Benghazi...what happened?!

[Thai]

Link: http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/Benghazi Talking Points Timeline.pdf

Story regarding above documents: Exclusive: Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror Reference | ABC News Blogs - Yahoo!

Who here still thinks that Obama Admin is transparent, as promised repeatedly when he was elected in 2008??

Just a reminder of what happened over there: ISLAMISTS DRAG DEAD BODY OF US AMBASSADOR THROUGH THE STREETS OF BENGHAZI! (Updated) ?Another Photo! | The Gateway Pundit

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Mg-e71IDAUw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Shocking that this is even covered by liberal media: Father of Official, New Report Raise Questions About Benghazi Response - Yahoo! News

From article:

A Defense Department official confirms that there an unarmed ISR ("intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance") drone overhead over part of the assault in Benghazi.

Woods (father of SEAL who died) also said, "apparently even the State Department had a live stream and was aware of their calls for help. My son wasn't even there. He was at a safe house about a mile away. He got the distress call; he heard them crying for help; that's why he and Glen risked their lives to go that extra mile just to take care of the situation. And I'm sure that wasn't the only one received that distress call-you know, 'Come save our lives.'"

...sources on the ground in Benghazi told her "that three urgent requests from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. Consulate and subsequent attack nearly seven hours later were denied by officials in the CIA chain of command - who also told the CIA operators 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."

:toilet:

 

[LandCruiser]

The attack came at an inconvenient time. There was campaining to do.

Hillary did her best to sweep it under the rug so that Obama didn't have to take time off from his busy schedule of partying in vegas.

 

[Jumpkix]

I'm not a conspiracy theorist or anything like that, but there is something that just doesn't feel right about all of this. Not to mention it sounds like there were major security concerns brought up before the attack, and all were swept under the rug.

 

[Thai]

I'm not a conspiracy theorist or anything like that, but there is something that just doesn't feel right about all of this. Not to mention it sounds like there were major security concerns brought up before the attack, and all were swept under the rug.

Basically, Obama administration knew that its foreign policy was going to crap in the Middle East and tried to cover it up for the 2012 election. When it blew apart on 9/11, Obama administration looked for ways to blame it on something that is out of its control (aka Youtube video). Of course, anyone with half a brain could see that this was bogus. It was his hope that Americans are dumb enough to blame the video and not him and his administration...unfortunately, some were dumb enough to believe it!

 

[bofa]

I hope this continues to get hashed out until the truth is known. None of it sits well based on what we've heard so far.

 

[LandCruiser]

The hearings showed to Americans, again, that Hillary is a vile, heartless, angry Machiavellian figure. The trail of murder and lies that follow her and Bill around track back over the last 3 decades, but nothing bad ever sticks to her.

 

[ndcent]

"If you look in a mirror and say "Benghazi" three times, the 241 marines who died in Beirut ask why there was no republican outrage in 1983."

Or outrage for Jan. 22, 2002: Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami Attacks Indian U.S. Consulate, June 14, 2002: Suicide Car-Bomb Outside U.S. Consulate in Karachi, Oct. 12, 2002: String Of Bali Bombings Included U.S. Consulate, Feb. 28, 2003: Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, Attacked For the Second Time in One Year, May 12, 2003: 36 People Including 9 Americans Die After Terrorists Storm U.S. Compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, July 30, 2004: Islamist Attacks U.S. Embassy in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, Dec. 6, 2004: Five Staff and Four Security Guards Die in U.S. consulate attack in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, March 2, 2006: Third Attack on Karachi U.S. Consulate Killed U.S. Diplomat, Sept. 12, 2006: Four Gunmen Stormed the U.S. compound in Damascus, Syria, Jan. 12, 2007: Greek Terrorists Fired a Rocket-Propelled Grenade at the U.S. Embassy yeman, turkey, and shit that's just under Bush.

 

[bofa]

"If you look in a mirror and say "Benghazi" three times, the 241 marines who died in Beirut ask why there was no republican outrage in 1983."

Or outrage for Jan. 22, 2002: Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami Attacks Indian U.S. Consulate, June 14, 2002: Suicide Car-Bomb Outside U.S. Consulate in Karachi, Oct. 12, 2002: String Of Bali Bombings Included U.S. Consulate, Feb. 28, 2003: Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, Attacked For the Second Time in One Year, May 12, 2003: 36 People Including 9 Americans Die After Terrorists Storm U.S. Compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, July 30, 2004: Islamist Attacks U.S. Embassy in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, Dec. 6, 2004: Five Staff and Four Security Guards Die in U.S. consulate attack in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, March 2, 2006: Third Attack on Karachi U.S. Consulate Killed U.S. Diplomat, Sept. 12, 2006: Four Gunmen Stormed the U.S. compound in Damascus, Syria, Jan. 12, 2007: Greek Terrorists Fired a Rocket-Propelled Grenade at the U.S. Embassy yeman, turkey, and shit that's just under Bush.

