The Truth About Benghazi

[GostHacked]

What answer do you want? I think all the questions have been answered numerous times already. Is it that you don't like the answers given?

Not one bit. The answer changed several times. Which answer do you want to go with? I mean what difference does it make?

http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/cnn-confirms-wnd-reporting-on-gun-running-in-benghazi/

CNN is reporting lawmakers are speculating on the possibility U.S. agencies operating in the Benghazi compound attacked Sept. 11, 2012, were secretly helping to transfer weapons from Libya, via Turkey, to the rebels in Syria.

That possibility was first reported by WND two weeks after the Benghazi attack, when the news agency cited Egyptian security officials who said murdered U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens played a central role in arming and recruiting rebels to fight Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

This is what I really want to know.

http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/01/exclusive-dozens-of-cia-operatives-on-the-ground-during-benghazi-attack/

Clinton et al, were trying to cover up the gun running operation through Benghazi. As I said, much of this was covered already in other threads. Guess you never bothered to look at them.

[monty16]

Oh good grief, first it's a complaint that Hillary didn't send in the military and save their lives but now it's something to do with gun running to Syria. The former dies a prolonged death while the latter is just old news for the US and it's CIA. Helping to kill people throughout the world to save them from 'something'?

A novel idea though. Blame Clinton for aiding Syrian terrorists. I like it!

[GostHacked]

Oh good grief, first it's a complaint that Hillary didn't send in the military and save their lives but now it's something to do with gun running to Syria. The former dies a prolonged death while the latter is just old news for the US and it's CIA. Helping to kill people throughout the world to save them from 'something'?

A novel idea though. Blame Clinton for aiding Syrian terrorists. I like it!

Well, I guess some people like the constant stream of lies and changing stories. Shows integrity.

[monty16]

Well, I guess some people like the constant stream of lies and changing stories. Shows integrity.

So is that the real issue now with the rabid right? Gun running? Because your links don't really pursue the issue of trying to damage Hillary Clinton?

When you get that all straightened out maybe we can be of help?

[GostHacked]

So is that the real issue now with the rabid right? Gun running? Because your links don't really pursue the issue of trying to damage Hillary Clinton?

When you get that all straightened out maybe we can be of help?

Like I said, you have some threads to read and catch up. It took months for the State Department to get all their stuff straightened out. Still have not sorted it out. So who was responsible for the attack at the CIA annex?

[monty16]

Like I said, you have some threads to read and catch up. It took months for the State Department to get all their stuff straightened out. Still have not sorted it out. So who was responsible for the attack at the CIA annex?

So you're not going to tell us what all this is really about? Maybe it's time to wrap it up and put it to bed before Issa makes a bigger fool of himself? We'll be interested in hearing from you when you make up your mind.

[GostHacked]

So you're not going to tell us what all this is really about? Maybe it's time to wrap it up and put it to bed before Issa makes a bigger fool of himself? We'll be interested in hearing from you when you make up your mind.

You asked, I said gun running, but since that answer does not jive with yours, you are simply going to wait until I provide an answer that does jive with yours. Then we will all be fine right?

I get it I get it.

[monty16]

You asked, I said gun running, but since that answer does not jive with yours, you are simply going to wait until I provide an answer that does jive with yours. Then we will all be fine right?

I get it I get it.

Right, it's about gunrunning and not about Hillary Clinton after all. WEll I don't have any interest in that because it's just standard practice in the US anyway. And besides, it's a part of the rabid right's agenda whenever it's not being done by the left or Obama.

[GostHacked]

Right, it's about gunrunning and not about Hillary Clinton after all. WEll I don't have any interest in that because it's just standard practice in the US anyway. And besides, it's a part of the rabid right's agenda whenever it's not being done by the left or Obama.

I find it really odd that you push back on the West in other threads but defend the likes if Clinton in this thread. Not very consistent, don't you think?

[monty16]

I find it really odd that you push back on the West in other threads but defend the likes if Clinton in this thread. Not very consistent, don't you think?

