Did Obama Watch While They Fought for their Lives?

[francoHFW]

Like poison with normal voters...where'd that drone go lol...

 

[American_Jihad]

 

[Mojo2]

Has anyone yet asked where the videotapes are of the attack?

 

[American_Jihad]

Has anyone yet asked where the videotapes are of the attack?

My guess is the same place the witnesses are, under lock n key...

 

[American_Jihad]

Why We’ll Never Stop Arguing About Benghazi​

By BLAKE HOUNSHELL
December 29, 2013


On a sleepy holiday weekend, the New York Times revived a debate that most of us thought was over: Did the Obama administration mislead Americans about what happened in Benghazi, Libya, on Sept. 11, 2012? Was it really a spontaneous response to an anti-Islam video, as officials first claimed, or was it a planned al Qaeda attack?

Launched with the kind of tender loving care and year-end timing that says “Pulitzer bait,” the Times published a 7,000-word report spread over three full newspaper pages by Middle East correspondent David Kirkpatrick that aimed to settle once and for all the big lingering questions about the assault, which killed four Americans, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens. The key paragraph:

...


No matter—several of those members of Congress fired back Sunday, doubling down on their version of the story. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), who heads the House Oversight Committee, had this to say on NBC’s Meet the Press: "It was never about a video. … There was a group that was involved that was affiliated with al Qaeda. It is not about al Qaeda as the only terrorist organization.” (Issa traveled to Libya in September as part of his investigation into the attack, but has said little about his trip.) Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), the head of the House Intelligence Committee, also disputed the Times story. Rogers said his committee’s “exhaustive investigation” contradicted the Times account, and suggested that Kirkpatrick “didn't talk to the people on the ground who were doing the fighting and shooting and the intelligence gathering.”

Conservative outlets soon jumped in too. The Weekly Standard, in a posting linked on Twitter by GOP strategist Karl Rove, accused the Times of “whitewash[ing]” the Benghazi attack. Powerline, a popular conservative blog, slammed it as a “revisionist account.” The author, retired lawyer Paul Mirengoff, writes: “Whatever else the Times story demonstrates, I believe it shows that this story won’t go away as long as Hillary Clinton aspires to be president.”

Leaving aside Mirengoff’s dubious speculation about collusion between the Times and the latent Hillary Clinton campaign, he does make one good point: This story isn’t going anywhere. And here are six reasons why:

...

Read more: Why We?ll Never Stop Arguing About Benghazi - Blake Hounshell - POLITICO Magazine

 

[Kosh]

This whole situation shows why the far left should not be in charge of anything.

 

[oreo]

The only thing I heard was that obama went to bed while the others stayed in the situation room and watched.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

The only thing I heard was that obama went to bed while the others stayed in the situation room and watched.

You heard wrong then - The attacks started around 10 PM BENGHAZI time. Over in DC that would have been about 4:00 PM EST!

The president went to bed at 4 PM? No, he was wide awake like the rest of our time-zone.

Obama met with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Vice President Joe Biden at the White House on Sept. 11, 2012 at 5:00 PM—just 55 minutes after the State Department notified the White House and the Pentagon that the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi was under attack.

- See more at: Obama Met With Panetta and Biden at WH As Benghazi Terror Attack Unfolded | CNS News


You guys are reading blogs that are erroneously reporting that it was 10 PM in Washington DC. Par for the course for dip-shit bloggers with no real knowledge about anything.

The terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi began at about 9:40 p.m. Benghazi time—or about 3:40 p.m. Washington, D.C. time. “The attack began at approximately 9:40 p.m. local time,” Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Charlene Lamb told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in written testimony submitted Oct. 10.

- See more at: Obama Met With Panetta and Biden at WH As Benghazi Terror Attack Unfolded | CNS News

 

[paperview]

The only thing I heard was that obama went to bed while the others stayed in the situation room and watched.

You heard wrong then - The attacks started around 10 PM BENGHAZI time. Over in DC that would have been about 4:00 PM EST!

The president went to bed at 4 PM? No, he was wide awake like the rest of our time-zone.

Obama met with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Vice President Joe Biden at the White House on Sept. 11, 2012 at 5:00 PM—just 55 minutes after the State Department notified the White House and the Pentagon that the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi was under attack.

- See more at: Obama Met With Panetta and Biden at WH As Benghazi Terror Attack Unfolded | CNS News


You guys are reading blogs that are erroneously reporting that it was 10 PM in Washington DC. Par for the course for dip-shit bloggers with no real knowledge about anything.

The terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi began at about 9:40 p.m. Benghazi time—or about 3:40 p.m. Washington, D.C. time. “The attack began at approximately 9:40 p.m. local time,” Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Charlene Lamb told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in written testimony submitted Oct. 10.

