White House press secretary, "Obama Has Not Participated in the Investigation' of Benghazi"

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 08:27 AM
link   

I just don't understand this "shoot first and ask questions later" mentality.


When did i say shoot? when did i ever even hint towards violence?

How about not aiding those responsible.....i mean foreign aid that the us so freely gives away while our country is tanking?

In the bigger picture tell all middle eastern nations that if they want our help anymore than you will all fight along side us, or fend for your selves.

I believe that our nation should be first worry of any elected official.......internally speaking.

We need to fix us before we worry about other nations. But i also believe that we should show no weakness in our resolve to those who attack and kill ours.




posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by elouina
If he was innocent, wouldn't he be doing everything possible to clear his name vs. "taking the fifth"?


Taking the fifth? What are you alluding to? Are you telling me that Obama has been subpoenaed for a deposition under oath and that he invoked his Fifth Amendment rights? Some of you folks are so hell bent on ousting Obama that you simply make up your own set of rules and demand that the POTUS follow them. I think y'all seriously need to snap back to reality.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by LeatherNLace

Originally posted by shaneslaughta
He should be looking into it. Americans Died! if he was any kind of leader he would be putting an American boot up someones ass.


Obama's title is Commander in Chief; not Investigator in Chief. Obama has several alphabet agencies that he is in command of. Those agencies are the one's tasked with the investigation; not the executive branch. Obama has ordered an investigation and, so far as I know, that investigation is ongoing. When the investigation is complete, then it will go public and we shall get our answers. Until the investigation is complete, then Obama doesn't know whose rear to put a boot up. I applaud the thorough investigation! I much prefer it to some reactionary like George Bush who conducted zero investigation into 9/11/2001 before committing our troops to an illegal, unaffordable and unwinnable war. I just don't understand this "shoot first and ask questions later" mentality.



Obama does have a long history of shooting first and aiming later so I guess you couldn't blame him for taking the easy way out right before an election.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by LeatherNLace

Originally posted by elouina
If he was innocent, wouldn't he be doing everything possible to clear his name vs. "taking the fifth"?


Taking the fifth? What are you alluding to? Are you telling me that Obama has been subpoenaed for a deposition under oath and that he invoked his Fifth Amendment rights? Some of you folks are so hell bent on ousting Obama that you simply make up your own set of rules and demand that the POTUS follow them. I think y'all seriously need to snap back to reality.


reply to post by LeatherNLace
 


Don't even go there, you know darn well I am just using it as an expression. Supression of facts is just as evil as flat out lying. The American public deserves to know who they are voting for. He is stonewalling, hoping folks will be too blinded by their zeal for him. I for one do not want to end up with Biden as president. So lets find out now.

For all we know, perhaps they figured that Obama will be going down (impeachment after the hearings) and want to keep a democrat (Biden) in office. And then Biden can continue Obamas plans. Has anyone even though of this?
edit on 2-11-2012 by elouina because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 08:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by shaneslaughta

when did i ever even hint towards violence?


Right here:


Originally posted by shaneslaughta
if he was any kind of leader he would be putting an American boot up someones ass.



How about not aiding those responsible.....i mean foreign aid that the us so freely gives away while our country is tanking?


Aiding them how? The same foreign aid we've been giving for decades? Somehow that is now Obama's fault?


I believe that our nation should be first worry of any elected official.......internally speaking. We need to fix us before we worry about other nations.


Now that I can agree with. If only we could get congress to pass a jobs bill and get the ball rolling. Our infrastructure is aging and, in many places, outdated. It's high time we cut the bloated defense budget and redirect that spending on updating our own country.


But i also believe that we should show no weakness in our resolve to those who attack and kill ours.


Again, I agree. But before we show our strength of our resolve, we must conduct a thorough investigation and make certain that we are going after the guilty people and guarantee that there is no innocent blood shed at the hands of the US.

edit on 2-11-2012 by LeatherNLace because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by LeatherNLace
 


He is the CIC he should have been in front of this incident and he should be honest with the public on what has happened. If this GWB at the helm all hell would be breaking loose. Obama is an embarassment to the American people and an object failure as a leader of our military.

He words in NJ " We will leave no one behind" funny how we let 4 brave americans perish in LIBYA, the didn't get left behind, they got left for dead.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 08:51 AM
link   

Senior counter terrorism officials felt cut out of the loop the night of the attack on the Benghazi consulate, according to emails that were shared with Fox News by military sources who are familiar with discussions of how to respond the night of the Sept. 11 attack.


Why? Who neglected their job......?


Top State Department officials decided not to send an inter-agency rapid response unit designed to respond to terrorist attacks known as a FEST team, a Foreign Emergency Support Team. This team from the State Department and CIA has a military Joint Special Operations Command element to it and has been routinely deployed to assist in investigations -- for instance, after the USS Cole bombing and the bombings at the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.


hmmmm?


