Proof that all the outrage about Benghazi is fake and manufactured

page: 2
24
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 9 2013 @ 09:38 AM
link   
reply to post by 48e18
 



Do you have proof that they were pre-warned about this specific attack? I have never seen that. I have seen months old request for money to provide more security...and I believe that was at the main embassy in Tripoli, not Benghazi.


You should have done a little research before throwing up such a disrespectful, partisan thread. I’m shocked that I read your nonsense this morning…I usually don’t get shocked by threads.

Read:


Just hours before he died in a terrorist attack at the U.S. compound in Benghazi, Ambassador Chris Stevens sent a cable to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton painting a chaotic, violent portrait of the eastern Libya city and warning that local militias were threatening to pull the security they afforded U.S. officials.
link




posted on May, 9 2013 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by jjkenobi
Typical liberal logic. None of those reported incidents could have been prevented if the administration at the time had ordered military intervention. A car bomb explodes - the event is over. It wasn't like Al-Qada was actively storming and attacking the embassy, which is EXACTLY what was happening when Obama went back to sleep and Hillary ordered a stand down TWICE in Benghazi.


First of all, many of those attacks I listed were not just a simple car bomb...but they were actual raids by men with guns and rockets. So yes...militants were actively storming embassies and consulates. So any more excuses?

Second of all, the drone didn't get there until 90+ minutes after the attack started (and was over)...so they watched nothing...they watched a burning building with no active fight going on. You seem to be confused about the timeline.

www.cnn.com...



posted on May, 9 2013 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by 200Plus
reply to post by 48e18
 


In the attacks that you mentioned:

How many times did the president get on TV and apologize to the attackers?


He didn't, go ahead and find video of him apologizing. This is just more lies from the Republican echo chamber. You are thinking of the Egyptian embassy issuing an apology...the White House actually disavowed the "apology".


How many times was an American citizen blamed and arrested in the states?



How many times was the attack blamed on "spontaneous demonstrations"?


How would we know...no one cared or talked about the other 11 attacks.



How many times did the Secretary of State respond with "what difference does it make?"


Even worse...no one cared...no one seemed to think the attacks and deaths made any difference at all. There was no outrage...there was no concern at all about those attacks.


Answer those questions and maybe you will see why this attack was different.


The only difference between this attack and the 11 I listed is that the Right Wing media didn't brainwash their naïve base to be outraged by it. The outrage to this is a pure Pavlovian response.



posted on May, 9 2013 @ 09:51 AM
link   
This is ridiculous. This is *all* coming from the right, be it the media or the politicians - if you can't see that this is a partisan attempt to try and "stick it" yet again to the Obama administration and not a true pursuit of the truth, take your head out of the sand. Is there outrage that the Benghazi attack happened - yes, from all sides. Were there likely mistakes made in the "fog of war" that likely occurred in those 7-8 hours - of course. Can you say you would have handled the situation better than it was handled? No, of course you can't - you don't know the exact circumstances of everything that was happening at that time. But to try to make this out as the next Watergate on very little evidence is ridiculous. Temper your outrage until *real* hard evidence comes out, if it ever does - but until it does, try to stay grounded in reality and not let the partisan whirl-wind sweep you up.



posted on May, 9 2013 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by redtic
This is ridiculous. This is *all* coming from the right, be it the media or the politicians - if you can't see that this is a partisan attempt to try and "stick it" yet again to the Obama administration and not a true pursuit of the truth, take your head out of the sand. Is there outrage that the Benghazi attack happened - yes, from all sides. Were there likely mistakes made in the "fog of war" that likely occurred in those 7-8 hours - of course. Can you say you would have handled the situation better than it was handled? No, of course you can't - you don't know the exact circumstances of everything that was happening at that time. But to try to make this out as the next Watergate on very little evidence is ridiculous. Temper your outrage until *real* hard evidence comes out, if it ever does - but until it does, try to stay grounded in reality and not let the partisan whirl-wind sweep you up.


It wasn't the following 7-8 hours after the attack and the fog of war. It was an official administration person going on numerous talk shows telling the American people why it happened and we know that reason was false. Either the administration knew it was false and you have a cover-up or they didn't have all the information in which case they shouldn't have been saying anything about it until they did.

The left would love to bury the fact this happened but it should outrage everyone.



posted on May, 9 2013 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by redtic

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
A U.S. Ambassador was murdered and a United States Consulate was over-run and totally destroyed, while our leaders watched it happen, as we now know, on video by drones overhead.