- See more at: Obama Met With Panetta and Biden at WH As Benghazi Terror Attack Unfolded | CNS News

Yep. Whether the Ambassador's official time of death is listed as later does not matter.

He was effectively murdered during that 20 minute attack, and we do know Sean Smith was found dead between 3:35 to 4:15 p.m. Washington time.

At that point in time, Obama was returning from his closed-press meeting with wounded warriors at Walter Reed.

The Foxers and Limbaugh enablers spun the tale about "Obama was sleeping" - and once again, those in the CEC have to come to terms with the fact: they were lied to: again. Will they admit it? Nah. That's too much to expect from the gullibles.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Val Jarrett made the call to "Let them die"

Obama was practicing his ball handling with Reggie Love, plus he had to go to that fund raiser in Vegas the next day

 

[Jackson]

The NYT foolishly tried to put Benghazi to bed once and for all, but instead brought it to the forefront from every corner of media. Headlines are appearing on the internet, newspapers and television denying the NYT and using it as a whipping boy telling the story over and over again.

I think Hillary's chances of candidacy in 2016 are dead.

 

[plant]

Ha love this thread !! What a bunch of faux dupe bullshit !!! The big OBAMA kicks the GOP ass over and over . Gotta love it .

 

[paperview]

The NYT foolishly tried to put Benghazi to bed once and for all, but instead brought it to the forefront from every corner of media. Headlines are appearing on the internet, newspapers and television denying the NYT and using it as a whipping boy telling the story over and over again.

I think Hillary's chances of candidacy in 2016 are dead.

No, what it's doing is making Issa look like a total incompetent dumbass.

Not like the car alarm boy wasn't that before, it just drives it home further after all this time. Nothing.

101 hearings (yes, I'm exaggerating) and what did he get? Diddly squat on a stick.

 

[American_Jihad]

The only thing I heard was that obama went to bed while the others stayed in the situation room and watched.

You heard wrong then - The attacks started around 10 PM BENGHAZI time. Over in DC that would have been about 4:00 PM EST!

The president went to bed at 4 PM? No, he was wide awake like the rest of our time-zone.

- See more at: Obama Met With Panetta and Biden at WH As Benghazi Terror Attack Unfolded | CNS News


You guys are reading blogs that are erroneously reporting that it was 10 PM in Washington DC. Par for the course for dip-shit bloggers with no real knowledge about anything.

The terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi began at about 9:40 p.m. Benghazi time—or about 3:40 p.m. Washington, D.C. time. “The attack began at approximately 9:40 p.m. local time,” Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Charlene Lamb told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in written testimony submitted Oct. 10.

- See more at: Obama Met With Panetta and Biden at WH As Benghazi Terror Attack Unfolded | CNS News

Yep. Whether the Ambassador's official time of death is listed as later does not matter.

He was effectively murdered during that 20 minute attack, and we do know Sean Smith was found dead between 3:35 to 4:15 p.m. Washington time.

At that point in time, Obama was returning from his closed-press meeting with wounded warriors at Walter Reed.

The Foxers and Limbaugh enablers spun the tale about "Obama was sleeping" - and once again, those in the CEC have to come to terms with the fact: they were lied to: again. Will they admit it? Nah. That's too much to expect from the gullibles.

We know the left-wing media "solong.com, media don't matter, msdnc and the daily krap" are not going to say anything, that's their boiy...

https://www.google.com/search?sourc...S325&q=where+was+obama+during+benghazi+attack

 

[American_Jihad]

Yes, Al-Qaeda ‘Infiltrated’ Libya

December 31, 2013 by Ryan Mauro

The New York Times’ conclusion that Al-Qaeda was not involved in last year’s attack on Ambassador Stevens in Libya—or even “infiltrated” Libya to begin with—is an example of a misleading game of semantics. The definition of “enemy” and even “Al-Qaeda” is becoming narrower and narrower, moving us closer to a more comforting (but incomplete) picture of the danger the West faces from Islamism.

The Times writes that an Islamist militia leader named Ahmed Abu Khattala is the almost certain culprit behind the Benghazi attacks, even if he denies it. This fact is used to deny Al-Qaeda’s role, along with the premise that there are two distinctly separate groups named Ansar al-Sharia and the one linked to Al-Qaeda cannot be implicated.

Khattala denies that he and his Obeida Ibn Al-Jarra militia are tied to Al-Qaeda. To the Times, the lack of an operational link is equivalent to no link at all, but the two are connected ideologically. Khattala is openly anti-American and approved of the Benghazi attacks. Both agree in violent retribution for mockery of their faith because of their common Sharia doctrine.

...

