Franco,
Do you think Fox fabricated the story?
Do you think the Colonels lied?
Do you think the youtube caused this?

or

Were our people under attack, someone new and issued the order to stand down?

And, if this did happen, how does one excuse it??

You may laugh at this, but I have been in a similar situation, you get underway to go save your comrades in arms.

Those people deserved better than they received and you know it!!

Doesn't anyone find it odd that the day after we knew it was the youtube video, but now no one knows anything????


C'mon man..............

Franco
10-29-2012, 06:09 PM
Franco,
Do you think Fox fabricated the story?
Do you think the Colonels lied?
Do you think the youtube caused this?

or

Were our people under attack, someone new and issued the order to stand down?

And, if this did happen, how does one excuse it??

You may laugh at this, but I have been in a similar situation, you get underway to go save your comrades in arms.

Those people deserved better than they received and you know it!!

Doesn't anyone find it odd that the day after we knew it was the youtube video, but now no one knows anything????


C'mon man..............

Lots of question here!

Did Fox Fabricate the story? No I don't think so. But in thier haste to be first with a story and with their agenda, they may have not vetted the info closely.

Colonels lied? Lots of conflicting stories. Maybe they don't know the truth.

Youtube comment? Tells me you are not interested in finding out what the truth is!

All the rest of your post is just you grandstanding.

Again, why has every crediable news source in the world pretty much ignore this story?

And, there is a reason Romney hasn't jumped all over this story!

I'll wait on the official investigation!

road kill
10-29-2012, 06:17 PM
Those people deserved better than they received and you know it!!

Doesn't anyone find it odd that the day after we knew it was the youtube video, but now no one knows anything????


Lots of question here!

Did Fox Fabricate the story? No I don't think so. But in thier haste to be first with a story and with their agenda, they may have not vetted the info closely.

Colonels lied? Lost of conflicting stories. Maybe they don't know the truth.

Youtube comment? Tells me you are not interested in finding out what the truth is!

All the rest of your post is just you grandstanding.



Again, why has every crediable news source in the world pretty much ignore this story?
So, you don't think those people deserved better??
You beleive the youtube video spurred the spontaneous riots?

OK..............


BTW---Grandstanding?? Do you ever read any of your own posts??
I mean I understand you got nothing here, but really, what does my grandstanding have to do with letting these people burn?

Franco
10-29-2012, 06:51 PM
So, you don't think those people deserved better??
You beleive the youtube video spurred the spontaneous riots?

OK..............


BTW---Grandstanding?? Do you ever read any of your own posts??
I mean I understand you got nothing here, but really, what does my grandstanding have to do with letting these people burn?

Do those killed deserve better? Of Course!

At least with my post I attempt to substaniate points and not make general statements thst have zero to do with whether the report is accurate!

Again, why has Romney steered clear of this report? What haven't the other media jumped on it like Fox News?

My hunch is that it can't be verified and I'll wait on the official bi-party investigation on the entire matter rather than jump on a bunch of assumptions and reports from an unreliable network!

huntinman
10-29-2012, 10:07 PM
Do those killed deserve better? Of Course!

At least with my post I attempt to substaniate points and not make general statements thst have zero to do with whether the report is accurate!

Again, why has Romney steered clear of this report? What haven't the other media jumped on it like Fox News?

My hunch is that it can't be verified and I'll wait on the official bi-party investigation on the entire matter rather than jump on a bunch of assumptions and reports from an unreliable network!

Why has Romney steered clear? There is an old saying... If your opponent is intent on hanging himself, just give him the rope.... (And shut up).

Obama is doing the job for him. Why should Romney get involved? He holds no official position. This is all Obama's mess.

road kill
10-30-2012, 05:51 AM
Here is some more "Grand Standing!!!"






Clinton asked for more security in Benghazi, Obama said NO!
Benghazi Libya
October 25, 2012
By: Christopher Collins
.


Last night, it was revealed that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had ordered more security at the U.S. mission in Benghazi before it was attacked where four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens were murdered by Al-Qaeda, but President Obama denied the request.

The news broke on TheBlazeTV’s “Wilkow!” hosted by Andrew Wilkow, by best-selling author Ed Klein, who said the legal counsel to Clinton had informed him of this information.

Klein also said that those same sources said that former President Bill Clinton has been “urging” his wife [Hillary] to release official State Department documents that prove she called for additional security at the compound in Libya, which would almost certainly result in President Obama losing the election.

Klein explained that everyone knew what was happening in Benghazi from the CIA to the National Security Agency and that there’s intelligence cables that have not been released.

Wilkow asked, “If everybody knew this including the White House, who would have given the order to go in and save the ambassador?”

Klein, “The President…he should have given the order to use the rapid reaction force…”

Wilkow, “Not Petraeus?”

Klein, “Well it has to come from the president.”

Wilkow also asked Klein about Valerie Jarrett, who’s the Senior Adviser to Obama and Assistant to the President for Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs, and her role in this cover-up.

Klein said, “We don’t know but we can only assume that every action that the president takes, and he said so, he is on the record saying “I don’t take any actions without passing it by Valerie Jarrett”...so we have to assume that Valerie Jarrett whose also by the way, hooked into the Chicago campaign line…she has a direct line to David Axlerod, was a part of this whole cover-up in the White House.”

Franco
10-30-2012, 07:01 AM
Would that be the same Christopher Collins that is running for a House seat in New York as a Republican?

Here is more on your boy, Christopher Collins;

In October 2009, Collins compared Sheldon Silver, the Jewish speaker of the New York State Assembly, with Adolf Hitler and the anti-Christ. Collins apologised for his comments.

In January 2010, several Republican colleagues of Collins said that at a crowded gubernatorial address, Collins told a woman that "I'm sure if you offer someone a lap dance you can find a place to sit."

Seems like a really credible guy;)

duckheads
10-30-2012, 09:32 AM
Isn't one of the major tenants that the military has, is that they and their country will do their utmost to leave no man behind. It's a matter of our country, the military, and each individual soldier KEEPING THE FAITH with each other.

By not expeditiously getting support to our people there when they were continuously asking for it; turning down requests by assets we had at the CIA Annex to go get the people we had in the embassy out; not sending in the Delta Force we had in Italy (which is specifically trained for situations like Benghazi); not sending in the C-130H/U Gunships (here is a link which states that their design and capabilities are specific for situations like Benghazi http://www.af.mil/in...sheet.asp?id=71 (http://www.af.mil/information/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=71) ) which were an hour or two flight time away; all senior levels of the executive Branch of our government watching the REAL TIME feed of what was going on from the Predator Drones, (were the drones armed?) doing nothing - and denying permission of the CIA assets to engage the terrorists and get our people out of the embassy; has to raise the question in the armed forces of what will happen if their unit is in a similar situation that requires expeditious support? Will their country keep the faith with them, or hang them out to dry too because the situation is too "vague" to send in support?

What if you were the father, mother, brother, wife, son, daughter of a person that puts their life on the line for our country on a continual basis? Wouldn't you want answers as to how this debacle occurred NOW ? Someone in the government knows who screwed up. What has been done to prevent it from happening again in the near future? Would you want to be like Tyrone Wood's family receiving your loved one's body in a casket at Andrews AFB because "someone" screwed up AGAIN or did not have the balls to expeditiously make a decision to get your loved one out of harms way AGAIN and consequently did not keep the faith AGAIN? Much less at the ceremony, some high level government official feeding you BS about the cause of why your loved one died !!!

If this administration had supported the expeditious sending in of support to get our people out of harms way during the Benghazi debacle the president would have been a shoe in to be reelected. But that did not happen. So this administration reaps what it sowed . Maybe, just maybe, somebody upstairs is watching, took notes and is now taking appropriate action to regain keeping the faith.

God Bless our people that were killed and wounded in Benghazi, their families, our armed forces, our diplomats, our security contractors and the United States Of America!!!!

MooseGooser
10-30-2012, 09:34 AM
Look at all the debate here on RTF,, asuming what happened,, specualting about who knew what and when,, unsure if the President turned his back on Patriots.. All here are discussing this full of doubt.

Now Imagine the Family of those folks killed,, the Seals,, the Ambassador,,, they too,,dont know the truth!!

The very MINIMUM the President owes those folks is the truth!!! And if they are hiding the truth, to save their sorry career,,,, then they should be boiled in oil!! Alll of them...

Gooser

gmhr1
10-30-2012, 09:40 AM
http://gillreport.com/2012/10/cbs-news-busts-pres-obama-itself-in-benghazi-cover-up/

CBS busts Pres Obama and itself in cover up

road kill
10-30-2012, 09:53 AM
Look at all the debate here on RTF,, asuming what happened,, specualting about who knew what and when,, unsure if the President turned his back on Patriots.. All here are discussing this full of doubt.

Now Imagine the Family of those folks killed,, the Seals,, the Ambassador,,, they too,,dont know the truth!!

The very MINIMUM the President owes those folks is the truth!!! And if they are hiding the truth, to save their sorry career,,,, then they should be boiled in oil!! Alll of them...

Gooser
When Obama called the Seals to get Bin Laden, they DELIVERED!
When the Seals called Obama, they were DENIED!!

nolefan
10-30-2012, 10:13 AM
AMEN! The stonewalling from the administration is revolting.



Isn't one of the major tenants that the military has, is that they and their country will do their utmost to leave no man behind. It's a matter of our country, the military, and each individual soldier KEEPING THE FAITH with each other.

By not expeditiously getting support to our people there when they were continuously asking for it; turning down requests by assets we had at the CIA Annex to go get the people we had in the embassy out; not sending in the Delta Force we had in Italy (which is specifically trained for situations like Benghazi); not sending in the C-130H/U Gunships (here is a link which states that their design and capabilities are specific for situations like Benghazi .....which were an hour or two flight time away; all senior levels of the executive Branch of our government watching the REAL TIME feed of what was going on from the Predator Drones, (were the drones armed?) doing nothing - and denying permission of the CIA assets to engage the terrorists and get our people out of the embassy; has to raise the question in the armed forces of what will happen if their unit is in a similar situation that requires expeditious support? Will their country keep the faith with them, or hang them out to dry too because the situation is too "vague" to send in support?

What if you were the father, mother, brother, wife, son, daughter of a person that puts their life on the line for our country on a continual basis? Wouldn't you want answers as to how this debacle occurred NOW ? Someone in the government knows who screwed up. What has been done to prevent it from happening again in the near future? Would you want to be like Tyrone Wood's family receiving your loved one's body in a casket at Andrews AFB because "someone" screwed up AGAIN or did not have the balls to expeditiously make a decision to get your loved one out of harms way AGAIN and consequently did not keep the faith AGAIN? Much less at the ceremony, some high level government official feeding you BS about the cause of why your loved one died !!!

If this administration had supported the expeditious sending in of support to get our people out of harms way during the Benghazi debacle the president would have been a shoe in to be reelected. But that did not happen. So this administration reaps what it sowed . Maybe, just maybe, somebody upstairs is watching, took notes and is now taking appropriate action to regain keeping the faith.

God Bless our people that were killed and wounded in Benghazi, their families, our armed forces, our diplomats, our security contractors and the United States Of America!!!!

Franco
10-30-2012, 11:35 AM
Look at all the debate here on RTF,, asuming what happened,, specualting about who knew what and when,, unsure if the President turned his back on Patriots.. All here are discussing this full of doubt.

Now Imagine the Family of those folks killed,, the Seals,, the Ambassador,,, they too,,dont know the truth!!

The very MINIMUM the President owes those folks is the truth!!! And if they are hiding the truth, to save their sorry career,,,, then they should be boiled in oil!! Alll of them...

Gooser

Couldn't agree more. That's why rather than reacting to a bunch of politicians running for office or a bunch of slanted media outlets, I'll wait on the official bi-partisan investigation for ther real story! We owe at least that much to the victims and their families. And, not a bunch of hysteria created by those with political agendas. If experience has taught us anything, there is the left's spin and the right's spin and the truth somewhere inbetween.

gman0046
10-30-2012, 12:44 PM
Bipartisan Investigation?????? Thats a joke. Both the US Senate and House have written letters to Obama, Petraeus and Panetta asking for details on Benghazi. No answers have been recieved. Don't hold your breath for answers until after the election.

MooseGooser
10-30-2012, 02:17 PM
Couldn't agree more. That's why rather than reacting to a bunch of politicians running for office or a bunch of slanted media outlets, I'll wait on the official bi-partisan investigation for ther real story! We owe at least that much to the victims and their families. And, not a bunch of hysteria created by those with political agendas. If experience has taught us anything, there is the left's spin and the right's spin and the truth somewhere inbetween.
I didn't mean rely on the media.
i didn't mean wait in a joke of a non partisan investigation
There is definatly a group of folks that know the truth.

Do they Not have morals?

Someone knows what happened!

i think it Has to be the President. If he didn't know,, he has to go.
I f he did know, and gave the order to stand down. He has to go.

He took an oath to honor the Constitution.
He ows the people he represents,and the troops he is Commander in chief of ,,,,the Truth

Franco
10-30-2012, 02:51 PM
Before the mob hangs anyone, I think we owe it to the accused to find out what the truth is.

I just did a Google search and even the Libian press in't covering this accusation. Other then Fox News and kooks like Beck, no one has been able to substantiate the alleged story!

Again, if this information is true, then why was it leaked only to Fox and not the bigger media outlets? Why haven't the other media outlets been able to verify this information by now?

I don't care for Obama or Romney but, I am interested in the truth!

If the information is true, then I expect Obama to go down. And, if the information is false, then I expect Fox News to lose their lisence to broadcast in the USA.

road kill
10-30-2012, 02:56 PM
Before the mob hangs anyone, I think we owe it to the accused to find out what the truth is.

I just did a Google search and even the Libian press in't covering this accusation. Other then Fox News and kooks like Beck, no one has been able to substantiate the alleged story!

Again, if this information is true, then why was it leaked only to Fox and not the bigger media outlets? Why haven't the other media outlets been able to verify this information by now?

I don't care for Obama or Romney but, I am interested in the truth!
Maybe you should tell that to the whitehouse.
Didn't they pretty much claim this was spontaneous due to a youtube video??

Maybe it's time for a "beer summit!!":cool:

JDogger
10-30-2012, 03:52 PM
There seems to be some confusion about what is an embassy and what is a consulate. Also some confusion about Navy Seals and former Navy Seals.

luvmylabs23139
10-30-2012, 04:48 PM
There seems to be some confusion about what is an embassy and what is a consulate. Also some confusion about Navy Seals and former Navy Seals.

I didn't know there was such a thing as a "former" Navy Seal. As far as I know once a Seal always a Seal.

MooseGooser
10-30-2012, 04:52 PM
There seems to be some confusion about what is an embassy and what is a consulate. Also some confusion about Navy Seals and former Navy Seals.
Since both entities are on the representative nations soviern ground, and either an Ambassador or a Counsel requested help from an eminent attack,
Please explain to gooser what difference it makes?

Eric Johnson
10-30-2012, 04:55 PM
I don't know where the AC-130 aircraft were but the fact that they didn't try to get them in the fight is telling. The AC-130 comes in several variants and some would have been spectacular for this (AC-130W/Stinger II) and some less so. Which ones were where, we dunno.

All special air operations are controlled out of Hurlburt Field, FL. So, the mission would go something like the Sec of State asking for help, the President tasking the DoD to come up with a plan, the DoD tasking the AF Special Ops Command to develop a plan, AFSOC looking at the assets in Europe and coming up with a plan. Then comes the approval process, the reverse of the tasking. Once the President approves the plan, the word "go" is given. All of this can be done in a reasonably short time but it would take a couple of hours. I was very tangentially with the planning of Operation El Dorado Canyon which took about a week. The days of "Top Gun" and "kick the tires, light the fires, first one in the air is the leader" are gone.

The AC-130 (all variants) cruise at about 300 mph. If they were located at Ramstein or Rhein-Mein air bases in Germany, they'd have had about a 4 hour flight just to get there. Some mission planning could have been done enroute but, some things need to be done before they even lift off...like fueling and arming. The days of having armed and fueled aircraft sitting at the end of the runway for 5 minute launch are gone.

All told, it probably would have taken 5-6 hours to have the right aircraft overhead and in a position to do some good. However, the fact that they didn't even try to get the consulate some help is rather shameful. President Obama talks about the US as still the most powerful nation on earth but what good is that if we won't use it?