It's not nearly as much defending Clinton as it's having fun with this charade that the teabaggers are trying to keep going and the gullible on the right is swallowing.

In any case, if we've made any progress at all on this thread, it's that we've established now that it's not about Hillary. Or would you like to go back and rethink that now too?

[GostHacked]

It's not nearly as much defending Clinton as it's having fun with this charade that the teabaggers are trying to keep going and the gullible on the right is swallowing.

Nothing to do with teabaggers or right wing. You are reaching here.

In any case, if we've made any progress at all on this thread, it's that we've established now that it's not about Hillary. Or would you like to go back and rethink that now too?

Progress?

It was never just about Hillary, and at no point did I make it just about her. However, she was head of the State Department and this CIA annex was part of her responsibility. Some would rather absolve her of any responsibility.

Anyways, we know it was a CIA annnex and not an embassy, as was initially claimed.

[Michael Hardner]

Some would rather absolve her of any responsibility.

And others like FOX News would elevate this lapse above the intelligence lapses prior to 9/11 in importance. In short, you are being played.

[monty16]

And others like FOX News would elevate this lapse above the intelligence lapses prior to 9/11 in importance. In short, you are being played.

Are they really being played? Only the dimmest of bulbs could be played on this one in my opinion. I think that most of them realize that this is being played for the political purpose of demonizing Hillary Clinton. That's why I led him off the track for a while and that's exactly why he is now insisting on bringing it back on track. Adding in a new twist that takes it further away from it's objectives.

He understands that if it was a CIA operation then that makes it only remotely connectable to Hillary's bad judgment or whatever they think it was.

And that all proves that when you draw them out a little they will destroy their own illusions for you. Pathetic!

[GostHacked]

And others like FOX News would elevate this lapse above the intelligence lapses prior to 9/11 in importance. In short, you are being played.

I used other sources that back up my stance, but you only complain when I use a Fox article.

Hey remember when the State Department told us it was a video that sparked the incident?

Who is being played here? 'What difference does it make....' that is what she said during the hearings.

[GostHacked]

Are they really being played? Only the dimmest of bulbs could be played on this one in my opinion. I think that most of them realize that this is being played for the political purpose of demonizing Hillary Clinton.

She does it to herself. She has a long list of scandals that tell us she has plenty of 'career baggage'.

That's why I led him off the track for a while and that's exactly why he is now insisting on bringing it back on track. Adding in a new twist that takes it further away from it's objectives.

So you admit to purposefully derailing the thread? Posters here don't take to kindly to this thing. But you have not really derailed anything. The gun running story has been part of this for some time. The CIA annex was under her watch, as she was head of the State Department, therefore her responsibility.

He understands that if it was a CIA operation then that makes it only remotely connectable to Hillary's bad judgment or whatever they think it was.

Hillary was in charge of the State Department. Check their responsibilities before you make other incorrect statements.

And that all proves that when you draw them out a little they will destroy their own illusions for you. Pathetic!

If you really want to talk about illusions, you have not been able to counter anything I have posted aside from attempts to derail the thread.

[Michael Hardner]

Are they really being played? Only the dimmest of bulbs could be played on this one in my opinion. I think that most of them realize that this is being played for the political purpose of demonizing Hillary Clinton.

Why does any of your post mean they're not being played ? If it was Cheney, then FOX wouldn't touch this one.

[GostHacked]

Why does any of your post mean they're not being played ? If it was Cheney, then FOX wouldn't touch this one.

Correct. I won't deny Fox is partisan, but that does not take away from the fact that I have used other sources than Fox to back up my argument. So pick on Fox all you want, I can still use other sources if that suits your fancy.

But go back to when Bush was in power and how Fox towed the line for him, while the likes of CNN was on the opposite side. Now it's reversed. The US media is very polarizing.

However, CNN was reporting it heavy when the incident occurred. As was every other MSM outfit.

Whatever really happened there, it happened on Clinton's watch. Plain and simple.

