The Truth About Benghazi

Shady · November 30, 2012

And a Republican president would have done so with 20/20 hindsight.

No hindsight was necessary. Just listening to the ambassadors several requests.

punked · November 30, 2012

It is you that is not following the time line of events. As you say, not doing the homework for you as we already have, several times through this thread and others. When their facts change so does the timeline of events.

Yes as they should. No one disputing that the they did not have all the details right after the events. They did however give the American people the best facts that were had the time. I think that is a good thing.

GostHacked · November 30, 2012

Yes as they should. No one disputing that the they did not have all the details right after the events.

The real issue is that false or misleading information was purposefully distributed Not that they changed the story with 'new facts'. There is something rotten in the intelligence community to admit they did give out false or misleading information, that is what you are always missing here.

They did however give the American people the best facts that were had the time. I think that is a good thing.

To quote Shady - Absolute Nonsense.

cybercoma · November 30, 2012

The real issue is that false or misleading information was purposefully distributed Not that they changed the story with 'new facts'. There is something rotten in the intelligence community to admit they did give out false or misleading information, that is what you are always missing here.

To quote Shady - Absolute Nonsense.

The term you're looking for is: Complete Nonsense^®

Edited November 30, 2012 by cybercoma

GostHacked · November 30, 2012

That's Complete Nonsense®

Ah seems like you have the more correct line ... I'll do better next time.

GostHacked · December 2, 2012

Been going through some videos posted about the attacks, and this one eludes to a botched kidnapping. All the things seem to fit within the video. Sheds some different perspective, and is really damning if true.

GostHacked · December 2, 2012

More about the timelines. Hmm she seems to ask a lot of the same questions I've had.

Edited December 2, 2012 by GostHacked

punked · December 4, 2012

So a real news organization that isn't "fox news" who can't even broadcast in Canada because they don't actually news is reporting. Its bad for the crazies in this thread who blamed the Whitehouse.

http://www.npr.org/b...not-white-house

"The officials said the first draft of the talking points had a reference to al Qaeda but it was removed by the Central Intelligence Agency, to protect sources and protect investigations, before the talking points were shared with the White House. No evidence has so far emerged that the White House interfered to tone down the public intelligence assessment, despite the attention the charge has received."

Edited December 4, 2012 by punked

GostHacked · December 4, 2012

Your last post backs up what I have already been posting about for the last 20-30 pages.

But you gotta wonder what kinds of assets they are trying to protect. Oh perhaps maybe that NATO helped fund the rebels who had known Al-Qeuda among them? No that can't be it... right? The Pentagon/Whitehouse NATO would not like it known that they helped the rebels who were the same people who took Stevens out? No that cannot possibly be right either ..... or could it.

Edited December 4, 2012 by GostHacked

Shady · December 4, 2012

So a real news organization that isn't "fox news" who can't even broadcast in Canada because they don't actually news is reporting. Its bad for the crazies in this thread who blamed the Whitehouse.

http://www.npr.org/b...not-white-house

Who can't broadcast in Canada?

GostHacked · December 4, 2012

Who can't broadcast in Canada?

Not only that, we have moved past blaming the White House. Well in my view we have moved past just blaming the White House.

punked · December 4, 2012

Who can't broadcast in Canada?

Fox News can not broadcast any Canadian content because it is illegal to label lies as news. It can be carried by providers but they can not extend into covering Canadian content or make a Fox News Canada.

Shady · December 4, 2012

Fox News can not broadcast any Canadian content because it is illegal to label lies as news. It can be carried by providers but they can not extend into covering Canadian content or make a Fox News Canada.

Complete nonsense.

punked · December 4, 2012

Complete nonsense.

Shady you have already shown you don't know anything by calling for Obama to pass a bill that became LAW 30 YEARS AGO. Just stop and spend the next two years learning something.

GostHacked · December 5, 2012

Fox News can not broadcast any Canadian content because it is illegal to label lies as news. It can be carried by providers but they can not extend into covering Canadian content or make a Fox News Canada.

Irrelevant.

Shady · December 13, 2012

Apparently the state department is hiding the survivors of the attack from congress and the media.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/12/12/Chaffetz-Benghazi-State-Dept

GostHacked · December 13, 2012

Apparently the state department is hiding the survivors of the attack from congress and the media.

http://www.breitbart...hazi-State-Dept

There have been a few other points as well. Rice has been in the spotlight for this, and it's really odd that Clinton has still yet to testify regarding this incident. They need to prevent access to those survivors of they would risk the 'integrity' of the official story.

I have also seen a couple other reports where the running of rebels and guns from Libya to Syria. How did they get to Syria? !!??!?

Cover up after cover up after cover up.

punked · December 13, 2012

Apparently the state department is hiding the survivors of the attack from congress and the media.

http://www.breitbart...hazi-State-Dept

That is not a news source. They have been repeatedly caught out right lying and you citing them as a news source makes you look stupid. The last time you cited that site we spent close to 10 pages making fun of you because of how easy the lie was to see through.