I guess what I'm saying is that if we think of two timelines, one for the time it would take to get aircraft overhead and one that describes the length of time they would be under attack, there's no way to know how long the latter would go on but we could calculate the former. Since the latter could well have been a very extended time, why was no effort expended to complete the former timeline?

JDogger
10-30-2012, 05:41 PM
Since both entities are on the representative nations soviern ground, and either an Ambassador or a Counsel requested help from an eminent attack,
Please explain to gooser what difference it makes?

Google is your friend /

MooseGooser
10-30-2012, 06:04 PM
Google is your friend /


I DID Google it!! What the Hell,, Ya think Gooser just knows this sh&%!:):)

Google told me they was the same,, One deals with Government,, the other deals with Trade..

But,, they is both soviern Ground,, supported by representative nations citizens,, So you tell me,, Are you insinuating one gets protection,, and the udder donts??

Or does one have the Wallstreet gurus as protection,, and the Udder have the U.S. Government...

Please help Gooser out...

Gooser

road kill
10-30-2012, 07:08 PM
There seems to be some confusion about what is an embassy and what is a consulate. Also some confusion about Navy Seals and former Navy Seals.

Great call Jdogger!!!

#1--Once a Seal always a Seal.
You probably wouldn't understand!!

#2--In regard to confusion, let's see if I can help:



spon·ta·ne·ous/spänˈtānēəs/


Adjective

1.Performed or occurring without premeditation or external stimulus





planned n.
1. A scheme, program, or method worked out beforehand for the accomplishment of an objective: a plan of attack


There, maybe that will help where it REALLY counts!!!

Buzz
10-30-2012, 08:56 PM
Before the mob hangs anyone, I think we owe it to the accused to find out what the truth is.

I just did a Google search and even the Libian press in't covering this accusation. Other then Fox News and kooks like Beck, no one has been able to substantiate the alleged story!

Again, if this information is true, then why was it leaked only to Fox and not the bigger media outlets? Why haven't the other media outlets been able to verify this information by now?

I don't care for Obama or Romney but, I am interested in the truth!

If the information is true, then I expect Obama to go down. And, if the information is false, then I expect Fox News to lose their lisence to broadcast in the USA.

Franco, what we have here are several severe cases of Obama derangement syndrome. And didn't you realize that there is no law against a "news outlet" lying? Faux News asserted that argument, and won... You should be able to find something about it with Google.

Buzz
10-30-2012, 08:59 PM
Franco, what we have here are several severe cases of Obama derangement syndrome. And didn't you realize that there is no law against a "news outlet" lying? Faux News asserted that argument, and won... You should be able to find something about it with Google.

I meant to say that they asserted that argument in court. Don't know how to edit a post in the mobile forum software on my iPhone so I had to reply to my own post... What a pita.

Franco
10-30-2012, 09:24 PM
Franco, what we have here are several severe cases of Obama derangement syndrome. And didn't you realize that there is no law against a "news outlet" lying? Faux News asserted that argument, and won... You should be able to find something about it with Google.

These are the only two stories I could find disputing Fox News.
http://www.examiner.com/article/four-star-general-debunks-claims-of-obama-lies-and-dereliction-benghazi-gate

http://news.yahoo.com/pentagon-denies-fox-news-benghazi-report-124552273.html

I do know that cable news is not held to the same standards as broadcast news because of the FCC. THe FCC only oversees broadcast stations and not cable. Probably why the big news outlets(broadcast) didn't touch it. Had they been able to confirm reputable sources then they would have been all over it.

However, all media is subject to liable and defamation. Which is why Fox dumped Beck. He was a loose cannon that made crap up on the fly. If this story proves to be a farce, will Hannity be next?

I don't watch Fox News and am wondering if Romney has been a guest on O'Reilly or Hannity in the last several months? Just like he avoids Rush like the plague, so credit Romney with that. I would imagine he has stayed away from those two just like he stayed away from THE story.


Hannity to his story's source..
http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/s480x480/564989_453831454682932_387774387_n.jpg

M&K's Retrievers
10-30-2012, 10:12 PM
These are the only two stories I could find disputing Fox News.
http://www.examiner.com/article/four-star-general-debunks-claims-of-obama-lies-and-dereliction-benghazi-gate

http://news.yahoo.com/pentagon-denies-fox-news-benghazi-report-124552273.html

I do know that cable news is not held to the same standards as broadcast news because of the FCC. THe FCC only oversees broadcast stations and not cable. Probably why the big news outlets(broadcast) didn't touch it. Had they been able to confirm reputable sources then they would have been all over it.

However, all media is subject to liable and defamation. Which is why Fox dumped Beck. He was a loose cannon that made crap up on the fly. If this story proves to be a farce, will Hannity be next?

I don't watch Fox News and am wondering if Romney has been a guest on O'Reilly or Hannity in the last several months? Just like he avoids Rush like the plague, so credit Romney with that. I would imagine he has stayed away from those two just like he stayed away from THE story.


Hannity to his story's source..
http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/s480x480/564989_453831454682932_387774387_n.jpg

Bill was complaining tonight that he couldn't get Romney to come on his show. Rush doesn't have guests. If you listened/watched some of the other programs, maybe you would actually know everything you think you know.

BonMallari
10-30-2012, 10:59 PM
These are the only two stories I could find disputing Fox News.
http://www.examiner.com/article/four-star-general-debunks-claims-of-obama-lies-and-dereliction-benghazi-gate

http://news.yahoo.com/pentagon-denies-fox-news-benghazi-report-124552273.html

I do know that cable news is not held to the same standards as broadcast news because of the FCC. THe FCC only oversees broadcast stations and not cable. Probably why the big news outlets(broadcast) didn't touch it. Had they been able to confirm reputable sources then they would have been all over it.

However, all media is subject to liable and defamation. Which is why Fox dumped Beck. He was a loose cannon that made crap up on the fly. If this story proves to be a farce, will Hannity be next?

I don't watch Fox News and am wondering if Romney has been a guest on O'Reilly or Hannity in the last several months? Just like he avoids Rush like the plague, so credit Romney with that. I would imagine he has stayed away from those two just like he stayed away from THE story.


Hannity to his story's source..
http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/s480x480/564989_453831454682932_387774387_n.jpg




Its not Hannity that broke the story.....the story was broken by Fox Pentagon correspondent Jennifer Griffin and Catherine Herridge ...Both Brett Baier and others on Fox asked Griffin on air how credible her sources are, and she replied "impeccable"

whether you like or believe Fox News, you have to look at this like you do Fast and Furious, you dont call out the State Dept, the CIA, and the Oval Office unless you have the proof in hand, this is not some fishing expedition, probably the reason the other networks havent picked up the story is that they do not possess the same proof that Fox has obtained, they would be foolish to run with a story if they dont have the same sources..

Fox has two choices, either they expose their source - which they wont do, or

hope that their source comes out in public and confirms what they have reported

Here is a good synopsis by David Ignatius from the Washington Post



The attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi has become a political football in the presidential campaign, with all the grandstanding and misinformation that entails. But Fox News has raised some questions about the attack that deserve a clearer answer from the Obama administration.

Fox’s Jennifer Griffin reported Friday that CIA officers in Benghazi had been told to “stand down” when they wanted to deploy from their base at the annex to repel the attack on the consulate, about a mile away. Fox also reported that the CIA officers requested military support when the annex came under fire later that night but that their request had been denied







The Benghazi tragedy was amplified by Charles Woods, the father of slain CIA contractor Tyrone Woods. He told Fox’s Sean Hannity that White House officials who didn’t authorize military strikes to save the embattled CIA annex were “cowards” and “are guilty of murdering my son.”

The Fox “stand down” story prompted a strong rebuttal from the CIA: “We can say with confidence that the agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi. Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.”

So what did happen in Benghazi on the night of Sept. 11, when Woods, Ambassador Christopher Stevens and two others Americans were killed? The best way to establish the facts would be a detailed, unclassified timeline of events; officials say they are preparing one, and that it may be released later this week. That’s a must, even in the volatile final week of the campaign. In the meantime, here’s a summary of some of the basic issues that need to be clarified.

First, on the question of whether Woods and others were made to wait when they asked permission to move out immediately to try to rescue those at the consulate. The answer seems to be yes, but not for very long. There was a brief, initial delay — two people said it was about 20 minutes — before Woods was allowed to leave. One official said Woods and at least one other CIA colleague were “in the car revving the engine,” waiting for permission to go. Woods died about six hours later, after he returned to the annex.

The main reason for the delay, several sources said, was that CIA officials were making urgent contact with a Libyan militia, known as the February 17 Brigade, which was the closest thing to an organized security force in Benghazi. The United States depends on local security to protect U.S. diplomatic facilities everywhere, and officials wanted to coordinate any response to the consulate attack. After this delay, Woods and his colleague proceeded to the consulate.

Here’s my question: Was it wise to depend on a Libyan militia that clearly wasn’t up to the job? Could it have made a difference for those under attack at the consulate if Woods had moved out as soon as he was, in one official’s words, “saddled and ready”?

Second, why didn’t the United States send armed drones or other air assistance to Benghazi immediately? This one is harder to answer. The CIA did dispatch a quick-reaction force that night from Tripoli, with about eight people, but it had trouble at first reaching the compound. One of its members, Glen Doherty, died along with Woods when a mortar hit the roof of the annex about 4 a.m.

What more could have been done? A Joint Special Operations Command team was moved that night to Sigonella air base in Sicily, for quick deployment to Benghazi or any of the other U.S. facilities in danger that night across North Africa. Armed drones could also have been sent. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta summarized last Thursday the administration’s decision to opt for caution: “You don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on.”

Looking back, it may indeed have been wise not to bomb targets in Libya that night. Given the uproar in the Arab world, this might have been the equivalent of pouring gasoline on a burning fire. But the anguish of Woods’s father is understandable: His son’s life might have been saved by a more aggressive response. The Obama administration needs to level with the country about why it made its decisions.

A final, obvious point: The “fog of battle” that night was dense not just in Benghazi but in Cairo, Tunis and elsewhere. U.S. officials needed better intelligence. That’s the toughest problem to address, but the most important.

smillerdvm
10-31-2012, 01:31 AM
Its not Hannity that broke the story.....the story was broken by Fox Pentagon correspondent Jennifer Griffin and Catherine Herridge ...Both Brett Baier and others on Fox asked Griffin on air how credible her sources are, and she replied "impeccable"


At first blush I thought most of the responses here on this POTUS thread were a bit rash and not terribly impartial and objective.
I based this on the following
A 4 Star General being interviewed by a Fox reporter said that there was nothing that could have been done to prevent the attack and that to politicize it as Fox is doing was irresponsible and unfair
The White House has denied the Fox report
The NSC has denied the Fox report
The CIA has denied the Fox report
The Pentagon has denied the Fox report
and so on


Then I discover this bombshell. According to Bon, while watching FOX, the FOX correspondent who broke the FOX story that has been reported on FOX while being interviewed on FOX by FOX reporter Brett Baier on FOX and other reporters on FOX stated on FOX while on air on FOX as to how credible her UNNAMED sources that the FOX report was based on claimed while on FOX that her UNNAMED sources that FOX based their story on and has reported on FOX were "impeccable".

Clearly FOX has uncovered the fox {FOX?} in the henhouse.

Its time to sharpen up the guillotine and let the heads roll

People like Franco who advocated not jumping to conclusions and waiting until an investigation could determine the facts have their head in the sand. He probably isn't aware that the reporter breaking this story has stated that her sources are impeccable.
In his defense he probably thought this would be the normal situation where when the reporter who breaks the story is questioned on the reliability of their UNNAMED sources admits that the UNNAMED he's she's & or its are lying scumbags who have numerous perjury convictions on their UNNAMED record.

I also have to agree that there must be stalling on this investigation for political gain. Even though the original 9-11 investigation dealt with an attack that occurred on our homeland resulting in a nation of outraged citizens and investigative agencies and authorities that yearned to cooperate and offer up anything they could to find the facts took almost 3 yrs to complete; you all have convinced me that this investigation in an unfriendly land 1000's of miles away with many elements very hostile to us would have been wrapped up by now, were it not being delayed for political gain as many of you have so wisely pointed out

On the subject of the original 9-11 investigation; it determined that intel was ignored that if acted upon could have prevented that disaster. It was also proven that we were mislead on WMD's amongst other things on the way to getting involved in two wars with adversaries that had nothing to do with the 9-11 attacks. Those mistakes by that administration resulted in the loss of American lives on a magnitude of 1000's times greater than this attack on our embassy, not to mention the cost in $'s and other factors.

You guys and FOX have gotten me worked up enough with outrage at this latest 9-11 attack that I'm ready to join your lynch mob. This is way to important to be a partisan issue. As your new non partisan ally and fellow American Patriot Am I wrong to be outraged 1000s times more over the mistakes of that administration?

road kill
10-31-2012, 06:25 AM
At first blush I thought most of the responses here on this POTUS thread were a bit rash and not terribly impartial and objective.
I based this on the following
A 4 Star General being interviewed by a Fox reporter said that there was nothing that could have been done to prevent the attack and that to politicize it as Fox is doing was irresponsible and unfair
The White House has denied the Fox report
The NSC has denied the Fox report
The CIA has denied the Fox report
The Pentagon has denied the Fox report
and so on


Then I discover this bombshell. According to Bon, while watching FOX, the FOX correspondent who broke the FOX story that has been reported on FOX while being interviewed on FOX by FOX reporter Brett Baier on FOX and other reporters on FOX stated on FOX while on air on FOX as to how credible her UNNAMED sources that the FOX report was based on claimed while on FOX that her UNNAMED sources that FOX based their story on and has reported on FOX were "impeccable".

Clearly FOX has uncovered the fox {FOX?} in the henhouse.

Its time to sharpen up the guillotine and let the heads roll

People like Franco who advocated not jumping to conclusions and waiting until an investigation could determine the facts have their head in the sand. He probably isn't aware that the reporter breaking this story has stated that her sources are impeccable.
In his defense he probably thought this would be the normal situation where when the reporter who breaks the story is questioned on the reliability of their UNNAMED sources admits that the UNNAMED he's she's & or its are lying scumbags who have numerous perjury convictions on their UNNAMED record.

I also have to agree that there must be stalling on this investigation for political gain. Even though the original 9-11 investigation dealt with an attack that occurred on our homeland resulting in a nation of outraged citizens and investigative agencies and authorities that yearned to cooperate and offer up anything they could to find the facts took almost 3 yrs to complete; you all have convinced me that this investigation in an unfriendly land 1000's of miles away with many elements very hostile to us would have been wrapped up by now, were it not being delayed for political gain as many of you have so wisely pointed out

On the subject of the original 9-11 investigation; it determined that intel was ignored that if acted upon could have prevented that disaster. It was also proven that we were mislead on WMD's amongst other things on the way to getting involved in two wars with adversaries that had nothing to do with the 9-11 attacks. Those mistakes by that administration resulted in the loss of American lives on a magnitude of 1000's times greater than this attack on our embassy, not to mention the cost in $'s and other factors.

You guys and FOX have gotten me worked up enough with outrage at this latest 9-11 attack that I'm ready to join your lynch mob. This is way to important to be a partisan issue. As your new non partisan ally and fellow American Patriot Am I wrong to be outraged 1000s times more over the mistakes of that administration?
Delightful OPINION!
Here are some that agree with you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qz3v3Paar_M&feature=related

By your standards, it's not news until Dan Rather, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews or the Veiw approve?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


So tell me, which was it, spontaneous due to a video or planned by terrorists?:cool:

Simple question that you can not answer because either answer embarrasses this administration!

Have a nice day....God bless!

Franco
10-31-2012, 06:47 AM
Delightful OPINION!
Here are some that agree with you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qz3v3Paar_M&feature=related

By your standards, it's not news until Dan Rather, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews or the Veiw approve?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


So tell me, which was it, spontaneous due to a video or planned by terrorists?:cool:

Simple question that you can not answer because either answer embarrasses this administration!

Have a nice day....God bless!

Nice try at attempting to change the subject. Typical, when you are wrong, just change the subject!

And, MK, Romney is smart to stay away from the fool O'Reilly. And why waste my time watching the garbage on Fox when there are much more credible news outlets.

M&K's Retrievers
10-31-2012, 08:22 AM
Nice try at attempting to change the subject. Typical, when you are wrong, just change the subject!

And, MK, Romney is smart to stay away from the fool O'Reilly. And why waste my time watching the garbage on Fox when there are much more credible news outlets.

