Video; Obama, responsible for Benghazi, case closed.

reply to post by cholo

Dear cholo,

First, you must get better at calling me names. No orginality at all. Check my signature for an example of the minimum insult I will accept.

But to agree with Wrabbit2000 (A member of the infamous Wrabbit Cartel mentioned in another thread), you're dodging. By wanting to move on you're abandoning the search for truth and facts, slapping a band-aid on a shotgun wound. As he points out, the cables are available, the witnesses (those the State Department will allow to speak) are telling what happened, a clear picture is emerging.

The only moral option I can see is for you, and other Obama supporters to call for the most complete investigation possible and hope that Obama and Clinton are somewhat innocent.

Oh, my hope that I was misunderstanding you? I try to give everyone the benefit of the doubt. It seems you're saying "Everybody ignore these deaths, it just the Republicans screaming over nothing."

reply to post by cholo

Well then you are gonna wait til hell freezes over, because the majority of people I know are not thinking about this or talking about it because it has been hammered TO DEATH.

Well, then it's a dandy coincidence. I hear there is a cold front rolling up the River Styx and right into the pits of Hades.

The forecast came yesterday before the United States Congress and under oath. 3 of the 4 who had something to say, finally had open air to say it. There is another, they are still playing games with. She'll get her say too....and with luck, that will give yet more the courage to step forward and share what they were a small part of in this mess.

There were hundreds with some level of knowledge or observation of what either led up to this or what happened that night. Too much, too many directions, happened. It only takes a small % to get this rolling for a full and PROPER investigation, as the events deserve.

deleted for being contrary to conservative ideology

reply to post by cholo


He was doing the Presidents job, remaining calm, and showing calm, even during extreme duress.

they were already doing all that stuff, it doesn't take the president in the control tower to launch jets, they don't even need his approval to do so when there is a threat.

9/11 was a sneak attack that happened in minutes.

Benghazi was over several hours, aid was trying to go help, and was told not to do so.

I may have missed the part where Bush ordered the military to let the terrorists do any of that stuff, could you point it out?

Obama had drones over head watching in real time, he knew exactly what was going on, they had assets available and ready, they ordered them not to help.

If you cant see the difference here, it is intentional on your part.......yes I am saying your trolling, and it is pathetic BTW.

Now please, stop trying to blame Bush, and stick to the topic of your thread, Obama let Americans die, he has not admitted to it, and has done his best to cover it up.

I have pointed out several times, just like several others, exactly how he did this, and you try to deflect with Bush did it crap.

Address the points, and disprove them if they are wrong, don't try to strawman me, I will not play this stupid game, and will only make you look foolish, using your own words, as you have already provided much easy ammo.

Yes or no, Obama knew what was going on in real time?
Yes or no, troops were ready and willing to go and help and were told to stand down?
Yes or no, 2 weeks after the fact, Obama had his staff lie to the American public on national TV, 5 times about what happened?
Yes or no, Obama still to this very moment, denied what actually occurred?


Please stay on topic in your own thread sir, deflection is weak and pathetic, address the points, if your position is the correct one, the facts will bare that out.

If your position is the wrong one, the facts must be twisted and ignored, to protect your position, which is very obvious to everyone, and only makes those doing so look ignorant.

So please just the facts about this, and strick on point like I have.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I hope this doesn't sound like I'm making light of this, but looking at those pictures....you'd think they'd have a nicer place for an embassy or consulate. Walls blown out, burnt out vehicles, sandbag emplacements, plastic lawn furniture...the inside looked much nicer than I would've expected from just seeing the outside.

Originally posted by BobM88
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

I hope this doesn't sound like I'm making light of this, but looking at those pictures....you'd think they'd have a nicer place for an embassy or consulate. Walls blown out, burnt out vehicles, sandbag emplacements, plastic lawn furniture...the inside looked much nicer than I would've expected from just seeing the outside.

Oh, not at all... I've thought the same thing. It almost looks like the low rent district of Napa Valley, to the extent there is one. The papers I linked on the last page also talk about the Consulate compound being a lease from a local land owner. So, I imagine, they had limitations to how much they could 'gussy it up'. All the more reason to question why, after the first attack (which the local militia the US hired, simply watched and wrote a report about) the Consulate wasn't cleared and people moved into the main Embassy in Tripoli where security was far more serious and solid.

You see in those, why I describe that place as staking the people out to die. How else can one put it? A boy scout pack could have climbed those low walls with nothing of note between them and ..indeed, a real NICE place to see the inside of it. At least, before they burned it out.

deleted for being contrary to conservative ideology

Originally posted by BobM88

Originally posted by cholo
If intel was wrong, that is not his job, he is not responsible for bad intelligence.

Now that is an interesting statement. One I agree with, by the way, but not one often heard 'round these parts when it comes to Presidential decisions and bad intel...

Correct. It's only the President's fault for bad Intel if his last name is Bush.

reply to post by cholo

Langley could have scrambled jets in that time, watch him sit there and then talk about your dismal
comparison

What the hell would Langley have to do with scrambling jets???

By the way, for all who are interested.... The locals who made that first attack which blew out the wall? DID claim credit, DID indicate more was coming and DID make a clear demand. I've avoided saying more, because I really would like people to read those docs themselves. It's 166 pages and enough to boil anyone's blood by the end of it and full comprehension of what happened there and why.