"The response process was isolated at the most senior level,"


So top level brass or the POUTS decided that Americans died no biggie.



National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor told Fox News, "the most senior people in government worked on this issue from the minute it happened. That includes the Secretary of Defense, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Secretary of State, National Security advisor, etcetera. Additionally, the Deputies Committee -- the second in command at the relevant national security agencies -- met at least once and more often twice a day to manage the issue."


So they are working on it daily....but never cared enough to defend American soil?


But the latest revelations, including reporting by Fox News that the State Department was warned a month before the attack that the consulate could not withstand a coordinated strike, have sparked renewed criticisms from top GOP lawmakers.


So they were warned and knew that the consulate would fall if attacked, and they did nothing to prepare or prevent yet another attack on American soil.

Fox

This is the reality!



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by DOLCOTT
reply to post by LeatherNLace
 


He is the CIC he should have been in front of this incident and he should be honest with the public on what has happened. If this GWB at the helm all hell would be breaking loose. Obama is an embarassment to the American people and an object failure as a leader of our military.

He words in NJ " We will leave no one behind" funny how we let 4 brave americans perish in LIBYA, the didn't get left behind, they got left for dead.


They can't immediately blame GWB so they are going to "investigate" it until it goes away.

Seems how they treat everything....
edit on 2-11-2012 by 11235813213455 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 08:54 AM
link   
reply to post by LeatherNLace
 


It was a metaphorical boot.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 08:55 AM
link   
reply to post by DOLCOTT
 


Yes, I remember that comment. Thank you for sharing this. Oh the irony and how fitting, true? But in Obamas defense, he did not leave a man behind. He left FOUR men out behind the building in coffins .
edit on 2-11-2012 by elouina because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 09:25 AM
link   
Why is it time and time again Obama has failed to protect our embassy's on foreign soil?
It seems as if they are coming under attack more and more, why is that?

Ill tell you why, because they see us a weak with Obama at the helm.

How about sending a squad or two of our boys to each embassy and keep them on standby.
Sure it may cost us a bit more, but hell in the grand scheme of things if it saves a few American lives its worth it.

And you will not have to investigate anything, with our people there and ready they will get the perps red handed every time.
edit on 2-11-2012 by shaneslaughta because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by shaneslaughta

Originally posted by flyswatter
You have to remember the fact that Obama really shouldnt be doing the investigating. As was said by a previous poster, it is actually better that he does NOT attempt to do any of the investigating on his own. It leaves less room for people to accuse him of whitewashing the information, and it leaves the investigating of the issue to the people that are more capable.


Oh so you think he shouldn't to make the mess look better for his election campaign?

He should be looking into it. Americans Died! if he was any kind of leader he would be putting an American boot up someones ass.



He should not be the one personally looking into it. He should be a subject of the investigation, not the investigating party. There are people far more experienced at this, and it would be a rather large conflict of interest if he were to personally handle anything related to the investigation.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by flyswatter
 


I should have stated that more clearly, not Obama specifically but his gauntlet of minions should be investigating it.
I agree he should be investigated as he failed to uphold his oath again and again by not protecting U.S. soil.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by shaneslaughta
reply to post by flyswatter
 


I should have stated that more clearly, not Obama specifically but his gauntlet of minions should be investigating it.
I agree he should be investigated as he failed to uphold his oath again and again by not protecting U.S. soil.


I'm not going to debate the correctness of how he handled things, as that is subject to interpretation. I cant pretend to place myself in his shoes or know what else was going on.

The right thing to do is have an independantly chosen group of people investigate things. Ideally I would think this group of investigators would come from both inside and outside of political circles, making every effort to steer clear of those that might have any potential conflicts of interest. Not that the results of the investigation will really do anything to those in charge, but at least we'd know more of the truth.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Take a look at the newest report from a senior intelligence officer with the CIA:




According to the senior intelligence official:

•The officers on the ground in Benghazi responded quickly to the attack, risking their lives in an attempt to rescue those at the consulate.

•There was no second-guessing of decisions made on the ground and no order to anybody to stand down in providing support. "At every level in the chain of command, from the senior officers in Libya to the most senior officials in Washington, everyone was fully engaged in trying to provide whatever help they could," the official said.

•The U.S. military provided essential support, including sending an unarmed drone and medical evacuation.

•Two U.S. security teams were involved -- one that was sent from the annex to the consulate and a tactical support team that was sent from Tripoli, each composed of approximately half a dozen security officers. Two U.S. military officers were on the team from Tripoli.