Please enlighten us with your sources. Surly you don't include MSNBC, CBS, CNN, ABC or NBC among them. Smoke signals? Crystal ball? National Enquirer? People Magazine? Let us know so we can all be as in touch as you.

Franco
10-31-2012, 08:33 AM
Please enlighten us with your sources. Surly you don't include MSNBC, CBS, CNN, ABC or NBC among them. Smoke signals? Crystal ball? National Enquirer? People Magazine? Let us know so we can all be as in touch as you.

Bloomberg, C-Span and Headline News are three outlets that just report without having bobbled headed anchors giving their views on the news.

I for one can form my own opinions and don't need some slanted psuedo journalist telling me what I ought to think!

MooseGooser
10-31-2012, 09:02 AM
Franco!! Be Carefull,,, Now you is useing tactics of a loosing debate by reverting to name calling..
Just sayin...:):) Bobbleheaded???:):)

AnyWAYS...




Woulds somebody help Gooser out with the grenade the Jdogger thew in the window, that he claimed would end all this discussion cause we was all confused about the difference of Embassys, Cousolates,, Seals,, and Former seals????

I dont get it! Jdogger please never tell Gooser to go to Google... I is worn out!

Please give us your explaination as to the point you were making...

Both an Embassy and a Counsolate are on soveirn ground.

I Kinda get your Seal and Former Seal point,, but here is How I look at it.

Innocent people who are protected by international law were being attacked, on a anniversary of a date where terrorist threw a sucker punch at those innocent peoples country... The FACT that those folks BEGGED for protection BEFORE the attack,,, and NOTHING was done,, is a HUGE concern to me as to the PRO ACTIVE preparedness of our current Administration...
Those folks were Americans attacked on Protected ground... We should have seen something like this comming...
What was the answer????? A VIDEO caused all this... REALLYYY???? and we locked a guy up for making it???? REALLY??


As Far as a Seal,, Or a Former Seal...

Jdogger,, if I have you as a neighbor,,, and I witness someone attacking you,, or robbing your house,, Orr I see you and your Family having trouble on the highway ,,broke down, needing help,,, I think there re some of us,, that answere to a higher calling,, that will step in and Help, and do the right thing, despite what labels that are put on us.. We just react. If the situation is dire enough,, we wont wait for the police,, an Official OK,, we understand, something has to be done at the criticle point in time..

I am appauled at the possiblity,, that Seals, Former Seals,, Ambassadors, Counsels, or just palin Americans died,, and maybe their last thoughts were of their country they were representing,, had abandoned them,, and they died alone... I just cant accept that!! I just cant!!,, and Now to have Politicians that prolly DO know what happened,, drag their feet and not give an explaination without a lot of double talk,, is an example of what we as Americans haves come to accept from our leaders....

We Elect them to Know!!! Their constitutional oath binds them to protect. Someone has to take responsiblity. Who do you think that would be??

Gooser

Franco
10-31-2012, 09:20 AM
Franco!! Be Carefull,,, Now you is useing tactics of a loosing debate by reverting to name calling..
Just sayin...:):) Bobbleheaded???:):)

AnyWAYS...




Woulds somebody help Gooser out with the grenade the Jdogger thew in the window, that he claimed would end all this discussion cause we was all confused about the difference of Embassys, Cousolates,, Seals,, and Former seals????

I dont get it! Jdogger please never tell Gooser to go to Google... I is worn out!

Please give us your explaination as to the point you were making...

Both an Embassy and a Counsolate are on soveirn ground.

I Kinda get your Seal and Former Seal point,, but here is How I look at it.

Innocent people who are protected by international law were being attacked, on a anniversary of a date where terrorist threw a sucker punch at those innocent peoples country... The FACT that those folks BEGGED for protection BEFORE the attack,,, and NOTHING was done,, is a HUGE concern to me as to the PRO ACTIVE preparedness of our current Administration...
Those folks were Americans attacked on Protected ground... We should have seen something like this comming...
What was the answer????? A VIDEO caused all this... REALLYYY???? and we locked a guy up for making it???? REALLY??


As Far as a Seal,, Or a Former Seal...

Jdogger,, if I have you as a neighbor,,, and I witness someone attacking you,, or robbing your house,, Orr I see you and your Family having trouble on the highway ,,broke down, needing help,,, I think there re some of us,, that answere to a higher calling,, that will step in and Help, and do the right thing, despite what labels that are put on us.. We just react. If the situation is dire enough,, we wont wait for the police,, an Official OK,, we understand, something has to be done at the criticle point in time..

I am appauled at the possiblity,, that Seals, Former Seals,, Ambassadors, Counsels, or just palin Americans died,, and maybe their last thoughts were of their country they were representing,, had abandoned them,, and they died alone... I just cant accept that!! I just cant!!,, and Now to have Politicians that prolly DO know what happened,, drag their feet and not give an explaination without a lot of double talk,, is an example of what we as Americans haves come to accept from our leaders....

We Elect them to Know!!! Their constitutional oath binds them to protect. Someone has to take responsiblity. Who do you think that would be??

Gooser

No doubt about it! What the heck was this adminsitration thinking, don't they know we are hated by these thugs! Obvious by the remarks in the days after the murders that the administration was caught with thier pants down. But then again, our entire Mideast policy of both political parties has been dysfunctional from the get-go. We will never, ever change those people!

Broncos looking good
;-)
Ravens were my preseason Super Bowl pick but with all their injuries, I have to go with the team led by the greatest QB of alltime! Looking like a Broncos vs 49ers or Giants showdown in New Orleans come February. A two Manning Super Bowl would make the locals forget their team's woes this season.

road kill
10-31-2012, 09:23 AM
Please enlighten us with your sources. Surly you don't include MSNBC, CBS, CNN, ABC or NBC among them. Smoke signals? Crystal ball? National Enquirer? People Magazine? Let us know so we can all be as in touch as you.
Stop, you're killing me here.......:cool:

Ken Bora
10-31-2012, 09:29 AM
is it true that the guy that made the video that did not cause the terror attack, is still in jail?

road kill
10-31-2012, 09:30 AM
Nice try at attempting to change the subject. Typical, when you are wrong, just change the subject!

And, MK, Romney is smart to stay away from the fool O'Reilly. And why waste my time watching the garbage on Fox when there are much more credible news outlets.
I am right on topic, as usual...............:cool:

huntinman
10-31-2012, 09:36 AM
is it true that the guy that made the video that did not cause the terror attack, is still in jail?

You mean... To use the president's words... "That shadowy character"

Yes... He's still sitting in the tank.

M&K's Retrievers
10-31-2012, 09:38 AM
Stop, you're killing me here.......:cool:

I couldn't spell ouigi, ougee, wegee, ouiji board. Shouldn't matter tho. Franco can't spell worth a hoot anyway. :D

M&K's Retrievers
10-31-2012, 09:38 AM
is it true that the guy that made the video that did not cause the terror attack, is still in jail?

I believe so.

Ken Bora
10-31-2012, 09:51 AM
what is he charged with?

huntinman
10-31-2012, 10:00 AM
what is he charged with?

Speaking his mind while democrats are in power.

Franco
10-31-2012, 10:01 AM
I am right on topic, as usual...............:cool:


The topic was the bogus news story from Fox which you so ardently defended! Then, when you realized that the story has a high probability of being false, switched the discussion to the reports right after the murders! Nice try;-)

road kill
10-31-2012, 10:09 AM
The topic was the bogus news story from Fox which you so ardently defended! Then, when you realized that the story has a high probability of being false, switched the discussion to the reports right after the murders! Nice try;-)
Incorrect, you are concerned there is a VERY HIGH probability they are correct and you (like the rest of the progressives) are worried to death your guy messed up.....REAL BAD!!!

I am totally confident of my sources and their reports.
You on the other hand have to wait until Whoopi and Joy concur!!!!:D

road kill
10-31-2012, 10:11 AM
You mean... To use the president's words... "That shadowy character"

Yes... He's still sitting in the tank.
Remember when I posted that he had been arrested (hauled away) with pictures and the progressives argued semantics and called my assertion false??

I guess the lefty's know about "false assertions!!":D

Spontaneous regards.............

Franco
10-31-2012, 10:12 AM
Incorrect, you are concerned there is a VERY HIGH probability they are correct and you (like the rest of the progressives) are worried to death your guy messed up.....REAL BAD!!!

I am totally confident of my sources and their reports.
You on the other hand have to wait until Whoopi and Joy concur!!!!:D

Wrong again!

My guy would have never had us in this no-win situation. ;-)

gmhr1
10-31-2012, 10:24 AM
http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com/2012/10/31/washington-post-is-now-asking-for-answers-about-benghazi-fncs-jennifer-griffins-reporting-has-gotten-the-washington-post-interested/

Needless to say, this is a good sign. Fox News Channel (and a few others) have been the only ones asking the Obama Administration for answers about Benghazi. Now the Washington Post is asking:

M&K's Retrievers
10-31-2012, 10:44 AM
Wrong again!

My guy would have never had us in this no-win situation. ;-)

You are correct, sir and he never will have the opportunity.

M&K's Retrievers
10-31-2012, 10:45 AM
what is he charged with?

I think I heard they got him on a parole violation.

Ken Bora
10-31-2012, 10:51 AM
http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com/2012/10/31/washington-post-is-now-asking-for-answers-about-benghazi-fncs-jennifer-griffins-reporting-has-gotten-the-washington-post-interested/

Needless to say, this is a good sign. Fox News Channel (and a few others) have been the only ones asking the Obama Administration for answers about Benghazi. Now the Washington Post is asking:


for many, unless Matt Lauer asks, the question don't count :confused:

smillerdvm
10-31-2012, 11:54 AM
Delightful OPINION!
Here are some that agree with you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qz3v3Paar_M&feature=related

By your standards, it's not news until Dan Rather, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews or the Veiw approve?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


So tell me, which was it, spontaneous due to a video or planned by terrorists?:cool:

Simple question that you can not answer because either answer embarrasses this administration!

Have a nice day....God bless!

Its not me that has a problem answering questions, let me show you how its done.
I see two question marks in your post, one is obviously a grammatical error on your part.
In spite of your problems with the English language and punctuation, I will attempt to deecipher your meaning and answer both.
As to your obvious question, my opinion is that this was planned by terrorists. My return question for you to answer is; How is that relevant to whether or not we could have prevented & or stopped the attack, & that the administration knew we had the capacity to stop it, but complicitly stood by and prevented our assets on the ground from doing so?

As to your attempted question, I dont consider it news until we have the facts. I think we should do a thorough investigation and find what those facts are. If the FACTS show that people acted in a criminal manner resulting in the loss of 4 innocent lives that we should harshly punish them with every tool available, be that impeachment, imprisonment, execution or whatever.

Facts are what we need. To me its still possible that there is a slight possibility that the CIA, the NSC, the Pentagon, 4 Star generals etc who have denied FOXs story may possibly have some insight due to their experience and boots on the ground in the region into this situation that the Patriot Roadkill hasnt discerned from behind his computer and TV set somewhere in Wisconscin. . I know the chances are slim, but as a Patriot Im sure you understand the concepts of innocent until proven guilty and proof beyond a reasonable doubt.. My distrust of politicians in general allows me to believe in the possibility of a coverup also. If the facts show that is so I've already stated what I hope happens to anyone complicit in it.

My follow up question to you on the subject of facts and investigations refers to the findings of the 9-11 commission. They found that intel was ignored that could have prevented the didaster. Furthermore we were mislead about WMD's and other factors which led up to our involvement in 2 senseless wars that cost us 1000s of lives and countless billions of $, not to count greatly compromised our security going forward.
I don't sense your sense of outrage for those FACTUAL & KNOWN screwups by the Bush administration as you show for these ALLEGED {by FOX } wrongs.
Knowing you to be a PATRIOT and not a PARTISAN I'm wondering if you feel that those wrongdoers should be prosecuted and punished for their wrongdoings that cost us Americans by a scope 1000s times greater; and if so what punishment would you recommend?

Lastly I noticed that you have expressed outrage and embarrasment at our First Lady for saying she had been embarressed of her country. Like me you indicated that you may not always agree with some of the USA's actions you were always proud of your country.
I saw your post the other day wherin you stated you had never been more embarressed of America.
When did the rules on being a Patriot change?

I hope you respond quickly as I leaving on a trip shortly, and I want to see you answer the ?s asked and prove Franco wrong when he says you change the subject when put on point

road kill
10-31-2012, 11:57 AM
Its not me that has a problem answering questions, let me show you how its done.
I see two question marks in your post, one is obviously a grammatical error on your part.
In spite of your problems with the English language and punctuation, I will attempt to deecipher your meaning and answer both.
As to your obvious question, my opinion is that this was planned by terrorists. My return question for you to answer is; How is that relevant to whether or not we could have prevented & or stopped the attack, & that the administration knew we had the capacity to stop it, but complicitly stood by and prevented our assets on the ground from doing so?

As to your attempted question, I dont consider it news until we have the facts. I think we should do a thorough investigation and find what those facts are. If the FACTS show that people acted in a criminal manner resulting in the loss of 4 innocent lives that we should harshly punish them with every tool available, be that impeachment, imprisonment, execution or whatever.

Facts are what we need. To me its still possible that there is a slight possibility that the CIA, the NSC, the Pentagon, 4 Star generals etc who have denied FOXs story may possibly have some insight due to their experience and boots on the ground in the region into this situation that the Patriot Roadkill hasnt discerned from behind his computer and TV set somewhere in Wisconscin. . I know the chances are slim, but as a Patriot Im sure you understand the concepts of innocent until proven guilty and proof beyond a reasonable doubt.. My distrust of politicians in general allows me to believe in the possibility of a coverup also. If the facts show that is so I've already stated what I hope happens to anyone complicit in it.

My follow up question to you on the subject of facts and investigations refers to the findings of the 9-11 commission. They found that intel was ignored that could have prevented the didaster. Furthermore we were mislead about WMD's and other factors which led up to our involvement in 2 senseless wars that cost us 1000s of lives and countless billions of $, not to count greatly compromised our security going forward.
I don't sense your sense of outrage for those FACTUAL & KNOWN screwups by the Bush administration as you show for these ALLEGED {by FOX } wrongs.
Knowing you to be a PATRIOT and not a PARTISAN I'm wondering if you feel that those wrongdoers should be prosecuted and punished for their wrongdoings that cost us Americans by a scope 1000s times greater; and if so what punishment would you recommend?

Lastly I noticed that you have expressed outrage and embarrasment at our First Lady for saying she had been embarressed of her country. Like me you indicated that you may not always agree with some of the USA's actions you were always proud of your country.
I saw your post the other day wherin you stated you had never been more embarressed of America.
When did the rules on being a Patriot change?

I hope you respond quickly as I leaving on a trip shortly, and I want to see you answer the ?s asked and prove Franco wrong when he says you change the subject when put on point
Have a great trip!!

smillerdvm
10-31-2012, 12:08 PM
Have a great trip!!

Game, set, match Franco

Thanks, I've been looking forward to this trip for a while.
10%, business 25% family & 65% pleasure.
Or at least thats the plan LOL

MooseGooser
10-31-2012, 12:18 PM
How bout these "facts"


Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein ordered the invasion and occupation of neighboring Kuwait in early August 1990. Alarmed by these actions, fellow Arab powers such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt called on the United States and other Western nations to intervene. Hussein defied United Nations Security Council demands to withdraw from Kuwait by mid-January 1991, and the Persian Gulf War began with a massive U.S.-led air offensive known as Operation Desert Storm. After 42 days of relentless attacks by the allied coalition in the air and on the ground, U.S. President George H.W. Bush declared a cease-fire on February 28; by that time, most Iraqi forces in Kuwait had either surrendered or fled. Though the Persian Gulf War was initially considered an unqualified success for the international coalition, simmering conflict in the troubled region led to a second Gulf War–known as the Iraq War–that began in 2003.

Before the IRAQ War began,,
Hussien continued to defy the world,, and the 20 U.N .resolutions.We gave him an Ultimatum to obey, supported by the U.N.
Since he didnt have WMD (Ya right,, he is on record using them on his own people) all he had to do was comply to inspections,, and not play the cat and mouse games he played.
He was a TYRANT..
He deccided to thumb his nose again.. Hussien paid the price... WHO was in a very good place to evade a violent situaion for his country?
Hussien conceeds to the UN demands,, His neck wouldnt be broke,,, and many people whod died,, (His Army) and didnt want to fight but surrender would haved lived to enjoy some sense of freedom as they do today...