However, the demand they made was for the release of Omar Abdel Rachman, or "The Blind Sheik" who many may recall (I sure do) was behind planning and inspiration of the 1993 World Trade Center Bombing in the parking structure beneath one of the towers.

That, among other things, has made this personal for me since day 1 that I became aware of those details, as reported in those docs, in the hand of the State Department employees inside that compound. You see, that terrorist has been held, at times, at the Federal Medical Facility for Prisoners at Springfield, Missouri. You might guess by now, what I live close enough to, to care ...and even driven past, countless times.

This all matters a great deal and knowing the full truth is very important.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


This is probably another one of those things not known...but why would the Ambassador be in the consulate there rather than in the main building in Tripoli? Did the capitol move to Benghazi? I believe I read in one of these threads that the anti-Gaddafi people were centered in Benghazi because Gaddafi was in Tripoli, if that's the case I'm guessing that's why the Ambassador was in the consulate in Benghazi rather than in Tripoli? Anyone know if that's correct, or am I assuming too much?

Originally posted by g146541
reply to post by inverslyproportional

 

You said,

Bush sent troops and aid every time one of our embassies were attacked, he was known for sending troops into places, or did you miss that memo?

And there it is, I did not care much for Pres. Shrub but, he was a helluva lot better American than BarryO will ever be.



Folks, please can we stop picking the lesser of two evils and just find a 3rd candidate who wants to do a roll up the sleeves job in Washington??

Agreed!!

I didn't really love old Bush that much, but at least he sent too many guys too help, never none.

Obama or his staff, whichever it was that made the call, sent NONE!!!!!!

That is the exact opposite of all American military doctrine, you always go to your buddies aid!! ALWAYS!!!!!

If they are quite literally in HELL itself, you will not have to order anyone to go help them, just ask for volunteers, and then watch every single soldier in earshot step forward, EVERY SINGLE TIME!!!!!

This breaks my heart, I cant imagine the look on their faces when they realized their country had abandoned them to their fate, and the tender mercies of their attackers, this is unprecedented, and a tragedy that should never have happened, and GOD willig, will never be repeated.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


What are these docs titled? So I can google and take a read myself, it sounds like it might be interesting as well as maddening.

reply to post by cholo

Tell the conservatives who cut the funding to Benghazi's security infrastructure.

SOURCE???

(The State Department has basically unlimited funds BTW)

Originally posted by BobM88
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

This is probably another one of those things not known...but why would the Ambassador be in the consulate there rather than in the main building in Tripoli? Did the capitol move to Benghazi? I believe I read in one of these threads that the anti-Gaddafi people were centered in Benghazi because Gaddafi was in Tripoli, if that's the case I'm guessing that's why the Ambassador was in the consulate in Benghazi rather than in Tripoli? Anyone know if that's correct, or am I assuming too much?

Well, who else is going to coordinate and facilitate the guns being run to the Muslim Brotherhood?

Originally posted by BobM88
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

This is probably another one of those things not known...but why would the Ambassador be in the consulate there rather than in the main building in Tripoli? Did the capitol move to Benghazi? I believe I read in one of these threads that the anti-Gaddafi people were centered in Benghazi because Gaddafi was in Tripoli, if that's the case I'm guessing that's why the Ambassador was in the consulate in Benghazi rather than in Tripoli? Anyone know if that's correct, or am I assuming too much?

I think you ask one of the key questions we all should see an answer to. Whatever the answer is for that? Likely sits at or close to the center of everything that happened. There were two locations, separated by roughly 2 miles. The State Department Compound and the Central Intelligence Agency's compound to the Southeast. That is where rescue came by those two former SEALs.

The attack was focused on the State Department people, NOT the CIA ....until the attackers apparently realized, all but two men in the State Department Compound had shifted to CIA. Shortly after THAT, the attack also shifted WITH THEM. So what moved from one compound to the other?

It's absurd to think the Militia and others in Benghazi didn't know the CIA was at the location they were...and reports even say as much for local "open secrets". Yet, they chose only 1 to hit...until that move. Why, indeed?

Originally posted by BobM88
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

What are these docs titled? So I can google and take a read myself, it sounds like it might be interesting as well as maddening.

Fair enough, and I don't blame you for wanting to cross check where they are and how they are on the net.

United States House of Representatives - Committe on Oversight and Government Reform

That is the original top page with links to the Documents and Photos release by Issa's committee, last year. It's what I've linked in the thread.

Overhead Images of State and CIA Compounds for relative Postion

Benghazi Attack Photos and Stevens Body in Attackers Hands

^^^ The last link is not one to open if the death of Stevens is particularly upsetting to see. It isn't graphic beyond what the world press corps showed, but that's quite a bit for what our Media normally does..... Now having said that, I know, it's like telling my Son not to touch a hot stove..but I'm serious on those being disturbing. They're about the limit for graphic I'll link to or display publicly. There are others...but that's for everyone else to find by their own effort, if so inclined.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Very, very interesting...I must admit to not having paid a lot of attention to this until I saw all the threads about Benghazi on here today. Sounds like something odd was going on there. But, too, it could just be normal government incompetence I suppose. Sometimes the stupid answer is the right one.

deleted for being contrary to conservative ideology

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Thanks very much!

ETA: Ha...the first page answered my question about whether the capitol had moved from Tripoli to Benghazi...the 12/27/11 document said that the TNC moved their center from Benghazi to Tripoli.