Obama Met With Panetta and Biden at WH As Benghazi Terror Attack Unfolded

reply to post by Agit8dChop


But.

Obama & Co. keeps changing the story.

The lies are not stopping.

Obama is cooking.

This has absolutely nothing to do with anything but Benghazi.

reply to post by Agit8dChop

There is a night and day difference between the deaths of people deployed into a war zone or combat directly and those who are in service to the State Department as part of Diplomatic Missions and the Ambassador himself. It's apples and watermelons for comparison when we add in the repeated requests for help and confusion where many layers of that are concerned.

This is a BIG BIG deal and it just won't fade away. A US Ambassador IS a rep. to/of the President. Murdering one is a real major issue. The mere hint of funny business related to such a major event demands questions be answered and this is a truck load of hints, clues and people raising facts that don't fit right.

I dont see this as big a deal as its being made to be.
Dont get me wrong, the deaths are shocking and I feel there are family and friends who are suffering and I feel for them. But, this is not some new and rare thing. Before you look at the shady happenings of Obama (to which I dont think he did wrong here) maybe you should ask what exactly this 'representative' was doing in Libya? considering this wasnt an embassy and there has been civil war / revolution there.

Like I said before, this wasn’t a embassy so communications would have been primitive. Meaning the group of protestors would have easily disabled it.

So your in the situation room, you have grainy static footage from a drone.
The last thing you heard from the people in the building was youths yelling and throwing rocks. (consider this was happening elsewhere due to the video as well)

Would you have rather Obama

A. Send in the jets to bomb
B. Allow the drones to fire missiles
C. Send in more men to be shot / killed
D. Send in special forces to kill untold people
E. Drop a Nuke

How has Obama been lying about this ordeal? All anyone has at the moment are random statements from experts on FOX NEWS (a republican mouthpiece) or anonymous statements released to the media.

Second, Dont you think Sandy deserves more attention and focus right now? 50people have died inside the USA this week and your still all focusing on 4 people who died in the middle east almost a month ago.

There are many things wrong with Obama, there are 10x things wrong with Romney, but people continually parroting on about this libya half consulate half embassy death is just pathetic.

Initially, it was said they were trying to save the ambassador and get him to a hospital.
Then it was said he was sodomized (funny enough every website was linking to a blog for this)

My personal view on the death?

It started as a protest against the video some hardcore jihadi's from the revolution rocked up, started shooting a gun and rousing the crowd. Some idiots got inside, ransacked the place and in the fury a few people were killed.

Hardly an incident worth spending all your time focusing on.

reply to post by Agit8dChop

I dont see this as big a deal as its being made to be.
Dont get me wrong, the deaths are shocking and I feel there are family and friends who are suffering and I feel for them. But, this is not some new and rare thing.

Okay, It's been over 30 years since the United States has lost an Ambassador in the line of duty. What part of that is NOT rare? The U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan was murdered in 1979. That was how far back one has to look. The US has lost only a small number in it's history. This *IS* a BIG deal and it's not about partisanship. It's about the law and it still matters to a good % of America, even if the MEDIA may not happen to share that sentiment at times. No one is ABOVE it. This isn't an event that can possibly be swept under the rug.

Like I said before, this wasn’t a embassy so communications would have been primitive. Meaning the group of protestors would have easily disabled it.

This was a United States Consulate which is an official Mission of the United States Embassy in Tripoli. Consulates are located around the world and for any number of nations where it's not enough for a full blown Embassy, but a presence is needed for some reason. In this case, that is part of what the investigations ought to be establishing. I've not heard anyone suggest Communications were a problem until the place fell?

The CIA Annex station less than a mile away would absolutely not have had communication problems though, I'll just bet. Close enough to give mutual support. Which IS where part of the battle was fought, as it happened, and some of the largest questions lay to be answered for support denied or withheld.

How has Obama been lying about this ordeal? All anyone has at the moment are random statements from experts on FOX NEWS (a republican mouthpiece) or anonymous statements released to the media.

Is there anything Obama doesn't get an automatic and 100% free pass on? This is the worst example of misrepresentation ...to avoid using another word...that I can imagine. Here is a dandy example.

September 20, 2012

WHITE HOUSE — The Obama administration on Thursday called last week’s assault on the U.S. consulate in Libya a terrorist attack. This is the first time that White House officials have called the incident a deliberate attack, rather than a part of protests against a video that many Muslims consider offensive.

Source - Voice Of America

Now that news source is quite literally an extension of the United States Government. Obama's Government.

However...A few days earlier... Gee.... They *LIED* to our FACES....

The attacks are “a response to a video, a film, that we have judged to be reprehensible and disgusting — that in no way justified any violent reaction to it — but this is not a case of protests against the United States writ large or [against] U.S. policy,” he claimed.

When asked if the sophisticated Libya assault that killed the four officials was also a reaction to the video, Carney responded carefully, saying, “we have no information to suggest that it was a pre-planned attack.”

Source

If you'd prefer to hear him lie in his own voice, he did that to the General Assembly of the United Nations. There is no defending this given what we NOW KNOW was known and when it was known.



It's outright bald face lying.

Pointing to past Presidents to divert attention or Candidates to drum up emotion away doesn't change the fact this man lied like it was absolutely nothing and second nature to him....about the murders of 4 Americans including HIS OWN Representative in Libya. Now he figures it's not fair to even ask about. Well...even if he LOSES and is out of office, I want this man to be held to account by the laws.

This REALLY isn't Political and the outcome of next weeks race is IRRELEVANT to me in terms of wanting to see criminal investigations started against everyone who was in the decision chain that night. If they're innocent, that's JUST as important to know, but enough with half baked attempts to sweep every problem under the rug and leave the public just wondering about details. This little problem is NOT going away no matter WHAT happens.