Those are Facts... But I just bet you dont agree with with them.. It doesnt fit YOUR agenda!

Gooser

MooseGooser
10-31-2012, 12:25 PM
This is pretty factual also!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1Yff-_9MZs


The Constitution's first three words are "We The People"

They are NOT

"I, being Your King."

The President and/or, anyone involved,,,You need to tell the truth..

Gooser

MooseGooser
10-31-2012, 01:06 PM
And since he took that oath,,

which states
section 2
Sections 2-4

Section 2 of Article 2 of the Constitution deals with the duties of the president. The president's responsibilities include:


Commander in Chief of the armed forces and state militias when called to duty for the United States
The power to grant pardons or reprieves for offenses against the United States, excluding impeachments
The right to make treaties, with the consent of the Senate
The appointment of ambassadors, counsels, Supreme Court judges, and all officers of the United States government with the consent of the Senate

Section 3 of Article 2 of the Constitution involves State of the Union addresses. The president is required to inform Congress on a regular basis. He may also convene one or both houses during extraordinary circumstances.
Section 4 of Article 2 addresses impeachments. It states, "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

Since presidents appoints ambassadors,, the President answers for their protection. The Ambassador that is dead now,, Pleaded for extra protection.. He begged his boss for help... His Boss basically ignored him. It was the Bosses resposibility to act. he didnt. Its Constitutional law.. The Boss took the Oath..

In special circumstance causing confusion.. TheBoss is required to speak to the REPRESENTATIVES of the PEOPLE and clarify special circumstances...

He has the authority and the resposibility to do this..

How am I wrong?

Help Gooser understand..

Please!

JDogger
10-31-2012, 01:23 PM
http://dansdigitaldive.com/web/archives/605
Franco!! Be Carefull,,, Now you is useing tactics of a loosing debate by reverting to name calling..
Just sayin...:):) Bobbleheaded???:):)

AnyWAYS...




Woulds somebody help Gooser out with the grenade the Jdogger thew in the window, that he claimed would end all this discussion cause we was all confused about the difference of Embassys, Cousolates,, Seals,, and Former seals????

I dont get it! Jdogger please never tell Gooser to go to Google... I is worn out!

Please give us your explaination as to the point you were making...

Both an Embassy and a Counsolate are on soveirn ground.
http://dansdigitaldive.com/web/archives/605
I Kinda get your Seal and Former Seal point,, but here is How I look at it.

Innocent people who are protected by international law were being attacked, on a anniversary of a date where terrorist threw a sucker punch at those innocent peoples country... The FACT that those folks BEGGED for protection BEFORE the attack,,, and NOTHING was done,, is a HUGE concern to me as to the PRO ACTIVE preparedness of our current Administration...
Those folks were Americans attacked on Protected ground... We should have seen something like this comming...
What was the answer????? A VIDEO caused all this... REALLYYY???? and we locked a guy up for making it???? REALLY??


As Far as a Seal,, Or a Former Seal...

Jdogger,, if I have you as a neighbor,,, and I witness someone attacking you,, or robbing your house,, Orr I see you and your Family having trouble on the highway ,,broke down, needing help,,, I think there re some of us,, that answere to a higher calling,, that will step in and Help, and do the right thing, despite what labels that are put on us.. We just react. If the situation is dire enough,, we wont wait for the police,, an Official OK,, we understand, something has to be done at the criticle point in time..

I am appauled at the possiblity,, that Seals, Former Seals,, Ambassadors, Counsels, or just palin Americans died,, and maybe their last thoughts were of their country they were representing,, had abandoned them,, and they died alone... I just cant accept that!! I just cant!!,, and Now to have Politicians that prolly DO know what happened,, drag their feet and not give an explaination without a lot of double talk,, is an example of what we as Americans haves come to accept from our leaders....

We Elect them to Know!!! Their constitutional oath binds them to protect. Someone has to take responsiblity. Who do you think that would be??

Gooser
http://dansdigitaldive.com/web/archives/605

Franco
10-31-2012, 01:26 PM
Gooser, I don't think anyone is disagreeing with the fact that the administration was responsible for providing additional security for Stevens. The disagreement is over the Fox fabricated story that additional security was instructed to Stand Down.

In regards to Iraq, I was all for securing the WMD's. But, as I wrote here on RTF back in 2003, I was totally against nation building. My disagreement was in our policy of rebuilding Iraq that cost us so dearly in life and treasure. We were trying to make the Iraqis something they didn't want to be. A huge failure of the Bush/Cheney administartion and a big reason why we are in 16 TRILLION in debt today. Not to mention that we distrupted the balance of power in that region.

MooseGooser
10-31-2012, 02:01 PM
Gooser, I don't think anyone is disagreeing with the fact that the administration was responsible for providing additional security for Stevens. The disagreement is over the Fox fabricated story that additional security was instructed to Stand Down.

In regards to Iraq, I was all for securing the WMD's. But, as I wrote here on RTF back in 2003, I was totally against nation building. My disagreement was in our policy of rebuilding Iraq that cost us so dearly in life and treasure. We were trying to make the Iraqis something they didn't want to be. A huge failure of the Bush/Cheney administartion and a big reason why we are in 16 TRILLION in debt today. Not to mention that we distrupted the balance of power in that region.

I don't agree with you on either point, so in order to maintain that order , I suggest we just agree to dis agree.

i do want to say one thing though, if the admin had been doing their job,and upholding their oath, weight not be having this discussion of Benghazi. It might not have happened.who knows what would be the topic, if the -ambassador and staff had been evacuated days earlier?

pro active or reactive policy I guess

BonMallari
10-31-2012, 06:08 PM
Gooser, I don't think anyone is disagreeing with the fact that the administration was responsible for providing additional security for Stevens. The disagreement is over the Fox fabricated story that additional security was instructed to Stand Down.

.

Fabrication...is that what you are calling it now.....what do you call the story about the You Tube video starting the disturbance, that was originally floated by the WH and its talking heads and mouthpieces

just trying to get an idea of your terminology first before responding any further

Franco
10-31-2012, 07:35 PM
Fabrication...is that what you are calling it now.....what do you call the story about the You Tube video starting the disturbance, that was originally floated by the WH and its talking heads and mouthpieces

just trying to get an idea of your terminology first before responding any further

I think both stories are a bunch of crap!

You need to stop the selective reading! I said early on this thread that I hold the administration responsible for security.

Blaming it on a video was garbage and so is the exclusive Fox Report!

MooseGooser
10-31-2012, 08:27 PM
Since Jdogger likes to Cut and paste..

here is the Geneva convention sir:

Summary of provisionsThe treaty is an extensive document, containing 53 articles. Following is a basic overview of its key provisions.[2] (http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/#cite_note-1) For a comprehensive enumeration of all articles, consult the original text.[3] (http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/#cite_note-2)


Article 9. The host nation may at any time and for any reason declare a particular member of the diplomatic staff to be persona non grata (http://www.retrievertraining.net/wiki/Persona_non_grata). The sending state must recall this person within a reasonable period of time, or otherwise this person may lose their diplomatic immunity.
Article 22. The premises of a diplomatic mission, such as an embassy, are inviolate and must not be entered by the host country except by permission of the head of the mission. Furthermore, the host country must protect the mission from intrusion or damage. The host country must never search the premises, nor seize its documents or property. Article 30 extends this provision to the private residence of the diplomats.
Article 27. The host country must permit and protect free communication between the diplomats of the mission and their home country. A diplomatic bag (http://www.retrievertraining.net/wiki/Diplomatic_bag) must never be opened even on suspicion of abuse. A diplomatic courier (http://www.retrievertraining.net/wiki/Diplomatic_courier) must never be arrested or detained.
Article 29. Diplomats must not be liable to any form of arrest or detention. They are immune from civil or criminal prosecution, though the sending country may waive this right under Article 32. Under Article 34, they are exempt from most taxes, and under Article 36 they are exempt from most customs duties.
Article 31.1c Actions not covered by diplomatic immunity: professional activity outside diplomat's official functions.
Article 37. The family members of a diplomat that are living in the host country enjoy most of the same protections as the diplomats themselves.





You can spend the time and read my cut and paste:

Ambassadors or counsels cannot be detained arrested or convicted by a Host country. ( idont think Ya cam kill em either)
Their communications cannot be eliminated with their parent country either.. BOTH of which has happened..

The President holds command of those embassies and thire Ambasadors.

Quit cutting and pasting!!

Dont be afraid to expound YOUR views,,, It dont hurt much!! :):)

Ya still didnt explain what you thought the difference or confusion over a Embassy or a Counsolate would make with this discussion,, nor did yoy address the Seal or Former seal.

Gooser

M&K's Retrievers
10-31-2012, 09:19 PM
Gooser, I don't think anyone is disagreeing with the fact that the administration was responsible for providing additional security for Stevens. The disagreement is over the Fox fabricated story that additional security was instructed to Stand Down.

In regards to Iraq, I was all for securing the WMD's. But, as I wrote here on RTF back in 2003, I was totally against nation building. My disagreement was in our policy of rebuilding Iraq that cost us so dearly in life and treasure. We were trying to make the Iraqis something they didn't want to be. A huge failure of the Bush/Cheney administartion and a big reason why we are in 16 TRILLION in debt today. Not to mention that we distrupted the balance of power in that region.

Where is your proof that it is a fabricated story? You and Sambo are going to enjoy the time your going to spend in the duck blind reminiscing about all your sorry football predictions, election predictions and news predictions.

Franco
10-31-2012, 10:12 PM
Where is your proof that it is a fabricated story? You and Sambo are going to enjoy the time your going to spend in the duck blind reminiscing about all your sorry football predictions, election predictions and news predictions.

The fact that only a shoddy news organization like Fox would reported it is proof enough. Only the gullible fell for that sorry piece of journalism!

M&K's Retrievers
10-31-2012, 11:29 PM
The fact that only a shoddy news organization like Fox would reported it is proof enough. Only the gullible fell for that sorry piece of journalism!

Again, why should I or anyone else believe you? You complain about Bill O, Hannity and Greta but they are not news reporters. Are you saying that the rest of Fox reporters are lying? If they are lying, why has no one been sued? Why is no one denying the report? Are you certain you are not from Port St Lucie?

BonMallari
10-31-2012, 11:57 PM
The fact that only a shoddy news organization like Fox would reported it is proof enough. Only the gullible fell for that sorry piece of journalism!

But I thought you were a fan of the Fox Business Network...

JDogger
11-01-2012, 12:09 AM
Since Jdogger likes to Cut and paste..

here is the Geneva convention sir:

Summary of provisionsThe treaty is an extensive document, containing 53 articles. Following is a basic overview of its key provisions.[2] (http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/#cite_note-1) For a comprehensive enumeration of all articles, consult the original text.[3] (http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/#cite_note-2)


Article 9. The host nation may at any time and for any reason declare a particular member of the diplomatic staff to be persona non grata (http://www.retrievertraining.net/wiki/Persona_non_grata). The sending state must recall this person within a reasonable period of time, or otherwise this person may lose their diplomatic immunity.
Article 22. The premises of a diplomatic mission, such as an embassy, are inviolate and must not be entered by the host country except by permission of the head of the mission. Furthermore, the host country must protect the mission from intrusion or damage. The host country must never search the premises, nor seize its documents or property. Article 30 extends this provision to the private residence of the diplomats.
Article 27. The host country must permit and protect free communication between the diplomats of the mission and their home country. A diplomatic bag (http://www.retrievertraining.net/wiki/Diplomatic_bag) must never be opened even on suspicion of abuse. A diplomatic courier (http://www.retrievertraining.net/wiki/Diplomatic_courier) must never be arrested or detained.
Article 29. Diplomats must not be liable to any form of arrest or detention. They are immune from civil or criminal prosecution, though the sending country may waive this right under Article 32. Under Article 34, they are exempt from most taxes, and under Article 36 they are exempt from most customs duties.
Article 31.1c Actions not covered by diplomatic immunity: professional activity outside diplomat's official functions.
Article 37. The family members of a diplomat that are living in the host country enjoy most of the same protections as the diplomats themselves.





You can spend the time and read my cut and paste:

Ambassadors or counsels cannot be detained arrested or convicted by a Host country. ( idont think Ya cam kill em either)
Their communications cannot be eliminated with their parent country either.. BOTH of which has happened..

The President holds command of those embassies and thire Ambasadors.

Quit cutting and pasting!!

Dont be afraid to expound YOUR views,,, It dont hurt much!! :):)

Ya still didnt explain what you thought the difference or confusion over a Embassy or a Counsolate would make with this discussion,, nor did yoy address the Seal or Former seal.

Gooser

First, be accurate. It is not the Geneva convention it is; Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Diplomatic_Relations).
I have some time now to respond to you. I do not, unlike most here play on the internet at work, and I find my phone to be an imperfect platform.
I did not copy and paste anything ala Bill S. I suggested that you inform yourself via google and then provided a link to a blog that the author made an arguement regarding soverignty of embassies and consulates, and provided substantiating links. Draw your own conclusions. As you previously stated we "are free to disagree". I seek to change no one's view.
Has there been a "cover-up" on the events in Benghazi...I do not believe so. My opinion...and my opinion only. no one except those that were there knows what happened that night. Not me, not you, not Fox, nor anyone posting on the internet.
As to former Navy Seals...they were just that...former seals acting as hired security in a dangerous capicity, once a seal always a seal...sure...but they were not under orders of the Commander-in-Chief
JD

M&K's Retrievers
11-01-2012, 12:47 AM
First, be accurate. It is not the Geneva convention it is; Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Diplomatic_Relations).
I have some time now to respond to you. I do not, unlike most here play on the internet at work, and I find my phone to be an imperfect platform.
I did not copy and paste anything ala Bill S. I suggested that you inform yourself via google and then provided a link to a blog that the author made an arguement regarding soverignty of embassies and consulates, and provided substantiating links. Draw your own conclusions. As you previously stated we "are free to disagree". I seek to change no one's view.
Has there been a "cover-up" on the events in Benghazi...I do not believe so. My opinion...and my opinion only. no one except those that were there knows what happened that night. Not me, not you, not Fox, nor anyone posting on the internet.
As to former Navy Seals...they were just that...former seals acting as hired security in a dangerous capicity, once a seal always a seal...sure...but they were not under orders of the Commander-in-Chief
JD

Hugh, you might want to rethink that. If they were employed by the CIA they were under orders of the POTUS.

road kill
11-01-2012, 05:18 AM
I think both stories are a bunch of crap!

You need to stop the selective reading! I said early on this thread that I hold the administration responsible for security.

Blaming it on a video was garbage and so is the exclusive Fox Report!

I asked you that question several times, all I got was the Louisiana 2 step.
If the Whitehouse had ANY information, classified or otherwise, that exonerated Obama in this, it would be leaked!!!
That's all the people need to know...............

I don't know why you guys are debating this with Franco, smillerdvm has declared "Game, Set & Match Franco."

BWAAAA HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Like I said earlier, to the progressives, it isn't news until Dan Rather, Rachel, Chris, Whoopi, Joy and John Stewart say it is!!

Franco
11-01-2012, 06:32 AM
I asked you that question several times, all I got was the Louisiana 2 step.
If the Whitehouse had ANY information, classified or otherwise, that exonerated Obama in this, it would be leaked!!!
That's all the people need to know...............

I don't know why you guys are debating this with Franco, smillerdvm has declared "Game, Set & Match Franco."

BWAAAA HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Like I said earlier, to the progressives, it isn't news until Dan Rather, Rachel, Chris, Whoopi, Joy and John Stewart say it is!!

You reading comprehension has gone to pot!

You were the one trying to change the subject from the bogus Fox report to the video.

I said all along that the video excuse was a joke.

Then, the subject became the Fox story which you were defending. When you realized that there was a very high probablity that it was bogus, you switched your arguement back to the video!

Yes, game, set, match!

road kill
11-01-2012, 06:40 AM
You reading comprehension has gone to pot!

You were the one trying to change the subject from the bogus Fox report to the video.

I said all along that the video excuse was a joke.

Then, the subject became the Fox story which you were defending. When you realized that there was a very high probablity that it was bogus, you switched your arguement back to the video!

Yes, game, set, match!
You funny............

For the record, I think Fox has nailed it!!!
Someone messed up bad, at a very high level, maybe the highest.
If they had proof Obama was clean, it would be leaked!!!!!

Franco
11-01-2012, 07:00 AM
You funny............