MSNBC

The story just came out last night. Looks to me like Obama isn't engaging that much, because there really isn't anything he did wrong. Fox and it's pundits would like to paint the president as a cold blooded murderer -- when from what we are now seeing isn't the case.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 

Consider this



The current “blame CIA” story linked above by Scandia Recluse is part of the White House’s obfuscation effort. More smoke. (I am counting Hillary as being part of the Obama/Jarrett/Axlerod/Michelle team that is actually directing the nation.)

The point is not the percent of CIA compared to State Dept in Benghazi, or how soon they went from the annex to the consulate on the initial rescue attempt. Or how soon the guys from Tripoli got there. Putting the spotlight on the CIA for a few days buys the White House more time, a few days, an eternity just days before an election.

But don’t go for the Magician’s feint: “Look at the bad CIA!” Keep your eye on the ball, which is the lack of outside military rescue, which was waiting to go in Sigonella for many hours of the seven hour battle of Benghazi. At any time Obama could have granted CBA and the rescue force would be inbound. It’s important to note that the flying time from either Tripoli or Sigonella to Benghazi are the same. So why make a big issue of when the CIA contractors left Tripoli on a chartered flight? (As we know, they were already “in country” and not bound by CBA rules.)

By the time the six CIA “shooters” from Tripoli finally arrived at the annex in Benghazi, they should have been met by a hundred Force Recon Marines, who already had the situation well in hand, with USN and USAF assets controlling the high ground clear up to space and satellites.

Getting side-showed by the CIA’s puny ad-hoc and chartered “rescue assets” in Tripoli is ridiculous. Keep your eye on the main thing, the rescue that didn’t happen, by the entire U.S. military that was ready, willing and able to go, on a moment’s notice, the minute the POTUS granted an execute order including CBA.

If he had done it, we would know it, because the White House could produce the orders. If they existed. No execute order, no CBA, no rescue mission.

More of the full column I wrote can be found on Free Republic.


]Source

FreeRepublic

I tend to think it's about gun running and that's why stevens was taken out...Casualty of Greed...IMO



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by elouina
 


Interesting you should bring up CNN elouina. Have you seen this yet?




An impassioned Brian Lilley tells us what we already know: that the mainstream media is lying when they report that the mohammadan riots are a response to the film "The Innocence of muslims."





Within this Canadian video report you will find footage of a CNN story on Egypt and Mohammed Al Zawahiri. It was produced by well-known CNN Journalist Nick Robertson. The entire video is excellent, but the pertinent aspect is at the 1:30 mark. In the previous thread I asked two central questions. The Second Question was: Why would CNN [or CNNi] refuse to air the Nick Robertson report with Muhammed Al Zawahiri (brother of Ayman Al Zawahiri) that clearly shows the Egyptian uprising was 100% in response to his call for protests for release of the Blind sheik on 9-11.? Why would the “most trusted name in news“, hide the report showing the truth, and instead allow the false narrative to be sold, by them, to the American electorate?





I came across this today:




Amber Lyon provides the answer(s). CNN never aired the Nick Robertson report in Egypt because it completely contradicted the Obama Administration, and Hillary Clinton State Department, Egyptian assertions. In short, it proved they were lying – BIG TIME. The refusal to air the real reasoning for the Egyptian Embassy assault was intentional protection of President Obama specifically orchestrated by the CNN News group. Specific, intentional, lying.


Who is Amber Lyon you might be wondering?




Amber Lyon is a three-time Emmy winning investigative journalist and photographer. She accuses CNN of being “fake news.”


What is Amber claiming?




She says she was ordered to report fake stories, delete unfriendly stories adverse to the Obama administration (like the Nick Robertson report), and construct stories in specific manners while working for the left-wing network. CNN is paid by foreign and domestic Government agencies for specific content.


Visit the link for so much more...

Amber Lyons blows the whistle on CNN



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeatherNLace
If Obama is being accused of any wrong doings as it relates to Benghazi; and he has been accused by the GOP leadership, then it is in the best interest of himself and the country to allow an investigation to go on without his interjections.

Besides, what's Obama suppose to do, put a lab coat on and go study the forensic evidence? Go interview witnesses and obtain sworn statements?


I think they should subpoena him to be involved in the hearings is what I think......and Hilary and Rice and Kennedy.......

Would be interesting to see who turns on who first.......



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 03:48 PM
link   
Worth sharing.
: MELT THEIR PHONES DOWN until they cover #Benghazi
NBC Phone: 212-664-3720
ABC Phone: 212-456-7777
CBS Phone: 212 975-3247

From Twitter@Romniac



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by MsAphrodite
 


Myself, I would like to see this Amber Lyon business announced on some better sources. But if this is correct, then what I have been saying all along is right. CNN is the US version of Pravda.

To quote myself from another thread Link to thread,




What bothered me the most and contributed to my involvement was how CNN was handling this Benghazi business. They are a major news source and it just seems like they have something to gain by not being honest with the public. I can feel it, can you?





top topics
 
11
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join