Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Benghazi: Names of "Whistleblowers" Revealed: Gregory Hicks,Mark Thompson,Eric Nordstrom

page: 1
19
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 4 2013 @ 09:14 AM
link   
These 3 all work at the State Department. They seem traumatized by the Benghazi

Attack. Shouting into cell phones but no action taken to back up our people on the

ground in Benghazi. The only reason i have found: It was 2 months before an election.

Link Here:

Benghazi Witnesses Revealed

Intimidation has been used on the 3 named State officials.

edit on 4-5-2013 by TauCetixeta because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 4 2013 @ 02:42 PM
link   
If dems had "Hilliary Hopes" for 2016 election, the next six months will squash a campaign effort forever. Why else was she totally silent except one "appearance" to say she takes full responsibility?
So much for transparancy during a Presidential election...



posted on May, 4 2013 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Granite
If dems had "Hilliary Hopes" for 2016 election, the next six months will squash a campaign effort forever. Why else was she totally silent except one "appearance" to say she takes full responsibility?
So much for transparancy during a Presidential election...


The so called " Accountability Review Board "?

They should have named it the " Hide Hillary Board ".

Threaten potential Whistleblowers. Then intimidate them. " Nice career you have there.

It would be a shame if anything were to happen to it."




And Nancy Pelosi wants Hillary in the White House?

Hillary lied under oath !



posted on May, 4 2013 @ 03:11 PM
link   
Exactly...
Sen Cruz and Sen Paul had her by the "female gonads" and she went aggressive to escape...for a few months...



posted on May, 4 2013 @ 03:15 PM
link   
They watched it all, live and in real time, they had assets in the region and could have ended it quickly. They did NOTHING! They had advanced warning and requests for more security, and at the highest levels those repeated requests were denied.

Fact is you have an administration and top officials that by their inaction are guilty of murder, not only that they are all more worried about offending Muslims, and the new leadership in Libya that they were already preconditioned for inaction.

The policies of tolerance, apologies and appeasement when dealing with Muslims, particularly in that region of the world have proven to be a failure. Weakness invites Muslims to attack.

There are no shocking revelations to be made here, there is no reason to assume that anyone will be held responsible for their inaction and complicity. Maybe if they try really hard with a new plan and better "talking points" they can still blame it all on that youtube video.




posted on May, 4 2013 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Granite
Exactly...
Sen Cruz and Sen Paul had her by the "female gonads" and she went aggressive to escape...for a few months...


Hillary Clinton is going down the tubes May 8, 2013.

She lied under oath and will be disbarred just like her husband was.

The request for more Benghazi Security DID come to her. She signed it and then DENIED it.

Read More Here:

Hillary Going Down The Tubes



posted on May, 4 2013 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by ausername
They watched it all, live and in real time, they had assets in the region and could have ended it quickly. They did NOTHING! They had advanced warning and requests for more security, and at the highest levels those repeated requests were denied.

Fact is you have an administration and top officials that by their inaction are guilty of murder, not only that they are all more worried about offending Muslims, and the new leadership in Libya that they were already preconditioned for inaction.

The policies of tolerance, apologies and appeasement when dealing with Muslims, particularly in that region of the world have proven to be a failure. Weakness invites Muslims to attack.

There are no shocking revelations to be made here, there is no reason to assume that anyone will be held responsible for their inaction and complicity. Maybe if they try really hard with a new plan and better "talking points" they can still blame it all on that youtube video.




Why do nothing?

It was 2 months before a Presidential Election !

Quick ! Send Susan Rice out there to 5 networks and blame the video!



posted on May, 4 2013 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by TauCetixeta
 


Like Dukakis in a tank, or Kerry saying, "I voted for it before I voted against it" Hillary will be remembered by Benghazi.

This was her "Three o'clock phone call" that she refused to accept the call.



posted on May, 4 2013 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by TauCetixeta
 


Like Dukakis in a tank, or Kerry saying, "I voted for it before I voted against it" Hillary will be remembered by Benghazi.

This was her "Three o'clock phone call" that she refused to accept the call.


Hillary AND Obama DID accept the call. Response? " Stand Down."

"Let them die !"



posted on May, 4 2013 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Clinton turned down the requests for additional security in Benghazi because she couldn't provide it. she already testified before congress on this point. she didn't have enough dept. of state security to fully cover it, and she told the ambassador to stay in Tripoli because it was more heavily defended and secure. she was not authorized to send in military, or CIA security, he disobeyed her and went anyway. old news



posted on May, 4 2013 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by jimmyx
Clinton turned down the requests for additional security in Benghazi because she couldn't provide it. she already testified before congress on this point. she didn't have enough dept. of state security to fully cover it, and she told the ambassador to stay in Tripoli because it was more heavily defended and secure. she was not authorized to send in military, or CIA security, he disobeyed her and went anyway. old news


A wash after the fact doesn't mean the crap wasn't there.

But hey, she did bump her head, so maybe her memory was compromised?




posted on May, 4 2013 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by ausername

Originally posted by jimmyx
Clinton turned down the requests for additional security in Benghazi because she couldn't provide it. she already testified before congress on this point. she didn't have enough dept. of state security to fully cover it, and she told the ambassador to stay in Tripoli because it was more heavily defended and secure. she was not authorized to send in military, or CIA security, he disobeyed her and went anyway. old news


A wash after the fact doesn't mean the crap wasn't there.

But hey, she did bump her head, so maybe her memory was compromised?



I can hear Hillary already.

"Yes, i lied but what difference does it make!?"