For the record, I think Fox has nailed it!!!
Someone messed up bad, at a very high level, maybe the highest.
If they had proof Obama was clean, it would be leaked!!!!!

I've never said that the administration was clean.

However, when a 4 Star General, NSC, White House, The Pentagon and CIA all deny giving orders to "stand down", it's pretty clear that the Fox report is bogus!

huntinman
11-01-2012, 07:05 AM
I've never said that the administration was clean.

However, when a 4 Star General, NSC, White House, The Pentagon and CIA all deny giving orders to "stand down", it's pretty clear that the Fox report is bogus!

They all work for Obama, what else are they gonna say?

MooseGooser
11-01-2012, 07:28 AM
I've never said that the administration was clean.

However, when a 4 Star General, NSC, White House, The Pentagon and CIA all deny giving orders to "stand down", it's pretty clear that the Fox report is bogus!


Maybe they dont have to give an order to stand down. I"m not Military, but maybe the DEFAULT rule of engagement was, "You guys move on our order,, and not 1 second sooner"

Ambassador requested extra security BEFORE the attack,, People in charge KNEW in real time, the Embassy was under siege. Maybe there was a "Silent" Stand down..
SO,,,, Your Generals,White House, CIA can easily deny giving orders to stand down.
The buck stops at the President...

He is in a bad situation no matter what happens.. His JOB is to know! If he didnt know untill a very late hour, thats a concern for me,,, If he Did know,,, and this story is true,, And he used a Video as a cover,,,He should be forced out of office right now,,

These are people we elect to carry the resposibility as the Leaders of our country.. They speak for us. Its times like this that they earn their keep.

I agree with RoadKill,, If there was just a Speck of evidence, that the Presidents hands were clean,, and the FOX NEWS of all people were reporting a ficticious story just before an election,,, The PRESIDENT would be all over it,, and drivin the silver stake right through FOX news heart..

The silence on the matter,, only makes the President look more guilty.. He can clear all this up by addressing the people,, or Congress.. OR MORE IMPORTANTLY the Families of the dead.. Its just that simple..




We need to really start thinking who we decide to give this job to..

Mt negative ways of looking at things is, I dont believe that the folks that could really be good at it, dont want anything to do with it.. They are happy in the private sector,, doing just fine for a Ton more money...


Gooser

gmhr1
11-01-2012, 08:52 AM
According to Hannity last night, a few other news stations do have this information that won't go public with it because they dont want to hurt Obamas chances on Tues. The latest e mail came out dated back on Aug 15, it went to Hillary's desk saying they needed extra security. Obama made it to Jay Leno last week he has time to hold a qick press conference and tell us whats going on. He has not answered any of the Senator's that have written him demanding an answer, mums the word till after Tues.
The good thing is if he wins hopefully he will be impeached
email from Ambassador Stevens http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com/video/fox-news-catherine-herridge-and-rep-jason-chaffetz-on-the-record/

M&K's Retrievers
11-01-2012, 09:05 AM
I've never said that the administration was clean.

However, when a 4 Star General, NSC, White House, The Pentagon and CIA all deny giving orders to "stand down", it's pretty clear that the Fox report is bogus!


They denied it so that makes it true. It would take some doing but that may be the dumbest thing ever written on PP.

I never had sexual relations with that Lewinski woman.
I am not a crook.
You'll be able to keep your own health insurance.
Read my lips. No new taxes.
AHCA will save families $2500 a year.
We will have transparency.
No more lobbyists.
No more taxes on those families earning less than $250,000.

It's your BS that's bogus.

gmhr1
11-01-2012, 09:18 AM
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/documents-back-up-claims-of-requests-for-greater-security-in-benghazi/

Documents back up claims of requests for greater security in bengazhi

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/email-shows-state-department-rejecting-request-of-security-team-at-us-embassy-in-libya/
email from state dept rejecting request for security at US Embassy in Libya

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/10/26/why-is-abc-news-shielding-obama-over-benghazi-attack/
why is abc ignoring emails relating to Obama/Libya scandal?

Franco
11-01-2012, 09:50 AM
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/documents-back-up-claims-of-requests-for-greater-security-in-benghazi/

Documents back up claims of requests for greater security in bengazhi

I haven't read anywhere on POTUS where anyone disputed a request for more security.

MooseGooser
11-01-2012, 10:03 AM
I haven't read anywhere on POTUS where anyone disputed a request for more security.


But as far as I am concerned,, Thats the problem.. More so than the questionable E-mails.

The Ambassadors DID request more security. Like I said. Its the PRESIDENTS responsibility via the Constitution to protect those appointees. He ignored the request,, on an anniversary very dear to terroists. How can you explain that?? Again,,,, pro active or reactive.

Then the video B.S.

The president ingnored his job!! Turned his back on the people who work for us.. He took an Oath.. I bet he payed more attention to fund raising..




Gooser

gmhr1
11-01-2012, 10:10 AM
Biden/obama have both said they didnt know the request was ever made. The latest email went to the desk of Hillary of course they knew, even Hillary said she requested it obama denied it. We have a right to know before the election from his mouth what happened.

Franco
11-01-2012, 10:35 AM
My comments in red.


Maybe they dont have to give an order to stand down. I"m not Military, but maybe the DEFAULT rule of engagement was, "You guys move on our order,, and not 1 second sooner"

Ambassador requested extra security BEFORE the attack,, People in charge KNEW in real time, the Embassy was under siege. Maybe there was a "Silent" Stand down..
SO,,,, Your Generals,White House, CIA can easily deny giving orders to stand down.
The buck stops at the President...

He is in a bad situation no matter what happens.. His JOB is to know! If he didnt know untill a very late hour, thats a concern for me,,, If he Did know,,, and this story is true,, And he used a Video as a cover,,,He should be forced out of office right now,,

These are people we elect to carry the resposibility as the Leaders of our country.. They speak for us. Its times like this that they earn their keep.

I agree with RoadKill,, If there was just a Speck of evidence, that the Presidents hands were clean,, and the FOX NEWS of all people were reporting a ficticious story just before an election,,, The PRESIDENT would be all over it,, and drivin the silver stake right through FOX news heart.. Why would the President want to give creedence to a bogus story and address it? It has already been disputed by all the Fed agencies involved! A comprehensive investigation will take place. Only the Fox viewers are clamoring for this and the rest of the journalist world knows Fox is NOT the standard bearer for accuracy!

The silence on the matter,, only makes the President look more guilty.. He can clear all this up by addressing the people,, or Congress.. OR MORE IMPORTANTLY the Families of the dead.. Its just that simple.. No, it actually makes him look Presidential by not stooping to such accusations.

Which brings uo the point that smillerdvm brought up. Where was the outrage when all the intellegence prior to the attack on 9/11 was ignored by the Bush Administration?

Oh, I get it! Bush is a Repub and Obama is a Dem. Here is a clue, the mess we are in was created by both parties.




We need to really start thinking who we decide to give this job to.. I've already decided and it won't be Obamney!

Mt negative ways of looking at things is, I dont believe that the folks that could really be good at it, dont want anything to do with it.. They are happy in the private sector,, doing just fine for a Ton more money...


Gooser

gmhr1
11-01-2012, 11:01 AM
Two news sources have now reported that a major news organization has the Stand Down memo from the white house and will not release it until after the election if at all. Believe it or not. This happened under Obamas watch Bush has nothing to do with it. Its time to stop blaming him and blame the current adminstration they are corrupt just like the voting machines are taking Romney votes and giving them to obama now the rumor is the Justice dept may be involved in this.

media sitting on damning emails release them or be exposed.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/glenn-beck-to-media-outlets-sitting-on-damning-benghazi-emails-release-them-or-be-exposed/

voting machines romney to obama hour long special tonight they say Justice dept may be involved.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/more-electronic-voting-machines-changing-romney-votes-to-obama-we-looked-into-it-and-heres-what-a-vendor-told-us/

dixidawg
11-01-2012, 11:13 AM
the voting machines are taking Romney votes and giving them to obama now the rumor is the Justice dept is involved in this.

media sitting on damning emails release them or be exposed.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/glenn-beck-to-media-outlets-sitting-on-damning-benghazi-emails-release-them-or-be-exposed/

voting machines romney to obama hour long special tonight they say Justice dept is involved.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/more-electronic-voting-machines-changing-romney-votes-to-obama-we-looked-into-it-and-heres-what-a-vendor-told-us/


Well that's a relief. I have full confidence that Holder et al will get right on this and will have it all fixed before the election!

Franco
11-01-2012, 11:16 AM
Two news sources have now reported that a major news organization has the Stand Down memo from the white house and will not release it until after the election if at all. Believe it or not. This happened under Obamas watch Bush has nothing to do with it. Its time to stop blaming him and blame the current adminstration they are corrupt just like the voting machines are taking Romney votes and giving them to obama now the rumor is the Justice dept may be involved in this.

media sitting on damning emails release them or be exposed.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/glenn-beck-to-media-outlets-sitting-on-damning-benghazi-emails-release-them-or-be-exposed/

voting machines romney to obama hour long special tonight they say Justice dept may be involved.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/more-electronic-voting-machines-changing-romney-votes-to-obama-we-looked-into-it-and-heres-what-a-vendor-told-us/

Two? With the second being Glen Beck's website!

Aren't you interested in the truth?

gmhr1
11-01-2012, 11:20 AM
I like Glenn Beck. I dont think people will go on the record with this type of info unless they had the facts to back it up
Networks have emails ordering team to stand down:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/gingrich-senator-told-me-networks-have-emails-from-white-house-ordering-team-to-stand-down-on-benghazi-rescue/

Franco
11-01-2012, 11:26 AM
I like Glenn Beck. I dont think people will go on the record with this type of info unless they had the facts to back it up
Networks have emails ordering team to stand down:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/gingrich-senator-told-me-networks-have-emails-from-white-house-ordering-team-to-stand-down-on-benghazi-rescue/

Newt hinting at a rumor that other news organizations may have these email that are highly questionable, reported on Glen Beck's website!

That is funnier than anything on The Daily Show!

gmhr1
11-01-2012, 11:34 AM
If Obama would have the courage to come forward and be transparent like he promised we would have all the answers its only been 7 weeks now. He's on Leno, the View, Letterman, MTV, Politico , touring NJ, but he cannot answer one question on this.

Now the father of a second dead Navy Seal has come forward and he's very angry at Obama , as he should be.

Franco
11-01-2012, 11:37 AM
If Obama would have the courage to come forward and be transparent like he promised we would have all the answers its only been 7 weeks now. He's on Leno, the View, Letterman, MTV, Politico , touring NJ, but he cannot answer one question on this.

The White House, the CIA, the Pentagon all responded to the allegations of the "stand down" email.

We have a system of Due Process and if the administration is lying, that will come out.

gmhr1
11-01-2012, 11:40 AM
The truth will come out but not until after the election, thats the problem. We have a right to know who our Commander in Chief really is before we vote.

Franco
11-01-2012, 11:52 AM
The truth will come out but not until after the election, thats the problem. We have a right to know who our Commander in Chief really is before we vote.

No, the problem is that you are not interested in the truth! You and the rest of the RTF mob have convicted the man based on a highly questionable email that only one news source, known for airing unsubstantiated stories has put forth. We are not a nation of the mob, like the one that killed Stevens. We are a nation of laws!

I don't like Obama but, I am willing to go through the process of law.

gmhr1
11-01-2012, 12:10 PM
The dead navy seals could have used his new 15 minute rule http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/the-dead-navy-seals-could-have-used-obamas-new-15-minute-rule/ he rushes to Jersey but cannot answer one question on bengazhi . Don't you think it would help his campaign if he would give the press a 5 min interview and set the record straight. A high percentage of people say this cover up is going to effect their vote so why not come clean? He can't, because if he does the election is over. We want the truth since when is this to much to ask for from the President of the United States?

Franco
11-01-2012, 01:34 PM
The dead navy seals could have used his new 15 minute rule http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/the-dead-navy-seals-could-have-used-obamas-new-15-minute-rule/ he rushes to Jersey but cannot answer one question on bengazhi . Don't you think it would help his campaign if he would give the press a 5 min interview and set the record straight. A high percentage of people say this cover up is going to effect their vote so why not come clean? He can't, because if he does the election is over. We want the truth since when is this to much to ask for from the President of the United States?

What part of; The White House, The Pentagon, the CIA the NSC have all denied the Fox story regarding the order to "Stand Down" don't you understand?

gmhr1
11-01-2012, 01:39 PM
I understand the Wh house, the Pentagon, CIA and NSC all denying the story its called a cover up . They want nothing to come out until after Tuesday. What part of stonewalling dont you understand? They can deny it all they want if there is an email from the WH saying to Stand down its all over for Obama. The mainstream news knows that, they are in bed with Obama and will not put any news out now that will hurt his chances.

Franco
11-01-2012, 01:46 PM
The dead navy seals could have used his new 15 minute rule http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/the-dead-navy-seals-could-have-used-obamas-new-15-minute-rule/ he rushes to Jersey but cannot answer one question on bengazhi . Don't you think it would help his campaign if he would give the press a 5 min interview and set the record straight. A high percentage of people say this cover up is going to effect their vote so why not come clean? He can't, because if he does the election is over. We want the truth since when is this to much to ask for from the President of the United States?

Again, What part of; The White House, The Pentagon, the CIA the NSC have all denied the Fox story regarding the order to "Stand Down" don't you understand?

The rule of the mob will not prevail in the USA! And, as far as Glen Beck's webiste, I suggested you would be better off believing in the Tooth Fairy!

gmhr1
11-01-2012, 01:56 PM
You can believe the tooth fairy or believe Obama its all the same. They will deny this story all the way to his impeachment. Thank God for Fox news or this would all just go the way of the rest of obamas rot. Mainstream media would not touch this with a ten foot pole.
Its not fox that has the email from the White house with the stand down order, its a major news organization & they will only be able to hide it for so long. Just wait and watch.

Some people had a hard time believing this as well
Clinton wanted more security (http://nation.foxnews.com/hillary-clinton/2012/10/26/report-hillary-asked-more-security-benghazi-obama-said-no#ixzz2ARGHdkoE) but Obama said "no."
It is possible that Clinton's legal counsel may have revealed this story to various sources, in hopes of protecting her reputation. Reports also indicate that former President Bill Clinton has urged his wife to release State Department documents "that prove she called for additional security at the compound in Libya."
Those same, unconfirmed reports indicate Obama will almost certainly lose the election if those documents are released.

helencalif
11-01-2012, 02:27 PM
Remember Fast & Furious? The Dept of Justice sent an official letter to the congressional oversight committee saying that there was no gun running into Mexico. That was in Feb. They finally admitted it was a lie 11 months later. The DOJ said they would find who was responsible for this failed program and that there would be accountability. What did the DOJ do? They promoted and transferred those responsible. There was no accountability even though their own Inspector General named some of the names.

helencalif
11-01-2012, 02:29 PM
The truth will eventually come out. Perhaps not before the election.

HPL
11-01-2012, 03:08 PM
The truth will eventually come out. Perhaps not before the election.

Certainly not before the election.

luvmylabs23139
11-01-2012, 06:35 PM
CBS is finally covering the story.


CBS News has learned that during the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Obama Administration did not convene its top interagency counterterrorism resource: the Counterterrorism Security Group, (CSG).


"The CSG is the one group that's supposed to know what resources every agency has. They know of multiple options and have the ability to coordinate counterterrorism assets across all the agencies," a high-ranking government official told CBS News. "They were not allowed to do their job. They were not called upon."

M&K's Retrievers
11-01-2012, 07:26 PM
What part of; The White House, The Pentagon, the CIA the NSC have all denied the Fox story regarding the order to "Stand Down" don't you understand?

What portion of post #138 is so difficult for you to comprehend? Are you really naive enough to believe that an administration that has deflected the truth during it's entire "transparent" administration is squeaky clean in this instance?

You must have had some training from Obama. Whenever anyone contradicts your bogus theories, you turn tail and ignore the post because you have no meaningful retort.

Port St. Lucie regards,

Franco
11-01-2012, 07:51 PM
What portion of post #138 is so difficult for you to comprehend? Are you really naive enough to believe that an administration that has deflected the truth during it's entire "transparent" administration is squeaky clean in this instance?

You must have had some training from Obama. Whenever anyone contradicts your bogus theories, you turn tail and ignore the post because you have no meaningful retort.

Port St. Lucie regards,

You really do have a problem with reading comprehension and possible need meds for your delusions!