So other tragedies justify new ones? I guess we'll be okay if someone else flies a few more planes into buildings then. :bash:

The difference here is we had credible intelligence about this and assets nearby that were told to stand down. This wasn't a one-off small scale attack like the ones mentioned above.

I know you are just digging up old posts to start sh!t and I should ignore, but even this argument seems beneath you.

 

[LandCruiser]

"If you look in a mirror and say "Benghazi" three times, the 241 marines who died in Beirut ask why there was no republican outrage in 1983."

Or outrage for Jan. 22, 2002: Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami Attacks Indian U.S. Consulate, June 14, 2002: Suicide Car-Bomb Outside U.S. Consulate in Karachi, Oct. 12, 2002: String Of Bali Bombings Included U.S. Consulate, Feb. 28, 2003: Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, Attacked For the Second Time in One Year, May 12, 2003: 36 People Including 9 Americans Die After Terrorists Storm U.S. Compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, July 30, 2004: Islamist Attacks U.S. Embassy in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, Dec. 6, 2004: Five Staff and Four Security Guards Die in U.S. consulate attack in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, March 2, 2006: Third Attack on Karachi U.S. Consulate Killed U.S. Diplomat, Sept. 12, 2006: Four Gunmen Stormed the U.S. compound in Damascus, Syria, Jan. 12, 2007: Greek Terrorists Fired a Rocket-Propelled Grenade at the U.S. Embassy yeman, turkey, and shit that's just under Bush.

Did those administrations intentionally fabricate a lie to save face, parade around an administration stooge on TV to propagate that lie, try to cover it up when caught in said lie, they desperately try to pressure the media to forget about it?

Bad shit happens under any president.

Obama and friends seem to be extremely outraged when Dear Leader looks like a fool when his blithering ineptness regarding foreign policy becomes apparent--especially when he spent all that time spiking the Bin Laden football and saying how Al Quaeda is "on the ropes" only to have a terror attack right before the election and a big fund raiser. He's a busy man, he can't be bothered with attacks on Americans when there's champagne and celebrities to hang out with.

So they lie and cover up.

More people would accept that Obama's an idiot rather than a scheming liar who throws a patsy like Susan Rice under the bus and brings out a liar and a criminal like Hillary to bury it--that's what most people are really upset about.

Your dear president is a petty incompetent liar and will go to extreme lengths, even pissing on the lives of American patriots, to hide that fact.

 

[ndcent]

Bad shit happens under any president.

Best thing I've read in Off Topic.

 

[zopperman]

"If you look in a mirror and say "Benghazi" three times, the 241 marines who died in Beirut ask why there was no republican outrage in 1983."

Or outrage for Jan. 22, 2002: Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami Attacks Indian U.S. Consulate, June 14, 2002: Suicide Car-Bomb Outside U.S. Consulate in Karachi, Oct. 12, 2002: String Of Bali Bombings Included U.S. Consulate, Feb. 28, 2003: Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, Attacked For the Second Time in One Year, May 12, 2003: 36 People Including 9 Americans Die After Terrorists Storm U.S. Compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, July 30, 2004: Islamist Attacks U.S. Embassy in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, Dec. 6, 2004: Five Staff and Four Security Guards Die in U.S. consulate attack in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, March 2, 2006: Third Attack on Karachi U.S. Consulate Killed U.S. Diplomat, Sept. 12, 2006: Four Gunmen Stormed the U.S. compound in Damascus, Syria, Jan. 12, 2007: Greek Terrorists Fired a Rocket-Propelled Grenade at the U.S. Embassy yeman, turkey, and shit that's just under Bush.

Did you purposely dig up this thread to start trouble?

 

[Ol'Blue]

All I'm going to say is this. Our guys got S$%^ on and there is still no accountability. Two men came to the rescue to help and lost there life's in the process. I'm still just pist that the RSO was not more involved in this fire fight because it his sole responsibility to protect the Ambassador, I for one can attest that you always know where he is period. So fail on there part. I'll just shut up now. It still just burns deep because I have been there and I know the shit that goes on. We always said we are on our own and this example proves it.