GostHacked · December 15, 2012

That is not a news source. They have been repeatedly caught out right lying and you citing them as a news source makes you look stupid. The last time you cited that site we spent close to 10 pages making fun of you because of how easy the lie was to see through.

And Obama and co have been lying from the start as well.

punked · December 15, 2012

And Obama and co have been lying from the start as well.

You still have not shown that to be true in the least. So I ask again what was the lie? This is the 15th time I have asked this of you with out an answer.

WIP · December 15, 2012

There have been a few other points as well. Rice has been in the spotlight for this, and it's really odd that Clinton has still yet to testify regarding this incident. They need to prevent access to those survivors of they would risk the 'integrity' of the official story.

I have also seen a couple other reports where the running of rebels and guns from Libya to Syria. How did they get to Syria? !!??!?

Cover up after cover up after cover up.

Even though I have pretty much despised everything about Susan Rice I have learned about since she became a public figure of note (she being one of the war hawks demanding an invasion of Libya according to the NY Times), it's what the Republicans object to and overlook, and the way they are attacking her, that I find totally despicable. That ageing senile clown - John McCain, who himself graduated fifth from the bottom of his class at Anapolis, and picked dimbulb Sarah Palin for VP, has the gall to say that Susan Rice is not smart enough for the job of Secretary of State. I would say that intellect is the last problem that we should have with Susan Rice! McCain, closeted homosexual - Lindsay Graham's, and other Republican attacks on Susan Rice's intellectual abilities look remarkably similar to the dog whistle racist attacks they turn to when going after any black Democrat, like Shirley Sherrod or Barack Obama himself....recall trust fund baby moron - Donald Trump demanding to see Obama's college transcripts - using the obvious implication that a black man is not smart enough to excel at the high levels of academia by his own merits, and must have been promoted through affirmative action. What's scary about this turn of events, is that the previous assumption that the Repubs were using veiled racism to motivate the white suburban voting base alienated by Republican economic policies, only because they decided that there was more to gain and less to lose in the strategy while running against a black president. But, now that the election is over, it's becoming clear that the Republican Party, despite the reports of so called moderates wanting dialogue with visible minorities, has plot its course to be the White National Party of the United States.

Of course, maybe part of the problems in their assumption that blacks can't be smart or competent, is that the few blacks that the Republicans are able to enlist as allies usually are stupid and inept....beginning with Clarence Thomas...a total dud, who does nothing and says nothing on the Supreme Court, other than copy whatever other students like Antonin Scalia are doing. Herman Cain....what a jackass he turned out to be! It was even a misrepresentation to call him the chairman of Godfather's Pizza, since he was in reality not much more than a paid spokesman for the company. And this clown in Florida - Allan West, all the money that could be pumped into his gerrymandered district couldn't save his job! It shouldn't be a surprise that not many blacks in their right mind can find a home in today's Republican Party....even if they happen to be upper middle class and have their own businesses, they are in a similar predicament as Jews used to be until Christian Zionists allowed them entry into Republican Party. Before that, Jews felt stuck with the Democratic Party regardless of economic thinking, since the Republicans used to be loaded with rabid antisemites, who almost hated Jews more than they hated blacks. But there's not great odds for the same thing working for other visible minorities today in the Republican Party.

GostHacked · December 18, 2012

So clinton gets a concussion and cannot testify? Convenient.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/15/us/us-hillary-clinton-concussion/index.html

Washington (CNN) -- U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sustained a concussion after becoming dehydrated and fainting, and will no longer testify Thursday before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on the deadly attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

Clinton had been suffering from a stomach virus at the time, according to a statement on Saturday from Philippe Reines, deputy assistant secretary of state.

She is being monitored by doctors and is recovering at home. She was never hospitalized, Reines said.

"At their recommendation, she will continue to work from home next week, staying in regular contact with Department and other officials. She is looking forward to being back in the office soon," Reines said.

A senior State Department official added that the fainting occurred earlier in the week and the concussion was "not severe."

Not buying it.

GostHacked · December 19, 2012

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/19/us/benghazi-what-happened/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Well at least this confirms some of the other things that we know in this thread.

-they knew of the threats-

-Stevens was attacked once already a couple months before

-they knew security was not enough

-requests for more security went unanswered

GostHacked · December 19, 2012

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/12/18/benghazi-report-cites-state-dept-for-security-failures-confirms-no-protest/

A State Department-ordered investigation into September's attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, concluded that "systemic failures" left the facility inadequately protected, according to the independent review board's report, which confirmed that no protest preceded the deadly attack.

So now we can even dispense that there was a protest. OK I waited for the facts, and they have confirmed most of what we already thought.

punked · December 19, 2012

http://www.foxnews.c...rms-no-protest/

So now we can even dispense that there was a protest. OK I waited for the facts, and they have confirmed most of what we already thought.

NO ONE SAID PROTEST! Spontaneous was the word you guys focused on maybe you should go back through the thread before you move the goal posts and change your argument. Was it a spontaneous attack? Fueled by protests in the region? That was the question better go back before you change what you have been saying.