I have said repeatedly said that the adminstration did not anticipate or provide adequate security.

WHAT I HAVE CALLED INTO QUESTION IS THE FOX NEWS REPORT WHERE THEY CLAIMED HELP WAS IN PLACE AND TOLD TO STAND DOWN!

From the same CBS Report...

"Forces were positioned after the fact but not much good to those that needed it," the military source told CBS News

M&K's Retrievers
11-01-2012, 09:24 PM
You really do have a problem with reading comprehension and possible need meds for your delusions!

I have said repeatedly said that the adminstration did not anticipate or provide adequate security.

WHAT I HAVE CALLED INTO QUESTION IS THE FOX NEWS REPORT WHERE THEY CLAIMED HELP WAS IN PLACE AND TOLD TO STAND DOWN!

From the same CBS Report...

"Forces were positioned after the fact but not much good to those that needed it," the military source told CBS News

No, what you said was that Obama, the CIA, etc. all denied any knowledge of the request for help and that the Fox story was bogus. I merely pointed out that the government has lied on numerous occasions before so why should we believe their denials now and automatically call the Fox report false.

You are incorrect. You know it and can't figure a way out. Kinda like Obama.

Franco
11-01-2012, 09:33 PM
No, what you said was that Obama, the CIA, etc. all denied any knowledge of the request for help and that the Fox story was bogus. I merely pointed out that the government has lied on numerous occasions before so why should we believe their denials now and automatically call the Fox report false.

You are incorrect. You know it and can't figure a way out. Kinda like Obama.

You must be drinking or off your meds.

I said that the White House, CIA, Pentagon denied the Fox Report.

Go back, read my post and quit making BS up! The Fox report IS bogus. Deal with it!

Once again...
From the same CBS Report...

"Forces were positioned after the fact but not much good to those that needed it," the military source told CBS News

Franco
11-01-2012, 09:38 PM
I've never said that the administration was clean.

However, when a 4 Star General, NSC, White House, The Pentagon and CIA all deny giving orders to "stand down", it's pretty clear that the Fox report is bogus!

Here it is MK. Maybe someone in your household can read it to you!

M&K's Retrievers
11-01-2012, 09:59 PM
Here it is MK. Maybe someone in your household can read it to you!

If you can't figure it out then just maybe that explains why you can't handle spell check either. I'll go real sloooow for you.

1. You said the 4 star general, NCS, White House, The Pentagon and CIA all deny giving orders to stand down.

2. I replied that the government (not just Obama) is famous for lying and cited a few examples. Why should we believe them and not Fox.

It's simple really. Your first guy lost-didn't even come close. Your next hope -GJ- will not even be a foot note in history. You can't stand that no one listens to you just like no listened to RP.

I can't help but wonder what you are going to say when and if the Fox report is proven true and the MSM is shown for the Obama loving entity they are for refusing to report the news because of their agenda.

Franco
11-01-2012, 10:06 PM
For a third time...

From the same CBS Report...

"Forces were positioned after the fact but not much good to those that needed it," the military source told CBS News

Believe what you want but, I'll take CBS's word over Fox News' seven days a week!

M&K's Retrievers
11-01-2012, 10:53 PM
For a third time...

From the same CBS Report...

"Forces were positioned after the fact but not much good to those that needed it," the military source told CBS News

Believe what you want but, I'll take CBS's word over Fox News' seven days a week!

Why? They are part of the Obama suck up MSM. You really don't have a clue do you?

Franco
11-01-2012, 11:05 PM
Why? They are part of the Obama suck up MSM. You really don't have a clue do you?

Why, because they don't fabricated stories for the extreme right?

M&K's Retrievers
11-02-2012, 12:07 AM
Why, because they don't fabricated stories for the extreme right?

Apparently they don't report all they know.

Eric Johnson
11-02-2012, 08:28 AM
For a third time...

Believe what you want but, I'll take CBS's word over Fox News' seven days a week!

I'll cite but one example....

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-665727.html

http://tinyurl.com/aq22phr

CBS Ousts 4 For Bush Guard Story

Four CBS News employees, including three executives, have been ousted for their role in preparing and reporting a disputed story about President Bush's National Guard service.

The action was prompted by the report of an independent panel that concluded that CBS News failed to follow basic journalistic principles in the preparation and reporting of the piece. The panel also said CBS News had compounded that failure with a "rigid and blind" defense of the 60 Minutes Wednesday report.

Asked to resign were Senior Vice President Betsy West, who supervised CBS News primetime programs; 60 Minutes Wednesday Executive Producer Josh Howard; and Howard's deputy, Senior Broadcast Producer Mary Murphy. The producer of the piece, Mary Mapes, was terminated.

"We deeply regret the disservice this flawed 60 Minutes Wednesday report did to the American public, which has a right to count on CBS News for fairness and accuracy," said CBS Chairman Leslie Moonves.

-more-

huntinman
11-02-2012, 08:32 AM
I'll cite but one example....

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-665727.html

http://tinyurl.com/aq22phr

CBS Ousts 4 For Bush Guard Story

Four CBS News employees, including three executives, have been ousted for their role in preparing and reporting a disputed story about President Bush's National Guard service.

The action was prompted by the report of an independent panel that concluded that CBS News failed to follow basic journalistic principles in the preparation and reporting of the piece. The panel also said CBS News had compounded that failure with a "rigid and blind" defense of the 60 Minutes Wednesday report.

Asked to resign were Senior Vice President Betsy West, who supervised CBS News primetime programs; 60 Minutes Wednesday Executive Producer Josh Howard; and Howard's deputy, Senior Broadcast Producer Mary Murphy. The producer of the piece, Mary Mapes, was terminated.

"We deeply regret the disservice this flawed 60 Minutes Wednesday report did to the American public, which has a right to count on CBS News for fairness and accuracy," said CBS Chairman Leslie Moonves.

-more-

Ouch... Truth hurts...

road kill
11-02-2012, 08:44 AM
For a third time...

From the same CBS Report...

"Forces were positioned after the fact but not much good to those that needed it," the military source told CBS News

Believe what you want but, I'll take CBS's word over Fox News' seven days a week!

Doesn't THIS guy work for CBS????
Did HE get fired????

http://i571.photobucket.com/albums/ss156/puzzled11/92257__dan_l.jpg

Killian Documents regards..............


Game Set & Match.....road kill!!!!!:cool:

Franco
11-02-2012, 08:50 AM
I'll cite but one example....

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-665727.html

http://tinyurl.com/aq22phr

CBS Ousts 4 For Bush Guard Story

Four CBS News employees, including three executives, have been ousted for their role in preparing and reporting a disputed story about President Bush's National Guard service.

The action was prompted by the report of an independent panel that concluded that CBS News failed to follow basic journalistic principles in the preparation and reporting of the piece. The panel also said CBS News had compounded that failure with a "rigid and blind" defense of the 60 Minutes Wednesday report.

Asked to resign were Senior Vice President Betsy West, who supervised CBS News primetime programs; 60 Minutes Wednesday Executive Producer Josh Howard; and Howard's deputy, Senior Broadcast Producer Mary Murphy. The producer of the piece, Mary Mapes, was terminated.

"We deeply regret the disservice this flawed 60 Minutes Wednesday report did to the American public, which has a right to count on CBS News for fairness and accuracy," said CBS Chairman Leslie Moonves.

-more-

No news operation is perfect. At least CBS fired those involved. Fox did boot Beck out but, this current faux story regarding "stand down" has been disputed by just about very media except the the ones that cater to the far right. Including news sources that do not offer opinions!

The topic is about the Fox News "stand down" story. Should we drag up all the false news stories in the past by Fox, Briebart, NBC etc?

M&K's Retrievers
11-02-2012, 09:20 AM
No news operation is perfect. At least CBS fired those involved. Fox did boot Beck out but, this current faux story regarding "stand down" has been disputed by just about very media except the the ones that cater to the far right. Including news sources that do not offer opinions!

The topic is about the Fox News "stand down" story. Should we drag up all the false news stories in the past by Fox, Briebart, NBC etc?

Let the wiggling begin.

MooseGooser
11-02-2012, 09:20 AM
This is all such a friggin waste of time!

We are all convinced what we want to believe..

The only voice you have is to get out and VOTE!!

Gettin in a yellin match with Gooser,, Franco,, GMHR1,, Jdogger,, is a huge waste of stale air..

Grow up!!! Realise its either gonna be a Republican or a Democrate in the white house.
Pick the constituancy that Fits your beleifs best,, and VOTE. for one or the other.

Its so very clear..

Do you believe in limited government,, or do you believe in growing government?

Do you support Unions and collective barganing?,, or do you believe in Private enterprise and competition?

Do you have a strong belief in the Costitution and the second ammendment,, or do you believe that ammendment has to have strict ,oppresive, controlls?


These are just a few points where the 2 different parts constituencies differ clearly, as night and day...

Its seems so easy to make a decision and vote...

This Banter about ALL NEWS AGENCIES,, that have become Editorial entertainment programs,, is just a HUGE waste of time.....

VOTE!!!!


Its the Only TRUE Way Gooser has of Stickin it to the Left!!,, and they cant do anything about it..

Gooser

Franco
11-02-2012, 09:31 AM
Let the wiggling begin.

Ain't no wigglin'. Fox aired a bogus piece on "stand down" period!

Buzz
11-02-2012, 09:44 AM
This is all such a friggin waste of time!

We are all convinced what we want to believe..

The only voice you have is to get out and VOTE!!

Gettin in a yellin match with Gooser,, Franco,, GMHR1,, Jdogger,, is a huge waste of stale air..

Gooser

What is so ridiculous about RTF is the close mindedness. Each side assumes that the other is wrong because they just want them to be.

Take this topic for instance. From the beginning I have been shaking my head because the other side figures that there are secrets being kept to protect Obama. How about maybe the truth not getting out IMMEDIATELY to protect classified sources??? I just read an interesting article this morning. From the article:


In the first days after the attack, various administration officials linked the Benghazi incident to the simultaneous protests around the Muslim world over an American-made film that ridiculed Islam's Prophet Muhammad. Only later did they publicly attribute it to militants, possibly linked to al-Qaida, and acknowledged it was distinct from the film protests. The changing explanations have led to suspicions that the administration didn't want to acknowledge a terror attack on U.S. personnel so close to the Nov. 6 election, a charge Obama has strongly denied.

On Thursday, intelligence officials said they had early information that the attackers had ties to al-Qaida-linked groups but did not make it public immediately because it was based on classified intelligence. And they said the early public comments about the attack and its genesis were cautious and limited, as they routinely are in such incidents.

http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20121101/US.US.Libya/

Rmoney and Faux try to play the worst kind of politics with a tragedy, and a big part of the population is susceptible to it because they suffer from Obama Derangement Syndrome.

gmhr1
11-02-2012, 09:45 AM
The President, Clinton and Gen Petraeus sat in the situation room in the WH watching in realtime the whole attack for 7+ hours and no help came so thats a BIG problem.
I agree all we can do is vote. Greata had Senators on last night that said no matter who wins this will not go away they will get to the truth.

huntinman
11-02-2012, 09:46 AM
What is so ridiculous about RTF is the close mindedness. Each side assumes that the other is wrong because they just want them to be.

Take this topic for instance. From the beginning I have been shaking my head because the other side figures that there are secrets being kept to protect Obama. How about maybe the truth not getting out IMMEDIATELY to protect classified sources??? I just read an interesting article this morning. From the article:



http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20121101/US.US.Libya/

Rmoney and Faux try to play the worst kind of politics with a tragedy, and a big part of the population is susceptible to it because they suffer from Obama Derangement Syndrome.

Pot, meet kettle...

Buzz
11-02-2012, 09:47 AM
No news operation is perfect. At least CBS fired those involved. Fox did boot Beck out but, this current faux story regarding "stand down" has been disputed by just about very media except the the ones that cater to the far right. Including news sources that do not offer opinions!

The topic is about the Fox News "stand down" story. Should we drag up all the false news stories in the past by Fox, Briebart, NBC etc?

Franco. I have tried this over the last few years here. I have no idea why I still try. It makes absolutely no impact. All I manage to do get people po'd at me.

road kill
11-02-2012, 09:47 AM
What is so ridiculous about RTF is the close mindedness. Each side assumes that the other is wrong because they just want them to be.

Take this topic for instance. From the beginning I have been shaking my head because the other side figures that there are secrets being kept to protect Obama. How about maybe the truth not getting out IMMEDIATELY to protect classified sources??? That might be feasible, except for the video claims, which you and Franco 2 step around very nicely!! I just read an interesting article this morning. From the article:



http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20121101/US.US.Libya/

Rmoney and Faux try to play the worst kind of politics with a tragedy, and a big part of the population is susceptible to it because they suffer from Obama Derangement Syndrome.
I agree with your opening statement 100%.

You have never even tried to understand where someone like me is coming from.

Buzz
11-02-2012, 09:47 AM
Pot, meet kettle...

Right back at ya.

Buzz
11-02-2012, 09:48 AM
I agree with your opening statement 100%.

You have never even tried to understand where someone like me is coming from.

Not that I haven't tried. I just can't seem to wrap my mind around it though.

road kill
11-02-2012, 09:51 AM
Not that I haven't tried. I just can't seem to wrap my mind around it though.
Trust me, I earned it, just like you.

I know I am not as smart as you, as accomplished, as well read or traveled etc.:rolleyes:

But I still get to be me..........:cool:

huntinman
11-02-2012, 09:58 AM
Trust me, I earned it, just like you.

I know I am not as smart as you, as accomplished, as well read or traveled etc.:rolleyes:

But I still get to be me..........:cool:


Stan, you be a good conservative now and listen to the intellectually superior libs now you hear?

M&K's Retrievers
11-02-2012, 10:12 AM
This is all such a friggin waste of time!

...
The only voice you have is to get out and VOTE!!

Gettin in a yellin match with Gooser,, Franco,, GMHR1,, Jdogger,, is a huge waste of stale air..

....
This Banter about ALL NEWS AGENCIES,, that have become Editorial entertainment programs,, is just a HUGE waste of time.....

VOTE!!!!


Its the Only TRUE Way Gooser has of Stickin it to the Left!!,, and they cant do anything about it..

Gooser

Gooser, the majority of stuff on PP is a complete waste of time. It's just something to do.

As far as voting, done last Friday. Small but steady crowd of voters. Took maybe 15 minutes. Think they would let me vote again? :p

starjack
11-02-2012, 10:14 AM
Stan, you be a good conservative now and listen to the intellectually superior libs now you hear?Off subject nice muley How big?

Buzz
11-02-2012, 10:20 AM
Trust me, I earned it, just like you.

I know I am not as smart as you, as accomplished, as well read or traveled etc.:rolleyes:

But I still get to be me..........:cool:

Really? You're going to play that card? I'm a hick from nowhere South Dakota...

Marvin S
11-02-2012, 10:36 AM
Really? You're going to play that card? I'm a hick from nowhere South Dakota...

You can't even play that card :p. U R from MI, & it shows :rolleyes: :). Even UB won't claim U :-P.

Buzz
11-02-2012, 10:40 AM
You can't even play that card :p. U R from MI, & it shows :rolleyes: :). Even UB won't claim U :-P.

Been here 11 years now. Before that I was in Cincinnati for 10. Twenty one years, I barely even remember Michigan.

MooseGooser
11-02-2012, 10:40 AM
The President, Clinton and Gen Petraeus sat in the situation room in the WH watching in realtime the whole attack for 7+ hours and no help came so thats a BIG problem.
I agree all we can do is vote. Greata had Senators on last night that said no matter who wins this will not go away they will get to the truth.


No only will this Failer of Foreign Polocy not go away,, Nor will the debt,,nor will the spending, nor will the Hurricane Victims..

Romney will spend... It will be up to those we vote into the congress,, mainly those Tea party guys,, to hold his feet to the fire.
The Platform is on less government.. He has to be held to that .

The vote for President isnt a vote for King..


All this Political bickering bothers Gooser. There are serious problems afoot. They need fixed.
Its not about Fox, ABC, NBC,, its about America and our way of life. Its about the Constitution,, and the founding fathers, and what we as Americans represent.

We are ALL in this together.. We All know we cant spend money we dont have.. We learn this in our daily lives..
We know we cant depend on Foreign oil,, or depend on technologies that are decades down the road. We need oil NOW!

Just look at the hurricane situation.. Thet have been without fuel for 3 days! Look what happens...