We do? How exactly do we *know* that?


Ummmm.... I think the dead body was my first clue.


How about you?



posted on May, 9 2013 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

Originally posted by redtic

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
A U.S. Ambassador was murdered and a United States Consulate was over-run and totally destroyed, while our leaders watched it happen, as we now know, on video by drones overhead.


We do? How exactly do we *know* that?


Ummmm.... I think the dead body was my first clue.


How about you?


Clever - but then again, you know that's not what I referring to, right?



posted on May, 9 2013 @ 10:04 AM
link   
I can't seem to find in any of the attacks listed in the OP where there was any "stand down" orders.

I'm starting to believe more and more that ATS is full of paid posters.

Pladuim



posted on May, 9 2013 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hopechest

Originally posted by redtic
This is ridiculous. This is *all* coming from the right, be it the media or the politicians - if you can't see that this is a partisan attempt to try and "stick it" yet again to the Obama administration and not a true pursuit of the truth, take your head out of the sand. Is there outrage that the Benghazi attack happened - yes, from all sides. Were there likely mistakes made in the "fog of war" that likely occurred in those 7-8 hours - of course. Can you say you would have handled the situation better than it was handled? No, of course you can't - you don't know the exact circumstances of everything that was happening at that time. But to try to make this out as the next Watergate on very little evidence is ridiculous. Temper your outrage until *real* hard evidence comes out, if it ever does - but until it does, try to stay grounded in reality and not let the partisan whirl-wind sweep you up.


It wasn't the following 7-8 hours after the attack and the fog of war. It was an official administration person going on numerous talk shows telling the American people why it happened and we know that reason was false. Either the administration knew it was false and you have a cover-up or they didn't have all the information in which case they shouldn't have been saying anything about it until they did.

The left would love to bury the fact this happened but it should outrage everyone.


Oh, so now it's not the president's and Hillary's "lack of response" immediately after the start of the attacks, now we're back to the whole Susan Rice thing. Please, make up your minds..



posted on May, 9 2013 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by redtic

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

Originally posted by redtic

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
A U.S. Ambassador was murdered and a United States Consulate was over-run and totally destroyed, while our leaders watched it happen, as we now know, on video by drones overhead.


We do? How exactly do we *know* that?


Ummmm.... I think the dead body was my first clue.


How about you?



Clever - but then again, you know that's not what I referring to, right?


No, I have no idea what you are referring to. I've got pictures by the dozen which the terrorists themselves released within 48 hours of the attack and show them burning out the Consulate to force the Ambassador to evacuate the safe room he'd taken shelter in...after the rest of the civilians had been successfully evacuated. I call that murder. Then we have pictures the entire press corps ran of his dead body being half dragged out and to a hospital we now learn the terrorist group who did it, controlled.

What part of that am I failing to see properly as the murder of a US Ambassador? I think it speaks for itself and in this case? Those who did it, supplied virtually all the evidence themselves almost immediately after the event occurred. They were proud of what they did.


Benghazi Photos

*****
^^^ WARNING: While these are among the less graphic, and I'll NOT link or post those which are worse, they are still a shock. They are among what ran in the World Press and not worse....but still, don't open that if the sight of Ambassador Steven's body in the hands of those terrorists is disturbing
*****

THAT is what murder looks like. Something to remember, if you hadn't seen it.
edit on 9-5-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2013 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pladuim
I can't seem to find in any of the attacks listed in the OP where there was any "stand down" orders.

I'm starting to believe more and more that ATS is full of paid posters.

Pladuim



you beat me to it. I dont see where any of these attackes had "stand down" orders or denied reinforcements as our leaders just watch americans die because they wanted to get re-elected and keep there catch phrases.

they knew those men died because reinforcements were told to stand down. thats why they covered it up as a protest to a u-tube video. Who by the, the producer of the film is still in jail.



posted on May, 9 2013 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by redtic
 



Oh, so now it's not the president's and Hillary's "lack of response" immediately after the start of the attacks, now we're back to the whole Susan Rice thing. Please, make up your minds..


It was a systematic failure on the part of many within this administration. They should be ashamed of their poor performance and some in this thread should be ashamed about carrying their water. Who ever dropped the ball should be held accountable.

Most people are honest enough to admit that this situation could have been handled MUCH better and the bold lies they peddled are almost as disgusting as the lack of leadership they showed.

