francoHFW
Diamond Member
No lies, no coverup, no delays, all that could be done was done- we don't know the attackers motives, but the CIA STILL thinks the video was the trigger. So what does all your STUPID BS MATTER?!?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That sounded like bullshit to me and contrary to every report I've heard. It's probably making the rounds on the lib sites and they won't question it.FYI-Stevens was offered security personnel for the SECOND time, by Gen. Ham just 2 weeks prior to the attack, and Stevens turned it down....read the hearings notes....Hillary does not care what caused the death of 4 Americans at Benghazi.
Prior to the attack, Ambassador Stevens had requested an increase of security personnel at Benghazi which was denied. Who approved the denial?
Who was responsible for failing to immediately send military help to Benghazi? The Warrior Ethos demands this. Obviously, no one but the military understood it. The civilian bureaucrats certainly did not.
He could possibly be here today, if he had said Yes to the security personnel offered....
The other thing to NOTE is the security personnel that the Embassy was requesting prior to the attack, was for more INTELLIGENCE personnel, not armed guards, they felt their security could be stronger with more intelligence AGENTS on the ground there...
CIA had a full annex of intelligence agents on the ground in benghazi...but they still were caught off guard....so who knows if the added security intelligence agents would have even helped?
Stevens did not turn down an offer for extra security. That is a report from some unknown official floated to provide cover for Hillary. The source of that lie cannot be accurately assessed, simply "Anonymous White House Official".
Funny how a liberal keeps using those words "witch hunt." And no, Benghazi won't be dropped, people will be prosecuted. End of story.
No lies, no coverup, no delays, all that could be done was done- we don't know the attackers motives, but the CIA STILL thinks the video was the trigger. So what does all your STUPID BS MATTER?!?
EXACTLY- But only YOUR heroes and fellow dupes are SURE the video was irrelevant, that the attackers were Al-Qaeda directed, etc etc. So what does your BS MATTER until the attackers are caught? And even then?
EXACTLY- But only YOUR heroes and fellow dupes are SURE the video was irrelevant, that the attackers were Al-Qaeda directed, etc etc. So what does your BS MATTER until the attackers are caught? And even then?
There were several reasons and a video isn't one of them.
The problem is all of the eye witnesses are either dead or in hiding.
How the hell are you sure the video was irrelevant lol? I tought we had a breakthrough there for a second- then you snap back to the brainwash lol...
And of course it was an armed assault, known from the get-go. Is that the RW goal? Duh.
Weren't they 'reassigned' so that Congress couldn't get in touch with them?EXACTLY- But only YOUR heroes and fellow dupes are SURE the video was irrelevant, that the attackers were Al-Qaeda directed, etc etc. So what does your BS MATTER until the attackers are caught? And even then?
There were several reasons and a video isn't one of them.
The problem is all of the eye witnesses are either dead or in hiding.
Why question evil? As long as their side wins? Meh---all the better for them...the only way they'll rethink is when they are directly affected...but by then it will be too late for them. Reap what you sow...That sounded like bullshit to me and contrary to every report I've heard. It's probably making the rounds on the lib sites and they won't question it.FYI-Stevens was offered security personnel for the SECOND time, by Gen. Ham just 2 weeks prior to the attack, and Stevens turned it down....read the hearings notes....
He could possibly be here today, if he had said Yes to the security personnel offered....
The other thing to NOTE is the security personnel that the Embassy was requesting prior to the attack, was for more INTELLIGENCE personnel, not armed guards, they felt their security could be stronger with more intelligence AGENTS on the ground there...
CIA had a full annex of intelligence agents on the ground in benghazi...but they still were caught off guard....so who knows if the added security intelligence agents would have even helped?
Stevens did not turn down an offer for extra security. That is a report from some unknown official floated to provide cover for Hillary. The source of that lie cannot be accurately assessed, simply "Anonymous White House Official".
How the hell are you sure the video was irrelevant lol? I tought we had a breakthrough there for a second- then you snap back to the brainwash lol...
And of course it was an armed assault, known from the get-go. Is that the RW goal? Duh.
Simply NOT TRUE Mud...this was a year ago....they were all given permission to testify....How the hell are you sure the video was irrelevant lol? I tought we had a breakthrough there for a second- then you snap back to the brainwash lol...
And of course it was an armed assault, known from the get-go. Is that the RW goal? Duh.
How do you know it was? You can't take Obama's word for anything because he's a compulsive liar. I think that has been clearly established.
You just figure that time will alter perceptions and fog memories. That is what all of the stonewalling was designed to do in the first place.
30 survivors of the assault on those compounds are still being withheld from testifying. They undergo monthly polygraph tests by White House officials to assure they aren't talking to Congress or reporters.
Now why is that? What are they hiding?
Benghazi Attack Survivors Asked By CIA To Testify Before Congress, Letter ShowsWASHINGTON -- CIA Director John Brennan is making public his letter to CIA employees who survived the attacks on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya, that requests they share their firsthand accounts with the congressional intelligence committees.
In the letter dated May 30, 2013, released to The Associated Press by the CIA, Brennan tells his employees that lawmakers asked to hear from them directly. But he adds that speaking to Congress is "completely voluntary" and can be done either through the CIA or confidentially, without informing CIA management.
The disclosure follows media reports that the CIA has been preventing employees from talking to lawmakers about the incident.
The nightlong attacks by militants on Sept. 11, 2012, killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, including two members of the CIA's security team.
It was verified, in General Ham's daily logs...FYI-Stevens was offered security personnel for the SECOND time, by Gen. Ham just 2 weeks prior to the attack, and Stevens turned it down....read the hearings notes....Hillary does not care what caused the death of 4 Americans at Benghazi.
Prior to the attack, Ambassador Stevens had requested an increase of security personnel at Benghazi which was denied. Who approved the denial?
Who was responsible for failing to immediately send military help to Benghazi? The Warrior Ethos demands this. Obviously, no one but the military understood it. The civilian bureaucrats certainly did not.
He could possibly be here today, if he had said Yes to the security personnel offered....
The other thing to NOTE is the security personnel that the Embassy was requesting prior to the attack, was for more INTELLIGENCE personnel, not armed guards, they felt their security could be stronger with more intelligence AGENTS on the ground there...
CIA had a full annex of intelligence agents on the ground in benghazi...but they still were caught off guard....so who knows if the added security intelligence agents would have even helped?
Stevens did not turn down an offer for extra security. That is a report from some unknown official floated to provide cover for Hillary. The source of that lie cannot be accurately assessed, simply "Anonymous White House Official".
FYI-Stevens was offered security personnel for the SECOND time, by Gen. Ham just 2 weeks prior to the attack, and Stevens turned it down....read the hearings notes....Hillary does not care what caused the death of 4 Americans at Benghazi.
Prior to the attack, Ambassador Stevens had requested an increase of security personnel at Benghazi which was denied. Who approved the denial?
Who was responsible for failing to immediately send military help to Benghazi? The Warrior Ethos demands this. Obviously, no one but the military understood it. The civilian bureaucrats certainly did not.
He could possibly be here today, if he had said Yes to the security personnel offered....
The other thing to NOTE is the security personnel that the Embassy was requesting prior to the attack, was for more INTELLIGENCE personnel, not armed guards, they felt their security could be stronger with more intelligence AGENTS on the ground there...
CIA had a full annex of intelligence agents on the ground in benghazi...but they still were caught off guard....so who knows if the added security intelligence agents would have even helped?