We need our own,, without a bunch of regualtion on it,, to SURVIVE.

WE NEED to VOTE

road kill
11-02-2012, 10:49 AM
Been here 11 years now. Before that I was in Cincinnati for 10. Twenty one years, I barely even remember Michigan.
See......you are very well traveled!!
Some of the most exotic places on earth!!!!

luvmylabs23139
11-02-2012, 10:49 AM
Really? You're going to play that card? I'm a hick from nowhere South Dakota...

YOU come off as as one of those Obama know's it all superiors. If a person on Potus doesn't kiss the "King's" butt we are are either a racist or a backwoods hick in your mind.
I really don't care what you call me, and you have called me many things.
I will stand by my principles no matter what.
There is no way the gov't should take my hard earned money and give what DH and I busted our butts for to them for nothing. I don't care about white, black, purple, whatever. WE did it by ourselves, and I will never support what we worked hard for being paid for by my hard earned money.

huntinman
11-02-2012, 10:50 AM
Off subject nice muley How big?

Thanks starjack, he is tall, but not all that wide... gross about 175" My Whitetail from KS a couple of years ago is actually much heavier, about the same width, just not as tall and they both score about the same... there are plenty of bigger ones out there... I just didn't catch up with them...

charly_t
11-02-2012, 03:19 PM
This is all such a friggin waste of time!

We are all convinced what we want to believe..

The only voice you have is to get out and VOTE!!

Gettin in a yellin match with Gooser,, Franco,, GMHR1,, Jdogger,, is a huge waste of stale air..

Grow up!!! Realise its either gonna be a Republican or a Democrate in the white house.
Pick the constituancy that Fits your beleifs best,, and VOTE. for one or the other.

Its so very clear..

Do you believe in limited government,, or do you believe in growing government?

Do you support Unions and collective barganing?,, or do you believe in Private enterprise and competition?

Do you have a strong belief in the Costitution and the second ammendment,, or do you believe that ammendment has to have strict ,oppresive, controlls?


These are just a few points where the 2 different parts constituencies differ clearly, as night and day...

Its seems so easy to make a decision and vote...

This Banter about ALL NEWS AGENCIES,, that have become Editorial entertainment programs,, is just a HUGE waste of time.....

VOTE!!!!


Its the Only TRUE Way Gooser has of Stickin it to the Left!!,, and they cant do anything about it..

Gooser

Excellent post ! x2

Golddogs
11-02-2012, 04:04 PM
The President, Clinton and Gen Petraeus sat in the situation room in the WH watching in realtime the whole attack for 7+ hours and no help came so thats a BIG problem. WRONG
I agree all we can do is vote. Greata had Senators on last night that said no matter who wins this will not go away they will get to the truth.


The below will require you to read a bit, but it might show you that not all the Fox information was or is reliable and that a reason can exist for information of a sesitive nature to be fully reported. It can also show that an open mind is sometimes required when events like this take place and that Fox news and agenda driven web reports might not be the best way to form opinions. Spinning a tragedy like this is as low as a party can get.

CIA reportedly rushed to aid besieged American consulate

Revelations come amid GOP accusations that the White House has been misleading public


By Greg Miller

Washington Post

WASHINGTON — The CIA rushed security operatives to an American diplomatic compound in Libya within 25 minutes after it had come under attack and played a more central role in the effort to fend off a nightlong siege than has been acknowledged publicly, U.S. intelligence officials said Thursday.

The agency mobilized the evacuation effort, took control of an unarmed U.S. military drone to map possible escape routes, dispatched an emergency security team from Tripoli, the capital, and chartered aircraft that ultimately carried surviving American personnel to safety, U.S. officials said.

The account provided by senior U.S. intelligence officials offers the most detailed chronology yet of the Sept. 11 assault that killed the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three
See LIBYA on Page A10 (javascript:parent.contents.setPJumpName("LIBYA");javascript:parent.contents.setPJumpDirection("1");javascript:parent.contents.gotoPage("A","A10");)


other Americans. The attack has become a flash point in the presidential campaign.

The decision to give a comprehensive account of the attack five days before the election is likely to be regarded with suspicion, particularly among Republicans who have accused the Obama administration of misleading the public by initially describing the assault as a spontaneous eruption that began as a protest of an anti-Islamic video.

U.S. officials said they decided to offer a detailed account of the CIA’s role to rebut media reports that have suggested agency leaders delayed sending help to State Department officials seeking to fend off a heavily armed mob.

Instead, U.S. intelligence officials said CIA operatives in Benghazi and Tripoli made decisions rapidly throughout the assault with no interference from Washington.

“ There was no secondguessing those decisions being made on the ground, by people at every U.S. organization that could play a role in assisting those in danger,” a senior U.S. intelligence official said in a statement that summarized the chronology of the attack and was made available to the media.

The information does not address the main source of political controversy surrounding the siege: the shifting assessments offered by administration officials over whether the assault was a protest that turned violent or a planned terrorist attack.

But officials reiterated that the initial intelligence was fragmentary and contradictory. They said talking points for members of Congress and senior administration officials did not discuss possible links between the attackers and al-Qaida because the information was classified.

“It wasn’t until after the points were used in public that people reconciled contradictory information and assessed there probably wasn’t a protest around the time of the attack,” the senior U.S. intelligence official said.

The briefing and material provided Thursday focused on the hour-by-hour developments in Benghazi. Among the disclosures is the CIA station chief in Tripoli sent a security force, with about a half-dozen operatives and two U.S. military personnel to Benghazi aboard a hastily chartered aircraft while the attack was under way.

The team arrived after midnight and attempted to organize an effort to make its way to a hospital where U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens had been taken.

But the team was held up by a combination of the time required to secure transportation and arms from U.S.allied militias, new reports that the ambassador was probably already dead and uncertainty about the security situation at the hospital.

The annex in Benghazi to which U.S. diplomatic personnel were evacuated was a CIA base established as its first stronghold in Libya before Moammar Gadhafi was overthrown last year.

U.S. officials said the CIA base learned of the assault on the nearby diplomatic compound in a desperate phone call about 9:40 p.m.

CIA security operatives assembled their gear and lined up vehicles even while agency officials sought, without success, to enlist Libyan militias that had been hired to provide security for the diplomatic outpost in Benghazi.

“Over the next 25 minutes, team members approach the compound, attempt to secure heavy weapons” from Libyans encountered along the way and “make their way onto the compound itself in the face of enemy fire,” the senior U.S. intelligence official said.

Shortly after 11 p.m., an unarmed Predator drone diverted from another mission arrived over Benghazi and began providing video surveillance.

The CIA operatives appear to have been part of a broader group of U.S. security personnel and Libyan guards who made several attempts to fight their way into a structure known as “Villa C,” which served as the safe house and the VIP residence for the mission, and where Stevens had taken cover. Each time, the would-be rescuers were forced to retreat from heavy smoke and flames that had engulfed the structure.

By 11:30 p.m., “all U.S. personnel, except for the missing U.S. ambassador, depart the mission,” the U.S. intelligence official said. “The exiting vehicles come under fire.”

By then, attackers had also descended on the CIA compound, about a mile from the diplomatic facility. The “annex,” as the CIA base was known in internal documents, continued to come under small-arms and rocket fire sporadically over the next 90 minutes.

Then, about 1 a.m., the siege went suddenly quiet, a pause that would last until near daybreak, apparently leading CIA and State Department officials to think that the danger had passed.

In the “predawn time frame, that team at the airport finally manages to secure transportation and armed escort and — having learned that the ambassador was almost certainly dead — heads to the annex to assist with the evacuation,” the official said.

The team arrived, accompanied by Libyan security elements, at 5:15 a.m., “just before the mortar rounds begin to hit the annex,” the official said. Other accounts have suggested that multiple mortars were aimed at the site, initially missing their target before striking the roof, where guards had taken position and were returning fire.

Two CIA contractors, both former Navy SEALs, were killed: Tyrone Woods, a security officer based in Benghazi, and Glen Doherty, who was part of the team rushed by air from Tripoli. "





"

gmhr1
11-02-2012, 04:11 PM
Thats why as Tyrone Woods dad puts it.... something stinks....A cover up. they need to get to the truth before or after the election. . Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. consulate and subsequent attack several hours later was denied by U.S. officials -- who also told the CIA operators twice to "stand down" rather than help the ambassador's team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.
Former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods was part of a small team who was at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When he and others heard the shots fired, they informed their higher-ups at the annex to tell them what they were hearing and requested permission to go to the consulate and help out. They were told to "stand down," according to sources familiar with the exchange. Soon after, they were again told to "stand down."
Woods and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the consulate which at that point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The rescue team from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight.

MooseGooser
11-02-2012, 05:44 PM
Gold dogs

With all due respect,,, Same ol song and dance about arguing WHO is reporting News..

Washinton Post.... Very Liberal slant... You know they will find someone to help cover their side..

Its all a waste of time...

http://www.mrc.org/node/29251

Gooser

JDogger
11-02-2012, 06:07 PM
Gold dogs

With all due respect,,, Same ol song and dance about arguing WHO is reporting News..

Washinton Post.... Very Liberal slant... You know they will find someone to help cover their side..

Its all a waste of time...

http://www.mrc.org/node/29251

Gooser

Still wasting your time, Mike? I voted early today since I have a 9AM doctor's appointment Tuesday. I think I'll scout some ducks tomorrow since they just flooded the Rio Grande yesterday, but it's still in the high 60's, low 70's here in the MRGV, (GW?) and the NMDG&F reports only small migration beginning, and give PP a rest.

:cool: Yeah sure....JD

BTW Golddogs good post. Something rings true about the timelines and reactions of personnel in regards Benghazi.

Franco
11-02-2012, 06:35 PM
The below will require you to read a bit, but it might show you that not all the Fox information was or is reliable and that a reason can exist for information of a sesitive nature to be fully reported. It can also show that an open mind is sometimes required when events like this take place and that Fox news and agenda driven web reports might not be the best way to form opinions. Spinning a tragedy like this is as low as a party can get.

CIA reportedly rushed to aid besieged American consulate

Revelations come amid GOP accusations that the White House has been misleading public


By Greg Miller

Washington Post

WASHINGTON — The CIA rushed security operatives to an American diplomatic compound in Libya within 25 minutes after it had come under attack and played a more central role in the effort to fend off a nightlong siege than has been acknowledged publicly, U.S. intelligence officials said Thursday.

The agency mobilized the evacuation effort, took control of an unarmed U.S. military drone to map possible escape routes, dispatched an emergency security team from Tripoli, the capital, and chartered aircraft that ultimately carried surviving American personnel to safety, U.S. officials said.

The account provided by senior U.S. intelligence officials offers the most detailed chronology yet of the Sept. 11 assault that killed the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three
See LIBYA on Page A10 (http://javascript<strong></strong>:parent.contents.setPJumpName("LIBYA");javascript<strong></strong>:parent.contents.setPJumpDirection("1");javascript<strong></strong>:parent.contents.gotoPage("A","A10");)


other Americans. The attack has become a flash point in the presidential campaign.

The decision to give a comprehensive account of the attack five days before the election is likely to be regarded with suspicion, particularly among Republicans who have accused the Obama administration of misleading the public by initially describing the assault as a spontaneous eruption that began as a protest of an anti-Islamic video.

U.S. officials said they decided to offer a detailed account of the CIA’s role to rebut media reports that have suggested agency leaders delayed sending help to State Department officials seeking to fend off a heavily armed mob.

Instead, U.S. intelligence officials said CIA operatives in Benghazi and Tripoli made decisions rapidly throughout the assault with no interference from Washington.

“ There was no secondguessing those decisions being made on the ground, by people at every U.S. organization that could play a role in assisting those in danger,” a senior U.S. intelligence official said in a statement that summarized the chronology of the attack and was made available to the media.

The information does not address the main source of political controversy surrounding the siege: the shifting assessments offered by administration officials over whether the assault was a protest that turned violent or a planned terrorist attack.

But officials reiterated that the initial intelligence was fragmentary and contradictory. They said talking points for members of Congress and senior administration officials did not discuss possible links between the attackers and al-Qaida because the information was classified.

“It wasn’t until after the points were used in public that people reconciled contradictory information and assessed there probably wasn’t a protest around the time of the attack,” the senior U.S. intelligence official said.

The briefing and material provided Thursday focused on the hour-by-hour developments in Benghazi. Among the disclosures is the CIA station chief in Tripoli sent a security force, with about a half-dozen operatives and two U.S. military personnel to Benghazi aboard a hastily chartered aircraft while the attack was under way.

The team arrived after midnight and attempted to organize an effort to make its way to a hospital where U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens had been taken.

But the team was held up by a combination of the time required to secure transportation and arms from U.S.allied militias, new reports that the ambassador was probably already dead and uncertainty about the security situation at the hospital.

The annex in Benghazi to which U.S. diplomatic personnel were evacuated was a CIA base established as its first stronghold in Libya before Moammar Gadhafi was overthrown last year.

U.S. officials said the CIA base learned of the assault on the nearby diplomatic compound in a desperate phone call about 9:40 p.m.

CIA security operatives assembled their gear and lined up vehicles even while agency officials sought, without success, to enlist Libyan militias that had been hired to provide security for the diplomatic outpost in Benghazi.

“Over the next 25 minutes, team members approach the compound, attempt to secure heavy weapons” from Libyans encountered along the way and “make their way onto the compound itself in the face of enemy fire,” the senior U.S. intelligence official said.

Shortly after 11 p.m., an unarmed Predator drone diverted from another mission arrived over Benghazi and began providing video surveillance.

The CIA operatives appear to have been part of a broader group of U.S. security personnel and Libyan guards who made several attempts to fight their way into a structure known as “Villa C,” which served as the safe house and the VIP residence for the mission, and where Stevens had taken cover. Each time, the would-be rescuers were forced to retreat from heavy smoke and flames that had engulfed the structure.

By 11:30 p.m., “all U.S. personnel, except for the missing U.S. ambassador, depart the mission,” the U.S. intelligence official said. “The exiting vehicles come under fire.”

By then, attackers had also descended on the CIA compound, about a mile from the diplomatic facility. The “annex,” as the CIA base was known in internal documents, continued to come under small-arms and rocket fire sporadically over the next 90 minutes.

Then, about 1 a.m., the siege went suddenly quiet, a pause that would last until near daybreak, apparently leading CIA and State Department officials to think that the danger had passed.

In the “predawn time frame, that team at the airport finally manages to secure transportation and armed escort and — having learned that the ambassador was almost certainly dead — heads to the annex to assist with the evacuation,” the official said.

The team arrived, accompanied by Libyan security elements, at 5:15 a.m., “just before the mortar rounds begin to hit the annex,” the official said. Other accounts have suggested that multiple mortars were aimed at the site, initially missing their target before striking the roof, where guards had taken position and were returning fire.

Two CIA contractors, both former Navy SEALs, were killed: Tyrone Woods, a security officer based in Benghazi, and Glen Doherty, who was part of the team rushed by air from Tripoli. "





"

Good report, too bad many on here can't tell the difference between a report and an opinion piece.

gmhr1
11-02-2012, 07:05 PM
Its almost over, lets just hope that no matter who is elected the search for the truth continues. Mr. Panetta decried “a lot of Monday-morning quarterbacking” in the questions his department has faced about why it didn’t send help in the middle of an hours-long assault on the U.S. Consulate
Mr. Panetta said the military had forces positioned to respond, but the situation was too uncertain to send them in.
“The basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on, without having some real-time information about what’s taking place,” he said. “It was really over before, you know, we had the opportunity to really know what was happening.”


Read more: Panetta: Benghazi intelligence too sketchy to send troops - Washington Times (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/25/panetta-benghazi-attack-occurred-too-fast-for-us-m/?page=1#ixzz2B753eplS) http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/25/panetta-benghazi-attack-occurred-too-fast-for-us-m/?page=1#ixzz2B753eplS

Golddogs
11-03-2012, 09:07 AM
Gold dogs

With all due respect,,, Same ol song and dance about arguing WHO is reporting News..

Washinton Post.... Very Liberal slant... You know they will find someone to help cover their side..

Its all a waste of time...

http://www.mrc.org/node/29251

Gooser


Gooser, the difference is that this is a report and not speculation of events. If you read the article, it is totally fact based and there are no opinions from the author. What I like to call good journalism.