A comet could hit Earth...and I'd still be asking when we were going to see the investigations start to learn how those mean died..while calling for help many had the power and ability to give them.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Dude, applaud your post, definitely made me stop and look at it from a different angle.

Few things that shot to mind were,

The CIA annex station, where is this, how do you know there were troops there? and why would you have a CIA annex so close to a ambassadors residence, why not have them together?

The attacks are “a response to a video, a film, that we have judged to be reprehensible and disgusting — that in no way justified any violent reaction to it — but this is not a case of protests against the United States writ large or [against] U.S. policy,” he claimed.
When asked if the sophisticated Libya assault that killed the four officials was also a reaction to the video, Carney responded carefully, saying, “we have no information to suggest that it was a pre-planned attack.”

This, is not a lie.
day dot '' we have no information.......'' & ''the attacks are in response to a video"
day dot + 3 '' last weeks assault on the U.S consulate - a terrorist attack ''

Why is that a lie? Do you think they had information enough on day 1 to declare it a terrorist attack? being other countries were experiencing large protests/riots over that video?

Also, why do you believe this was preplanned? if its true and this was just a few people in a un-defended house.. why plan? simply walk up with a gun and start some cr@p....
Is the concept of this being planned, why you believe its a terrorist attack instead of a group of angry youth with guns who wanted to kill someone?

also,
what would you have done with grainy, static, moving footage unsure of whats happening?

Ahhh...Your reply makes me stop and back up a minute and ..hey, I'm sorry for my sharp tone. I forget sometimes in being as passionate as I am about this specific event, not everyone has spent almost unhealthy amounts of time researching it.

This first set of photographs shows what the hearings almost immeidately after "accidentally" showed on the poster board behind the speakers. At the time this first appeared to the public, it was a big deal.. This wasn't supposed to be known as what it was or that it even existed....if they could avoid announcing it.

Another example, frankly, of how the Government in general (not even specifying anyone in particular on this one) totally underestimated the seriousness of the event as the public would see it. They thought at the time this appeared and people got chewed for not covering the photo in the first image on the link, they could still hide anything.

CIA Annex Location in Benghazi in relation to Consulate Compound

This link below describes the details on how the first photo in the above set should never have been displayed the way it first was there. Keeping it secret was absurd in my opinion. However...I'll grant that the suggestion it may have been exposed without careful consideration and more of a political stunt ought to get a couple people nailed for that (Rep or Dem). It's way past that now for knowing about the place in general though.

Story explaining the above hearing photo and poster board

For context and the discussion I'll also add this photo set. It carries more than the media did of the consulate compound itself. It shows some details of the building, damage and gate area for security or the distinct lack of it.

(If I could...it there were any way, I'd love to scratch the first 4 photos of this series. I do NOT post it for those. They are of Stevens in the hands of those who killed him. Nothing more graphic than media has ever shown of that..but it'd strike me very wrong to post a series that includes them and NOT make this note in advance.)

Consulate Compound during and immediately following the events

____

In terms of not having them together? Well, the arguments I heard made in the days following the disclosure the CIA annex existed was that they intended to keep CIA operations and State Department operations totally separate and removed from each other in the appearances for the local population. I can see that..I suppose. They also wouldn't want to advertise the location for locals to just sit there and watch who comes and goes for who CIA in town was.

.....although I find the logic to that kinda silly. As if the locals living in a closed society and isolated nation that way for decades wouldn't know every single newcomer who arrived after things suddenly changed. lol.... I imagine my own town here. If a foreign nation set up a "secret" operation inside my town..where I live...would there be any chance those living here would be totally in the dark? Yeah.. I'll bet you have to chuckle a little at that thought too.

Personally? Look at the compounds from overhead. The CIA one is a lot nicer than the State Department one. I wonder, when they staked out their new locations for Benghazi, if that factor didn't have far more to do with locations than anything else. People are people after all, right?

(I have a parent conference I have to run to...I'll check back on your take to the above material and finish my reply when I get back in a couple hours. )

- I also have to take a bit of time to sort my material on clear and supported statements for some of the more meaningful revelations...as opposed to the FLOOD of conjecture and pure guesswork of what everyone has a different opinion of.. I think facts vs. "facts" are running about 1:100 on this, eh? Sure makes feeling informed a hard thing.

* Oh..and I'm working on getting something special to share for context... more on that this evening if I can get the imagery I'm after.

There is a lot of new news out tonight about Libya and what was said, done and decided that night. It's still breaking. So, I'm going to keep this short.

This is a Predator drone showing footage from actions in Iraq. It's how you normally see it.



It's surprisingly hard to even find nighttime footage of a stock nature online for anything that shows detail and what might realistically have been seen that night. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist or that I haven't seen some unbelievably detailed night shots from drones of the type likely over the Consulate. However....what lies deep down, stays deep down, so to speak. Finding an open and public spot that has something worthwhile took real work.

That is to explain, what shows the detail necessary to get an idea of what they saw and could have done about it comes with a graphic and ugly example. It's all in Thermal, which is the biggest point of the quality of image and the capability. This still isn't as good as it gets. Israel wouldn't be releasing the best. Israel absolutely doesn't have better than we do.

Israel fence incursion and fight

What you're seeing is explained, in detail. It's all above the video. That is what makes this valuable to watch if someone looks at it in a technical way. Watch it without reading the narrative and explanation. Zoom it, if you have a good monitor, because that is how it would have been watched and at higher resolution actually by a pilot and observers.

Then read exactly what really DID happen.....and see how well your interpretation matches what a viewer of the feed could have determined if watching in real time. Figure they saw better than that in technology terms.

I'm letting it off there for now because of that breaking news and all that not being real clear for what to believe yet.