Another Fox Benghazi Myth Dies

Truthseeker420

Gold Member
Mar 30, 2011
10,374
1,015
140
Home of the 2013 BCS National Champion
A claim pushed dozens of times by Fox News that security forces were ordered to "stand down" during the September 11, 2012 Benghazi attacks on a U.S. diplomatic facility collapsed after the commander of those security forces testified that he received no such order.

More than a month after the attacks in Benghazi killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, Fox began airing accusations that security forces present in Libya at the time were ordered to "stand down" by the Obama administration. Fox's confused coverage over the months claimed that both a reaction force that was dispatched to Benghazi and suffered two casualties while trying to defend the facility, and a group of four special forces troops in Tripoli received "stand down" orders. This accusation was given new fuel after former Deputy Chief of Mission Gregory Hicks May 8 remarks made before a congressional committee appeared to confirm claims that Lt. Col. Gibson, who commanded a small team of special forces troops in Tripoli, was ordered to "stand down." Fox baselessly speculated that either President Obama or then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta gave the alleged order.

A search of the Nexis database shows that the accusation that these security forces were ordered to "stand down" was made in 85 segments on the network's primetime shows by Fox hosts, contributors, guests, and in video accompanying news reports and commentary.

But now even Republicans are admitting that a "stand down" order was never given. According to The Associated Press, Gibson told a Republican-led congressional committee on June 26 that he was never ordered to "stand down."

No Benghazi "Stand Down" Order Was Given: Another Fox Narrative Falls Apart | Blog | Media Matters for America
 
Last edited:
A claim pushed dozens of times by Fox News that security forces were ordered to "stand down" during the September 11, 2012 Benghazi attacks on a U.S. diplomatic facility collapsed after the commander of those security forces testified that he received no such order.

More than a month after the attacks in Benghazi killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, Fox began airing accusations that security forces present in Libya at the time were ordered to "stand down" by the Obama administration. Fox's confused coverage over the months claimed that both a reaction force that was dispatched to Benghazi and suffered two casualties while trying to defend the facility, and a group of four special forces troops in Tripoli received "stand down" orders. This accusation was given new fuel after former Deputy Chief of Mission Gregory Hicks May 8 remarks made before a congressional committee appeared to confirm claims that Lt. Col. Gibson, who commanded a small team of special forces troops in Tripoli, was ordered to "stand down." Fox baselessly speculated that either President Obama or then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta gave the alleged order.

A search of the Nexis database shows that the accusation that these security forces were ordered to "stand down" was made in 85 segments on the network's primetime shows by Fox hosts, contributors, guests, and in video accompanying news reports and commentary.

But now even Republicans are admitting that a "stand down" order was never given. According to The Associated Press, Gibson told a Republican-led congressional committee on June 26 that he was never ordered to "stand down."

No Benghazi "Stand Down" Order Was Given: Another Fox Narrative Falls Apart | Blog | Media Matters for America

Color me shocked...:eek:
 
Benghazi was just an unforseen, regrettable , unavoidable occurence handled with transparent credibility and the best security liberals would provide.........
 
here we have two of our finest scholars quoting media matters and noam chomsky............inquiring little minds want to know
 
A claim pushed dozens of times by Fox News that security forces were ordered to "stand down" during the September 11, 2012 Benghazi attacks on a U.S. diplomatic facility collapsed after the commander of those security forces testified that he received no such order.

More than a month after the attacks in Benghazi killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, Fox began airing accusations that security forces present in Libya at the time were ordered to "stand down" by the Obama administration. Fox's confused coverage over the months claimed that both a reaction force that was dispatched to Benghazi and suffered two casualties while trying to defend the facility, and a group of four special forces troops in Tripoli received "stand down" orders. This accusation was given new fuel after former Deputy Chief of Mission Gregory Hicks May 8 remarks made before a congressional committee appeared to confirm claims that Lt. Col. Gibson, who commanded a small team of special forces troops in Tripoli, was ordered to "stand down." Fox baselessly speculated that either President Obama or then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta gave the alleged order.