From the paper that brought us the Watergate story Regards

gmhr1
11-03-2012, 11:49 AM
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/10/31/Senators-issue-letter-WH-Benghazi
multiple letters sent to Obama from Senators

The administration is stonewalling on this.
In the words of our President voting is the best revenge

helencalif
11-03-2012, 03:40 PM
Gooser, the difference is that this is a report and not speculation of events. If you read the article, it is totally fact based and there are no opinions from the author. What I like to call good journalism.

From the paper that brought us the Watergate story Regards

Go back and re-read sentence by sentence what was reported in the Washington Post article. It says the CIA rushed within 25 minutes. This was a small amount of CIA personnel at the annex which was a little over a mile away. Other reports say they were not successful in making it to the consulate and turned back. The article says the drone was not put into service to observe until 11 p.m. (1 hr. 20 min. into the attack). The small team from Tripoli (which included one of the two Seals which were killed at the annex later) did not arrive until after midnight (over 2 hrs. 20+ min. into the attack). They were at the annex when it got quiet around 1 :00 a.m.

1:00 a.m. quiet at the annex, but no more help arrived. Then the siege by mortar fire began. The two seals were killed; others were injured.

5:15 a..m. a team from the airport arrived to help the survivors escape.How come no additional help or an attempt to remove personnel at the annex in the 4 + hrs. between 1:00 a.m. and 5:15 a.m. ?

Helen

JDogger
11-03-2012, 05:00 PM
A question maybe someone here can answer. What would have been the appropriate number of troops stationed in Libya to provide rapid responce to an attack on the Embassy or Consulate? Squad? Platoon? Company? Battalion? Stationed at what base? Requiring what number of support troops?

Just askin' JD

M&K's Retrievers
11-03-2012, 05:10 PM
I'm thinking zero. No troops, no Ambassador, no CIA, nobody.

MooseGooser
11-03-2012, 05:20 PM
M$K beat me to it!

A Pro active approach from the Commander in cheif,, whos JOB BY CONSTITUTION is to protect the intrests of Americans..

they should have known that 9-11 meant something special as a Terrorist anniversary,, and removed those folks from danger when they fIRST felt security was not sufficient,,, and the was 3 WEEEEKS before the attack..

Thats why I snuff the washington Post report of timely events.:rolleyes:

The problem presented itself Weeks before hand,, and the Commander in cheif,, and his underlings ignored it..


Wastin time,, and votin to get even ,,,regards:

Gooser

JDogger
11-03-2012, 05:28 PM
Hmmm, so isolationism best serves our national interests? Are you guys sure you're not libertarian? Maybe you're voting for the wrong guy. ;)

Franco
11-03-2012, 05:50 PM
Hmmm, so isolationism best serves our national interests? Are you guys sure you're not libertarian? Maybe you're voting for the wrong guy. ;)

During the Foreign Policy Debate the other night, I kept waiting on Romney to endorse Obama!;) He agreed with him so much that I was sure an endosement was forthcoming.

MooseGooser
11-03-2012, 05:59 PM
As a matter of Fact I am a Libertarian!!!! ( actually more of a constitutionalist)

I do not however think Isolationisum serves our countries best intrest..

Proactive decisions are the resposiblity of the person in charge. They also have to listen..

There is a difference in putting an Army in a situation of probable danger when they can defend themselves with the training and weapons they have,, and a group of unarmed citizens.
Thugs,, terroists, animals ,,dont follow rules of war!! They take advantage of lax attitudes and opportunity to evoke fear.

The persons resposible for the deaths of those folks are cowards and murderers.

And for the foklks that sat and watched for hours,,,,,,, well I wont say.

As far as my Vote.

I understand the reality, that the result of this election is going to be either a republican or a democrat in the white house..
I voted weeks ago, for one of those parties that speaks best for me..

Cant have everything,,, But with my vote,,, I think a I will get a great deal, if all works out..


Gooser

MooseGooser
11-03-2012, 06:01 PM
JDogger

You actually think a level headed true Libertarian would cast a Vote for a DEMOCRAT???

Gooser

huntinman
11-03-2012, 06:01 PM
As a matter of Fact I am a Libertarian!!!! ( actually more of a constitutionalist)

I do not however think Isolationisum serves our countries best intrest..

Proactive decisions are the resposiblity of the person in charge. They also have to listen..

There is a difference in putting an Army in a situation of probable danger when they can defend themselves with the training and weapons they have,, and a group of unarmed citizens.
Thugs,, terroists, animals ,,dont follow rules of war!! They take advantage of lax attitudes and opportunity to evoke fear.

The persons resposible for the deaths of those folks are cowards and murderers.

And for the foklks that sat and watched for hours,,,,,,, well I wont say.

As far as my Vote.

I understand the reality, that the result of this election is going to be either a republican or a democrat in the white house..
I voted weeks ago, for one of those parties that speaks best for me..

Cant have everything,,, But with my vote,,, I think a I will get a great deal, if all works out..


Gooser

You will not get any more apologies for this country.

gmhr1
11-03-2012, 06:03 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/03/exclusive-security-officials-on-ground-in-libya-challenge-cia-account/

Security officials on the ground in Libya challenge the CIA account. For the sake of the families the truth must come out.

MooseGooser
11-03-2012, 06:03 PM
I was gonna tell Jdogger that Google was his friend,, and to Google the defiition of liberty.

I'll save you hours!

lib·er·ty/ˈlibərtē/




Noun:






The state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life.










Ran 3 set ups of marks this afternoon with Flinch!!

Shes a good republican... Works hard,, respects authority,, Sometimes thinks for herself,, but happy to work as a team., and is happy for her room and board that is the reward for her HARD WORK!!



i am now back home,,, bored,,, wastin time....

Gooser

Franco
11-03-2012, 06:38 PM
I was gonna tell Jdogger that Google was his friend,, and to Google the defiition of liberty.

I'll save you hours!

lib·er·ty/ˈlibərtē/




Noun:






The state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life.










Ran 3 set ups of marks this afternoon with Flinch!!

Shes a good republican... Works hard,, respects authority,, Sometimes thinks for herself,, but happy to work as a team., and is happy for her room and board that is the reward for her HARD WORK!!



i am now back home,,, bored,,, wastin time....

Gooser


You have to be joking if you think that is what the Repubs or Tea Party are about! Both are all about telling you how you have to live your life. Don't kid yourself, The Repubs are no different than the Dems, just a different flavor!

huntinman
11-03-2012, 06:48 PM
You have to be joking if you think that is what the Repubs or Tea Party are about! Both are all about telling you how you have to live your life. Don't kid yourself, The Repubs are no different than the Dems, just a different flavor!

Of course... And unfortunately millions of Americans are to stupid to see that, but thankfully we have Franco the pot loving Ron Paul groupie to enlighten us.

JDogger
11-03-2012, 07:05 PM
JDogger

You actually think a level headed true Libertarian would cast a Vote for a DEMOCRAT???

Gooser

Yes, I do. Given that the choices other than for President do not include any libertarian candidates at this time, at least on the ballot I submitted yesterday. But hey, that might change...JD

Franco
11-03-2012, 08:03 PM
Of course... And unfortunately millions of Americans are to stupid to see that, but thankfully we have Franco the pot loving Ron Paul groupie to enlighten us.

That's all you've got?

The Dems stand for more Liberty than the Repubs ever will!

gmhr1
11-03-2012, 08:09 PM
But do we want the liberty that the Dems stand for gay marriage and abortion on demand? Dont forget Obama was always against gay marriage until Biden opened his mouth. It doesn't really matter now just vote for the America you want. Its never be clearer! I just want fox news to sink their teeth into this Bengazhi gate and dont let go until we find out what really happened. Obama lied Americans died, thats the signs on our street corners.

huntinman
11-03-2012, 08:15 PM
That's all you've got?

The Dems stand for more Liberty than the Repubs ever will!

It took you this long to finally admit who you are really with... You are a lib at heart.

murral stark
11-03-2012, 08:32 PM
Of course... And unfortunately millions of Americans are to stupid to see that, but thankfully we have Franco the pot loving Ron Paul groupie to enlighten us.

What is wrong with a person "loving" pot, so long as they don't push it on you? Old saying says, "don't knock it til you try it." don't judge someone else for smoking some rope, just because you choose not to partake. Are you a booze lover? If so, I am glad that you have the choice to partake in drinking your favorite adult beverage. A good friend of mine has been prescribed medical marijuana for his cancer. He has less pain, and actually can eat now because the "pot" gives him an appetite. He's put some weight back on too.

MooseGooser
11-03-2012, 08:44 PM
That's all you've got?

The Dems stand for more Liberty than the Repubs ever will!


Ha Ha ha ha ha hahhahahahahah!!!

THIS comming from this supposed fence sittin Conservative!!

:):):)

God help this country!

Gooser

Julie R.
11-03-2012, 08:46 PM
Bottom line: Obama repeatedly brags that he's made the world safe from terrorism as he brags about [the Navy Seals] killing Osama. He doesn't get to take credit for that without accepting responsibility for a screw up that resulted in the deaths at Benghazi. He's an arrogant lightweight that isn't fit to govern an Acorn chapter, much less a nation.

huntinman
11-03-2012, 08:49 PM
Bottom line: Obama repeatedly brags that he's made the world safe from terrorism as he brags about [the Navy Seals] killing Osama. He doesn't get to take credit for that without accepting responsibility for a screw up that resulted in the deaths at Benghazi. He's an arrogant lightweight that isn't fit to govern an Acorn chapter, much less a nation.

Right on the money!!

gmhr1
11-03-2012, 08:51 PM
Instead of Obama saying bin laden is dead gm is alive how about al Qaeda is alive and our ambassador is dead. I heard this today thought it was very fitting. Thanks to John Mccain and the other Senators for going after Obama on this.

Franco
11-03-2012, 09:03 PM
It took you this long to finally admit who you are really with... You are a lib at heart.

With you coming from the extreme right, someone who respect Liberty would lool like a lib.

Today's Repubs are about limited freedom. IT IS THEIR PLATFORM!

huntinman
11-03-2012, 09:34 PM
With you coming from the extreme right, someone who respect Liberty would lool like a lib.

Today's Repubs are about limited freedom. IT IS THEIR PLATFORM!

I just figured out why you are so cranky tonight. I just saw the score of Alabama - LSU;-)

Marvin S
11-03-2012, 09:35 PM
With you coming from the extreme right, someone who respect Liberty would lool like a lib.

Today's Repubs are about limited freedom. IT IS THEIR PLATFORM!

:) :) - your characterization of Bill as being from the extreme right is downright humorous - but from a lefty (which you now admit) his middle of the road position may look extreme to you :p.

mngundog
11-03-2012, 09:41 PM
:) :) - your characterization of Bill as being from the extreme right is downright humorous - but from a lefty (which you now admit) his middle of the road position may look extreme to you :p.
That's some funny stuff right there, I would love to see some of his middle of the road posts but I won't hold my breath. :D

huntinman
11-03-2012, 09:53 PM
That's some funny stuff right there, I would love to see some of his middle of the road posts but I won't hold my breath. :D

You wouldn't be able to see the middle from where you are standing... (IMHO)

PamK
11-03-2012, 09:58 PM
I live in Texas one of the most Repub states in the country. They tell me how many dogs I can have in my house. There went my liberty.

JDogger
11-03-2012, 10:05 PM
Instead of Obama saying bin laden is dead gm is alive how about al Qaeda is alive and our ambassador is dead. I heard this today thought it was very fitting. Thanks to John Mccain and the other Senators for going after Obama on this.

Whoops, I'm sure you heard something....Wanna share?:-?

MooseGooser
11-03-2012, 10:09 PM
The following came from another thread, where I was describing my Inlaws Political view points. They are Very left. They ADORE President Obama.

Francos Post;


http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by MooseGooser http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?p=1026310#post1026310)
I think Franco is my Mother in law!:smile::smile:

Gooser



You should be proud that she is a traditional Conservative. There are few left!:wink:

So,, You see,, Guys like Franco believe that the right has slid so far right tof them,, that the LEFT is now,, are what HE DEFINES a "TRADITIONAL CONSERVATIVE"!!!

These true lefties (socialists) are very tricky.. They try and proove their sensless points by re-defining words and distracting from the reality of the situation..
I call them" Fence sitters". They sit on the fence,, and debate back and forth with slogans like his siignature line, thinking that their debate makes them look intellectual,, and a true thinker,, when in actuality,, they are lost,, and cant be comitted to anything cause they dont really know what they stand for..

Why do I keep comming back? It IS TRULY is a waste of time... Its DEVISIVE,,, In many cases Offensive,, to people who have Family members that have died defending the constitution of this country..

I see whay Chris has a seperate Board to discuss this stuff... It has opened my eyes to a lot of you!

I'm sure it has opened your eyes toward me too!!:)


See ya all after Tuesday.. God Bless us All!


Gooser

mngundog
11-03-2012, 10:17 PM
You wouldn't be able to see the middle from where you are standing... (IMHO)
But am I wrong, when was the last time you made a post somewhere near the middle? I've only been on here a year, but I can't recall any.

huntinman
11-03-2012, 10:19 PM
But am I wrong, when was the last time you made a post somewhere near the middle? I've only been on here a year, but I can't recall any.

Depends on the subject... I'm not keeping score... Sounds like you are. Have at it.

mngundog
11-03-2012, 10:22 PM
Depends on the subject... I'm not keeping score... Sounds like you are. Have at it.
Alright then I will put you at zero posts remotely near the middle. :D

huntinman
11-03-2012, 10:24 PM
Alright then I will put you at zero posts remotely near the middle. :D

Amazing coincidence... We have the same amount.

mngundog
11-03-2012, 10:33 PM
Amazing coincidence... We have the same amount.
Hardly....:D

gmhr1
11-05-2012, 09:40 AM
CBS releases previously withheld 60 min interview segment in which Obama refuses to call Bengazhi a terrorist attack

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/cbs-releases-previously-withheld-60-minutes-interview-segment-in-which-obama-refuses-to-call-benghazi-a-terrorist-attack/

It will be interesting to see what effect Bengazhi has on election day.
The attack was then fed to all of them, the White House, the Pentagon, the State Dept., the CIA, through live video feed. A later email that day reported, “Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack.” The feed showed no protest of any supposedly offensive You Tube video.
Just one hour flight time away were U.S. Air Force bases that could have been rousted in minutes to send fighter planes and attack helicopters that could have routed the attackers in minutes of fighting. As Investors Business Daily editorialized on October 24, “Within an hour’s flight time from Libya, at the large naval air station in Sigonella, Italy, and at bases in nearby Aviano and Souda Bay, were fighters and AC 130 gunships that can be extremely effective in dispersing crowds or responding to a terrorist assault.” But the order for the rescue never came. Maybe because Barack Obamadid not want to offend Muslim sensibilities by such a show of force.

Brian Cockfield
11-05-2012, 07:42 PM
He let Americans die. PERIOD.

gmhr1
11-05-2012, 08:21 PM
CNN is all over Bengazhi this is first time I have heard them talk about it.

starjack
11-09-2012, 06:10 PM
I just want the truth from our mr transparent prez. Have you notice menmon is leaving this alone. In my gut the prez hillary and all have blood on there hands

murral stark
11-09-2012, 08:57 PM
I just want the truth from our mr transparent prez. Have you notice menmon is leaving this alone. In my gut the prez hillary and all have blood on there hands

From "A Few Good Men"
"You want answers?"
"I WANT THE TRUTH!!!"
"YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!"
ROFLMAO

Pals
11-09-2012, 11:17 PM
You find the deaths of 4 Americans funny Murral?

MooseGooser
11-09-2012, 11:31 PM
Miss Pals

Evidently he does.

but he can't really help himself.
Hes been on the Sofa all night watching movies,smokin his peace pipe,and to top it off,now he,s got cheesy poof fingers,
and we all know what trouble THAT leads to.

old dinosaur regards

Gooser

starjack
11-10-2012, 08:08 AM
From "A Few Good Men"
"You want answers?"
"I WANT THE TRUTH!!!"
"YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!"
ROFLMAOYou think four Americans ard dead and its a joke. With your thinking know wonder this country is going to hell.

M&K's Retrievers
11-10-2012, 08:46 AM
From "A Few Good Men"
"You want answers?"
"I WANT THE TRUTH!!!"
"YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!"
ROFLMAO

Perhaps it's time for another self imposed suspension.

mngundog
11-10-2012, 10:27 AM
He let Americans die. PERIOD.
3000 dead Americans in the 9/11 attacks 4000+ soldiers in the Iraq/Afghanistan wars under the last Republican watch.......................