Blue

 

[Jumpkix]

I'm a civilian, so obviously I have no idea how the military reaction process works for these kinds of emergency situations. But I know if I was within reach and knew what was happening, I'd lock and load regardless of what the CO says. I have no reservation about doing the right thing at the risk of a court martial or NJP.

I do, however, know enough to understand that our guys did get abandoned, which only makes me wonder if this will have any bearing on future situations when American lives are in danger.

 

[BrianSD_42]

I'm a civilian, so obviously I have no idea how the military reaction process works for these kinds of emergency situations. But I know if I was within reach and knew what was happening, I'd lock and load regardless of what the CO says. I have no reservation about doing the right thing at the risk of a court martial or NJP.

I do, however, know enough to understand that our guys did get abandoned, which only makes me wonder if this will have any bearing on future situations when American lives are in danger.

I'm sure you mean well with this comment and all ...

The "right thing" is to follow the orders of those above you. That is why one of the first things they teach you in basic is to shut up and follow orders. The guy on the ground, officer or enlisted, cannot possibly know every angle or what is "right or wrong" in a given situation.

 

[Jumpkix]

I'm sure you mean well with this comment and all ...

The "right thing" is to follow the orders of those above you. That is why one of the first things they teach you in basic is to shut up and follow orders. The guy on the ground, officer or enlisted, cannot possibly know every angle or what is "right or wrong" in a given situation.

And obviously, if people didn't follow orders, military decision making would fail and the consequences would be disastrous. But are there never situations when there's doing the right thing by following orders, versus doing what you know should be done?

I'm not suggesting people disobey orders, but I do think there are rare circumstances when military personnel are in a situation with first hand information by themselves because supposedly no one else is aware of what's happening. You follow orders, even though your gut says something is very, very wrong.

Again, I'm just a civilian, so maybe I'm talking out my rear. But I think about things like this all the time.

 

[LandCruiser]

And obviously, if people didn't follow orders, military decision making would fail and the consequences would be disastrous. But are there never situations when there's doing the right thing by following orders, versus doing what you know should be done?

I'm not suggesting people disobey orders, but I do think there are rare circumstances when military personnel are in a situation with first hand information by themselves because supposedly no one else is aware of what's happening. You follow orders, even though your gut says something is very, very wrong.

Again, I'm just a civilian, so maybe I'm talking out my rear. But I think about things like this all the time.

A few German fellows who were "only following orders" a few years back guaranteed that in today's modern military disobeying orders on a strong moral and humanitarian authority (like saving your buddies) won't get you thrown in a Supermax or before a firing squad, but still will likely result in a discharge (hopefully honorable).

I mean, shit, that's partially what "Lone Survivor" is about.

 

[Ol'Blue]

I'm sure you mean well with this comment and all ...

The "right thing" is to follow the orders of those above you. That is why one of the first things they teach you in basic is to shut up and follow orders. The guy on the ground, officer or enlisted, cannot possibly know every angle or what is "right or wrong" in a given situation.

In most cases I agree with you but on this one I do not. When you are in the middle of gun fight and you are on the hook begging for help and get told "NO", I don't give a F what the reason is it is wrong. We do not leave our people behind or let them hang out to dry. I have been in more gun fights than I care to talk about and that is the one rule no matter where you are, what branch, etc. You just always take care of the guy next to you because they are all you have when shit goes to hell.

There is always a time to follow orders but there are also times when you as a leader have to make that call to say **** it and do what you have to do. Trust me, I have been there and it is never fun and you will be questioned for it and people will Monday night quarterback it from some place. In the end it is all about the guy next to you always, and getting home.

I hope you understand I'm not just talking out my butt on this one too. I worked in this line of work and had the same arguments with the State Department staff to pull there heads out there A##es and wake up. When this happened all we said, was "I told you" now are you going to listen and really see it! Like I said before it just burns deep because I have been there man.

Rant over.....

Blue

 

[02SE]

edited..

I wouldn't want to shine too bright a light on the Obama Administrations deceit and incompetence.

 

[BrianSD_42]

[MENTION=92510]Ol'Blue[/MENTION]

I don't disagree with you.

I was just imagining that even in the situations you described that there was an officer on the ground, with the squad, or squad leader in charge and it would be rare for someone directly disobey an order from that person.

At least in the Navy I can tell you that there are very few situations where someone doesn't obey a direct verbal order from the CO of the ship.

And when Jumpkix said "CO" above I assumed he meant commander of the group on the ground not some guy in Washington.

 

[bofa]

edited..

I wouldn't want to shine too bright a light on the Obama Administrations deceit and incompetence.

We want the truth. :hungry: