Benghazi Covered Up Changing Sides in the War on Terror?

No amount of hearings, reports and accusations will ever make anything right.

 

Eh, the cost of a few golf trips. Where you worried about the money spent on the first lady when she was galvanting around China?

 

.

Where were you

 

darm auto correct

1 Why was the ambassador even in Benghazi a unsecure embassy in a unfriendly area on 9/11? That seems like a huge security risk. Further WHY was he there? (Better?)

2 I was at home in bed but I am not the Commander in Chief aka President. I have zero authority to deploy troops in an attempt to save or help those under attack. I am also not responsible for the state department and thus the Ambassador. If I was and my underlings did not wake me for an attack on our embassy I would have numerous unemployed underlings. If the did notify me I would get the @#$#! out of bed and monitor the situation. Of course I am not saying he was in bed as the only indication is that he was NOT in the room where decisions were being made. (Better?)

 

So far, the administration's tactics on this Benghazi issue is to dodge, weave, and continue to refuse to cooperate with the committees investigating it. Obviously they feel that if they stick with it long enough it will eventually become a non-issue and will then go away. If those committees can keep up the pressure long enough it might make some difference in the elections in November. Hopefully, the committees can find some heads to chop off and also affect the elections which would be a win-win. :up:

 

*Shaking my head*

Rome burns.

 

So who's playing politics? Just another lie on the top of an ever-growing stack of lies.

"rioters were outraged over a you-tube video"
"there is not one smidgen of corruption in the IRS"
"I will have the most transparent administration in history"
"Mine will be a bi-partisan administration"
"if you like your health insurance plan, you can keep it. You like your doctor, you can keep him"
"if you make less than $300,000, your taxes will not be raised. Not one dime".

These need to be played in every campaign ad, just like GWB's statement "Read my lips, NO NEW TAXES"

 

Guys the root cause here is beyond politics. Consider the promise we make to those that carry our flag abroad. "We will get you home."

This is where the fail is. Because it does matter. It should have mattered then, now and tomorrow.

 

Until I actually see some facts and not reports such as "according to emails obtained" I'll withhold judgement. I followed Charlies link. I looked at the Reuters article. They quoted judicial watch's opinion without a citation from an email in context other than spinning for talk shows. Big effing deal. An administration spins shit.

As for what happened on the ground is it possible there was more behind the scenes than has been reported and some of that may just need to stay on the down low for national security reasons? Or does the report from the discredited security guy who wasn't there still hold more weight than the transcripts and orders that were issued to the rapid response team?

Is it possible that the situation was so damn fragile to begin with that the this was a very calculated risk of which we did loose unfortunately, but instead of learning and moving on all we hear is COVER UP CONSIPIRACY!!! THAT ARAB OBAMA DID IT!!!!!

Fucking hell. If there was a decent well presented case that didn't revolve around the words "Allegedly" and "Speculation." Present some facts and I'll respectfully read them and respond accordingly.

Intelligence is a world of grays. Turning this into a Political sissy slap fight to place blame on why it went south is so myopic that I tend to ignore these threads.

Here are some questions.

What types of SAMs were they?
Where did they come from?
When were they placed in Libya?
Other than "a whistle blowers attorney" what source of these supposedly missing SAMs corroborates the claims?
Is the outrage because a covert intel operation blew up in our faces or because intel agents were killed?
What is the source of the claim that more security was requeste and denied? I've seen claims that show the ambassador refused more security. Who is right?

As a largely apolitical person I'll wait until there are actual facts instead of going off half cocked screaming for blood based on allegations, speculation, and unnamed sources. Those all may in the end prove to be correct, but until there are facts, all this shit seems to be based on rumors and opinions - i.e. total political BS.

Yes, I can talk to myself easily in the mirror. I'm intelligent enough to dismiss this kind of political BS and actually focus on factual information instead of getting worked up over speculation that serves ulterior motives.

 

I think you are mostly correct.

However the fail matters more if:
No effort was made to help those that died
The facts of why you died are blantantly lied about
Your commander is absent during the time of decision

And then there is the possibility that the events happening were illegal or undermined your country (if that is the case it matters less for the ambassador who knew what the purpose was)

 

What is the case for withholding the details after it's all over?
What security is in question now?
Why did the administration fight for eight months to withhold an email that they now claim means nothing?

How can you possibly call yourself apolitical?

 

What is the case for withholding the details after it's all over?

All of what is over? Intel operations in Libya? The attack on the Embassy? CIA operations under the guise of State Department personnel?

What security is in question now?
Oh I don't know. Hard to say. Anybody operating in Libya at the moment may want it to be kept quite what they are doing and why.

The email?
I personally don't give a shit about a particular email one way or the other. I guess you mean this: "underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy." It's an email from someone working on spin. Not someone making policy or decisions.

Apolitical????

Simple, I don't freak out and go all chicken little every time one side or the other claims the end of the fucking world because Obama or The RWNJs did or said something stupid.

Now economics is another matter. You guys get all worked up over these stupid political posturing moves designed to attack the other side but fail to look into what really matters and where the power really lies. Economics.

If political moves impact economic conditions then I do become concerned. Otherwise it's just all a bunch of BS.

 

quiet

They probably already know.

 

Good point. I bet they are quite quiet.




The guys running scared are the Libyan's who were providing the info on where the weapons were. I can see delaying all information and tail chasing trying to get those folks safe, and I think it's worth it.

Talk to anyone who is / was in the Sandbox who worked with local civilians. By and large the folks under 40 love the US and those over hate us. The ones in their 20s who are working with US folks in whatever capacity are freaking the fuck out and trying to get visas ASAP to get the hell out of dodge.

I'd wager that the Libyans helping with the weapons intel feel / felt much the same and I hope we made an effort to get them out of harms way.

 

I'm not concerned about what Libyans were doing. They have their own interests.
I want to know what we were doing there, and why it ended the way it did.
The only reason to keep any of that secret at this point is to cover administration asses.
Because they were doing shit they shouldn't have been doing, in the Oliver North tradition, and it went south.
At this point, it very much matters.
Just not to Obama's ball suckers.

 

It's hard to get the facts when you are being stonewalled.

I am curious, if it was you that lost a loved one in this attack would you hold the same position?

I find it ironic that Benghazi was swept under the rug during the election. That wouldn't have anything to do with the presidents bid for reelection would it? Politicians can all EAD and DIAF. Left, right, center doesn't matter, they are all a bunch of self serving assholes that only look out for their next election. Until the public gets tired of the same political bullshit nothing will change. Benghazi is a perfect example of it, and the shit needs to end.

 

That strategy works fine if you don't care about having factual information when deciding to keep or oust a current politician.

 

Maybe if one tenth of the effort put into investigating some barrels put on a bridge on-ramp in NJ was expended exposing the facts behind Benghazi, people might know what really happened.

 

Apolitical!
Intelligent, again whatever you must tell yourself and the man in the mirror.

From my position, you appear to be blinded. I am not in a position to debate your position or opinion/thoughts on what the GOP may or may not be doing. I would not heisitate to call it political. And, there is abosoutely no heistation on my part to call the talking points and what the White House did in the initial stages politically.

I guess it would be a stretch to guess, you never wore an uniformed of the US Armed Forces.

To main point, "we bring our guys home." Or at least we try.

If you do not see an issue with what happened and think this is just about the color of the man in the White House, your agenda is challenging your intellect.