A search of the Nexis database shows that the accusation that these security forces were ordered to "stand down" was made in 85 segments on the network's primetime shows by Fox hosts, contributors, guests, and in video accompanying news reports and commentary.

But now even Republicans are admitting that a "stand down" order was never given. According to The Associated Press, Gibson told a Republican-led congressional committee on June 26 that he was never ordered to "stand down."

No Benghazi "Stand Down" Order Was Given: Another Fox Narrative Falls Apart | Blog | Media Matters for America



Why would the rescue team's MISSION not be to rescue Benghazi endangered Americans but Tripoli??

Let me repeat what the testimony was:
Greg Hicks who testified under oath:
"They were told not to board the flight, so they missed it," Hicks said. Pressed on why, he said, "I guess they just didn't have the right authority from the right level."

And here is the reason:
Earlier this month, Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Congress there was never a stand-down order.
They weren't told to stand down. A 'stand down' means don't do anything," he said.

"They were told that the mission they were asked to perform was not in Benghazi, but was at Tripoli airport."
Former US commander in Libya denies Army unit told to stand down during Benghazi attack | neurope.eu
Former US commander in Libya denies Army unit told to stand down during Benghazi attack | neurope.eu

I'm going to shout and make this BIG!!!
YES the were NEVER ORDERED to STAND DOWN
BUT THEY WERE NEVER ASKED TO GO TO BENGHAZI!
They were never ASKED to go to Benghazi...WHY??????
 
Okay, a lot of witnesses stated they were told to stand down. One general was fired because he was going to disobey orders. Obama replaced him with the guy who arrested the general on the spot. After a year of total silence and dismissal of Benghazi, the administration was finally forced to answer to some things that witnesses on the ground were saying.

The administration explained the stand down orders by claiming there wasn't enough time to go in and no reason to risk more lives of our troops. Then they claimed they didn't have permission. The story changed so damn many times, it was hard to keep track. They came up with a lie for each and every bit of information that came out.

Now they are re-writing things yet again. They had no good excuse, so probably bullied someone into saying there were no stand down orders.

And some are so fucking loyal that they will accept whatever bullshit is fed to them.

The statements by witnesses are not the doing of FOX or anyone on the right. They were people on the ground who relayed what they were told at the time. One person trying to claim otherwise does not dismiss all the other witnesses.
 
Benghazi was just an unforseen, regrettable , unavoidable occurence handled with transparent credibility and the best security liberals would provide.........

compared to the great security of 911 and George Bush?

When the sun rose on September 11 2001 it was not yet the anniversary of the worst attack on the nation since Pearl Harbor so there were no expectations of a terrorist attack being launched that day fast forward to September 11 2012 it was the eleven year anniversary of the worst attack on the nation since Pearl Harbor that's a big difference and having increased and heightened security at U.S. diplomatic missions around the world especially in the middle east on that date should have been a given.
 
Benghazi was just an unforseen, regrettable , unavoidable occurence handled with transparent credibility and the best security liberals would provide.........

compared to the great security of 911 and George Bush?

When the sun rose on September 11 2001 it was not yet the anniversary of the worst attack on the nation since Pearl Harbor so there were no expectations of a terrorist attack being launched that day fast forward to September 11 2012 it was the eleven year anniversary of the worst attack on the nation since Pearl Harbor that's a big difference and having increased and heightened security at U.S. diplomatic missions around the world especially in the middle east on that date should have been a given.

Bbbbut what about the PDB ?!!!! And all the warnings and unfinished business left by the incompetent and reckless clinton adm.........
 
You leftist dogs are a real treat, LOL. You gonna go down on your new God next? Perhaps a reach around would be in order.

You people are so stupid I sometimes wonder why I waste my time with mental dwarfs like you, ROFLMAO.

Useful Idiots.
 
You leftist dogs are a real treat, LOL. You gonna go down on your new God next? Perhaps a reach around would be in order.

You people are so stupid I sometimes wonder why I waste my time with mental dwarfs like you, ROFLMAO.

Useful Idiots.

no kidding they are..
damn, and mediamatters...lol
 

Forum List

Back
Top