[Michael Hardner]

Whatever really happened there, it happened on Clinton's watch. Plain and simple.

Right. So now that FOX is the only MSM that cares, we should just let this one die as we did the 9/11 lapses. Mistakes happen, move on.

[monty16]

So you admit to purposefully derailing the thread? Posters here don't take to kindly to this thing. But you have not really derailed anything.

If you really want to talk about illusions, you have not been able to counter anything I have posted aside from attempts to derail the thread.

It's pretty clear from what you said here that I derailed the thread but I didn't derail the thread but I did derail the thread!

I don't know what else to say to you other than to say that I didn't derail the thread in anybody's mind but yours. And I haven't even been able to figure that out for certain yet! I hope you're more sure about the topic of the thread?

Oh, and then I guess I might just as well remind you again that this isn't about me. That is, unless you want to complain about me derailing the thread? Or was that not dera..........

Edited May 26, 2014 by monty16

[GostHacked]

Right. So now that FOX is the only MSM that cares, we should just let this one die as we did the 9/11 lapses. Mistakes happen, move on.

Other sites are carrying it, and no we should not let it die. If you let them get away with this, what else are you willing to overlook? And would someone remember this if we find out that a future attack came from Libya, what then?

Iran-Contra affair. Fast and Furious, Osama and Al-Queda. All operations about weapons running via the help of the CIA or another entity from the US. The US were caught in all three cases to have started the whole thing to begin with. So we have predicent that the CIA is gun running to rebels.

And since this ties in with Syria, with Benghazi gun running to the Free Syrian Army terrorist rebels, you have something larger going on that you and others are failing to make the connection. The gun running thing was something everyone was reporting on when we found out it was not due to a crappy made movie.

They are still lying to us, and you are telling me to get over it? Is this why we continue to have problems with the government and it's approach to the war on terror which seems to be completely hypocritical simply because the CIA is helping known terror groups with weapons and training.

[monty16]

No, the Republican wingnuts shouldn't just get over it. This Benghazi thing now has the potential to hurt the Republicans while it has no likelihood of having any effect against Hillary Clinton. When this soon becomes obvious to the rightwingers it will be time for the Democrats to insist on carrying out the investigation. It's really become that bad now!

All the visible complaints so far are just non-issues. Who cares about whether or not it was claimed to be about a movie? Who cares if it was about gunrunning to Syrian rebels? Isn't that really just a part of the Repubs own agenda? This thing has definitely fallen off the rails!

[Michael Hardner]

Other sites are carrying it, and no we should not let it die. If you let them get away with this, what else are you willing to overlook?

It's not overlooked - the questions were asked, and one assumes that the security agencies adjusted to the realities of the day. Just as with 9/11

They are still lying to us, and you are telling me to get over it? Is this why we continue to have problems with the government and it's approach to the war on terror which seems to be completely hypocritical simply because the CIA is helping known terror groups with weapons and training.

Assuming you're American, then it could make sense to devote your life to boiling the ocean with a low flame of indignation. If not, then you could join the ranks of those who permanently protest the existence of the CIA, and disapprove of everything they do. Even THAT course of action is different than what this is - basically an attempt to stick something on Hillary Clinton and not much else.

[bush_cheney2004]

....Even THAT course of action is different than what this is - basically an attempt to stick something on Hillary Clinton and not much else.

All is fair in love, war, and politics. This isn't Clinton's first rodeo, and she is American.

[Michael Hardner]

All is fair in love, war, and politics. This isn't Clinton's first rodeo, and she is American.

Sure, but why be a dupe ... for anybody ? If you have a problem with everything the US government has done back to Iran Contra and beyond, you're likely not hung up on Hillary's role.

[bush_cheney2004]

Sure, but why be a dupe ... for anybody ? If you have a problem with everything the US government has done back to Iran Contra and beyond, you're likely not hung up on Hillary's role.

Beats me...I think Col. Oliver North was a god_amn American hero !

Clinton will be a viable prez candidate for her party if she chooses to run, and that means taking lots of heat over Benghazi.