"The election narrative was that we had Al Qaeda on the run. We had to lie."



posted on May, 4 2013 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by ausername
They watched it all, live and in real time, they had assets in the region and could have ended it quickly. They did NOTHING! They had advanced warning and requests for more security, and at the highest levels those repeated requests were denied.

Fact is you have an administration and top officials that by their inaction are guilty of murder, not only that they are all more worried about offending Muslims, and the new leadership in Libya that they were already preconditioned for inaction.

The policies of tolerance, apologies and appeasement when dealing with Muslims, particularly in that region of the world have proven to be a failure. Weakness invites Muslims to attack.

There are no shocking revelations to be made here, there is no reason to assume that anyone will be held responsible for their inaction and complicity. Maybe if they try really hard with a new plan and better "talking points" they can still blame it all on that youtube video.



any evidence?.....this was covered in the hearings, but who cares when you can accuse the entire administration and top officials of murder....because, you know, why wouldn't a president and the sec. of state want one of their own ambassadors murdered...makes perfect sense



posted on May, 4 2013 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by jimmyx

Originally posted by ausername
They watched it all, live and in real time, they had assets in the region and could have ended it quickly. They did NOTHING! They had advanced warning and requests for more security, and at the highest levels those repeated requests were denied.

Fact is you have an administration and top officials that by their inaction are guilty of murder, not only that they are all more worried about offending Muslims, and the new leadership in Libya that they were already preconditioned for inaction.

The policies of tolerance, apologies and appeasement when dealing with Muslims, particularly in that region of the world have proven to be a failure. Weakness invites Muslims to attack.

There are no shocking revelations to be made here, there is no reason to assume that anyone will be held responsible for their inaction and complicity. Maybe if they try really hard with a new plan and better "talking points" they can still blame it all on that youtube video.



any evidence?.....this was covered in the hearings, but who cares when you can accuse the entire administration and top officials of murder....because, you know, why wouldn't a president and the sec. of state want one of their own ambassadors murdered...makes perfect sense


The evidence will be revealed May 8, 2013 in the House of Representatives.

Listen carefully to the testimony.

Hillary is going down the tubes.



posted on May, 4 2013 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by TauCetixeta
 


In all honesty, I can't fault Hillary completely, she was completely unqualified for the job, along with many others in the administration at the time.. While ignorance is no excuse, it is a fact that should not be missed. When you elect an unqualified leader, you should expect no less in the people he/she selects to delegate authority to.

For all of them I believe they seen all of this as a game, seeking out political angles and not actually dealing with the problems they were faced with and were completely unqualified to deal with, so in every instance they fell back on what little they knew, and their top considerations in nearly every instance was "how is this going to effect us "politically" without the ability to think beyond that, or that there would be people on the inside that would expose their ineptness and their attempted cover-ups.
edit on 4-5-2013 by ausername because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2013 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by ausername
reply to post by TauCetixeta
 


In all honesty, I can't fault Hillary completely, she was completely unqualified for the job, along with many others in the administration at the time.. While ignorance is no excuse, it is a fact that should not be missed. When you elect an unqualified leader, you should expect no less in the people he/she selects to delegate authority to.

For all of them I believe they seen all of this as a game, seeking out political angles and not actually dealing with the problems they were faced with and were completely unqualified to to deal with, so in every instance they fell back on what little they knew, and their top considerations in nearly every instance was "how is this going to effect us "politically" without the ability to think beyond that, or that there would be people on the inside that would expose their ineptness and their attempted cover-ups.


I can tell you that those State Department officials hired the best attorneys in Washington DC.





posted on May, 4 2013 @ 04:08 PM
link   
Strange thing I just noticed. Eric Allan Nordstrom also served at Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. The Boston Bombers friend named Robel Phillipos is a Ethiopian. Is there a connection? His mother works with refugees from Ethiopia. I wonder if that is a state department job? The bombers uncle worked with the CIA and State Department creating front companies in Russia to send money to Chechnya to do anti Russian attacks. The older bomber was trying for the Olympics which is connected to the State Department.

Also have a strange connection with Gregory N. Hicks. His wife works for USAID also through John Snow,Inc. located in Boston which also has projects on Russia.

It seems strange that you connect these names to Libya, Ethiopia,Russia and Boston all through the USAID and State Department. What is the chance so many things happening to places directly connected to these guys who's job is in Terrorism?
edit on 4-5-2013 by JBA2848 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by TauCetixeta
 


Odds are good that their stories will change at the last minute, there is too much at stake here, and when you stand as a threat to that much power, they will find a way to either intimidate you or threaten you until you either play along or ultimately pay the price.

We'll see.



posted on May, 4 2013 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by jimmyx
 


Its not that they wanted them dead, they just didn't care. Why? Because of the liberal mind-set that what is best for liberals is more important than anything. Think about for a moment. More important than anything. More important than you, your children, your job, your survival...hell...even God. Ask Nancy...she has already said it. They were elected to do as they wish...no matter what. And if you disagree, you are not a liberal and if you are not a liberal...you are an idiot.
edit on 5/4/2013 by WeAreAWAKE because: spelling



posted on May, 4 2013 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by TauCetixeta
The evidence will be revealed May 8, 2013 in the House of Representatives.

Listen carefully to the testimony.


So what your'e saying is that nothing happened that even remotely resembles what you suggest happened. The fact that nothing happened will be revealed on May 8th.

"All we're waiting for is something worth waiting for."






top topics



 
19
<<   2 >>

log in

join