Maybe this issue and the security of our people isn’t as important to some on the left as OTHER issues??





posted on May, 9 2013 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
No, I have no idea what you are referring to. I've got pictures by the dozen which the terrorists themselves released within 48 hours of the attack and show them burning out the Consulate to force the Ambassador to evacuate the safe room he'd taken shelter in...after the rest of the civilians had been successfully evacuated. I call that murder. Then we have pictures the entire press corps ran of his dead body being half dragged out and to a hospital we now learn the terrorist group who did it, controlled.

What part of that am I failing to see properly as the murder of a US Ambassador? I think it speaks for itself and in this case? Those who did it, supplied virtually all the evidence themselves almost immediately after the event occurred. They were proud of what they did.


If you think I'm actually refuting the fact that the Ambassador was murdered, you're more delusional than I thought. I'm referring the fact that you stated "we know" that the administration was watching the events unfold on drone video. Where is your proof of that?



posted on May, 9 2013 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by redtic

Originally posted by Hopechest

Originally posted by redtic
This is ridiculous. This is *all* coming from the right, be it the media or the politicians - if you can't see that this is a partisan attempt to try and "stick it" yet again to the Obama administration and not a true pursuit of the truth, take your head out of the sand. Is there outrage that the Benghazi attack happened - yes, from all sides. Were there likely mistakes made in the "fog of war" that likely occurred in those 7-8 hours - of course. Can you say you would have handled the situation better than it was handled? No, of course you can't - you don't know the exact circumstances of everything that was happening at that time. But to try to make this out as the next Watergate on very little evidence is ridiculous. Temper your outrage until *real* hard evidence comes out, if it ever does - but until it does, try to stay grounded in reality and not let the partisan whirl-wind sweep you up.


It wasn't the following 7-8 hours after the attack and the fog of war. It was an official administration person going on numerous talk shows telling the American people why it happened and we know that reason was false. Either the administration knew it was false and you have a cover-up or they didn't have all the information in which case they shouldn't have been saying anything about it until they did.

The left would love to bury the fact this happened but it should outrage everyone.


Oh, so now it's not the president's and Hillary's "lack of response" immediately after the start of the attacks, now we're back to the whole Susan Rice thing. Please, make up your minds..


That's what this whole thread has been about.

Did you read the OP at all?



posted on May, 9 2013 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by redtic
 


If you didn't catch the hearings yesterday that supported the statements of others much earlier on and last year, regarding the presence of United States drone aircraft over the site of the attack, then I can't help you but to suggest you research your topic a whole lot better before coming on with posts like this. :shk:



posted on May, 9 2013 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by jjkenobi
Typical liberal logic. None of those reported incidents could have been prevented if the administration at the time had ordered military intervention. A car bomb explodes - the event is over. It wasn't like Al-Qada was actively storming and attacking the embassy, which is EXACTLY what was happening when Obama went back to sleep and Hillary ordered a stand down TWICE in Benghazi.


are you rush Limbaugh or sean Hannity?



posted on May, 9 2013 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by jimmyx

Originally posted by jjkenobi
Typical liberal logic. None of those reported incidents could have been prevented if the administration at the time had ordered military intervention. A car bomb explodes - the event is over. It wasn't like Al-Qada was actively storming and attacking the embassy, which is EXACTLY what was happening when Obama went back to sleep and Hillary ordered a stand down TWICE in Benghazi.


are you rush Limbaugh or sean Hannity?


Neither, sounds like a logical American thinking for himself and not being spoon feed propaganda.

whats your thoughts jimmyx? do you think Obama and Hillary did everything in there power to try and save these people? Or are you thinking "why does it matter"?
edit on 9-5-2013 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2013 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by redtic
 


If you didn't catch the hearings yesterday that supported the statements of others much earlier on and last year, regarding the presence of United States drone aircraft over the site of the attack, then I can't help you but to suggest you research your topic a whole lot better before coming on with posts like this. :shk:


And I suggest you do the same - there is no proof that the White House was watching live footage of the drone video as the events happened.



posted on May, 9 2013 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by 48e18
 
the OP is being ignorant on why the outrage, THEY LIED!
and they assume we're so stupid that we wouldn't notice or care.

but no matter, they'll get away with this just as they have gotten away with fast and furious and all the other crap they have done.



posted on May, 9 2013 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Thunderheart
 


Yep, the outrage isn't over what actually happened because bad things happen, if there were security lapses they should be dealt with and criticized seperatly but the Watergate comparisons are coming because of the lies in the media afterwards.

That is really the outrageous part.





new topics
top topics
 
24
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join