Yes, Al-Qaeda ?Infiltrated? Libya | FrontPage Magazine

 

[Ava]

The NYT foolishly tried to put Benghazi to bed once and for all, but instead brought it to the forefront from every corner of media. Headlines are appearing on the internet, newspapers and television denying the NYT and using it as a whipping boy telling the story over and over again.

I think Hillary's chances of candidacy in 2016 are dead.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/general-discussion/332529-what-s-really-in-and-out-for-14-a.html

 

[1776]

They didn't want to intervene since it would go against their campaign lie that "terrorism was waning," so they let them die then started a COVER UP.

They couldn't have military units in Europe or the Horn of Africa rushing to Libya when Obama said Libya was a success and terrorism was dead thanks to him.

The media ran with the lie and the liberal lemmings ate it up.

 

[American_Jihad]

Benghazi – The Signs of Al Qaeda

January 2, 2014 by Dawn Perlmutter

The latest version of the Benghazi cover up is being argued with semantics of whether the jihadist group that attacked the U.S. consulate in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 was part of the “core” al Qaeda network. State Department deputy spokeswoman Marie Harf said,

“…at this point, we have no indications that core al-Qaida, which I think is what most people are referring to when they talk about, quote, al-Qaida, directed or planned what happened in Benghazi. …..So it is not the U.S. Government’s assessment or position that Ansar al-Sharia is an affiliate of core al-Qaida. We don’t recognize them as an affiliate of core al-Qaida… These folks don’t carry ID cards. They don’t come out and wear a t-shirt that says, ‘I belong to al-Qaida,’ right?”

I beg to differ. In addition to the tremendous amount of evidence and statements by members of the House Intelligence Committee claiming that intelligence indicates al Qaeda was involved and that Ansar al Shariah is widely believed to be affiliated with al Qaeda, there are simpler, more obvious indicators. Ms. Harf is correct, they don’t carry ID cards or wear T-shirts that say “I belong to al Qaeda,” but they do throw hand signs and leave graffiti behind in the same manner as gangbangers that just marked their territory after murdering their rival.

...

In combination with the quintessential photo of the assailant using the al Qaeda jihadist hand gesture, the messaging was clear that it was not an anti-Islam film protest. Of course, you have to suspend political correctness to be able to interpret the signs that are literally on the wall. Gang identifiers are visual or verbal ways that gang members identify their affiliation. Law enforcement is trained on gang identifiers so that they can recognize violent incidents as being affiliated with particular street gangs or Security Threat Groups. Unfortunately, training on Islamist identifiers is currently prohibited under the Obama administration, which is why obvious signs continue to go unrecognized.

Benghazi ? The Signs of Al Qaeda | FrontPage Magazine

 

[American_Jihad]

New Declassified Docs Expose Obama’s Benghazi Lies

January 14, 2014 by Arnold Ahlert

Newly declassified documents reveal that high-ranking members of the Obama administration were aware that the September 11, 2012 assault on the American consulate in Benghazi was a “terrorist attack” only minutes after the battle began. In classified testimony given on June 26, 2013 to the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation, Gen. Carter Hamm, former head of the United States Africa Command (AFRICOM) revealed he was the one who broke the news to former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. According to declassified testimony obtained by Fox News, Hamm testified that he learned about the attack only 15 minutes after it began at 9:42 p.m. Libya time. Thus, the administration’s carefully crafted narrative that the attack was based on a video has once again been revealed for the lie it always was.

...

The can be no doubt any longer what the president knew and when he knew it. On September 11, 2012 four Americans were killed in a terrorist attack. The president was aware of that reality shortly after 5 p.m. EST, even as a drone flew over the battlefield relaying video in real time. And despite all the lying, and incompetence, not a single person has been fired or held accountable, nor has even one member of the media asked the president where he was between the time he left Panetta and Dempsey, and boarded a plan for the fundraiser in Las Vegas.

Last Sunday, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates may have inadvertently given America some insight in that regard. He was describing Obama with regard to Afghanistan. “As I write in the book, it was this absence of passion, this absence of a conviction of the importance of success that disturbed me,” Gates said.

Americans might ask themselves whether that lack of compassion and absence of conviction extended to Benghazi.

Or perhaps former Carter campaign worker Pat Caddell had it right at an Accuracy in Media conference in June of 2012, when he lambasted the media and their unrelenting efforts to cover for Obama. “If a President of either party—I don’t care whether it was Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton or George Bush or Ronald Reagan or George H. W. Bush—had a terrorist incident, and got on an airplane after saying something, and flown off to a fundraiser in Las Vegas, they would have been crucified!” he declared.

Perhaps that time is coming.

New Declassified Docs Expose Obama?s Benghazi Lies | FrontPage Magazine

 

[American_Jihad]

Senators: Benghazi attack 'likely preventable'

By Jason Hanna and Evan Perez, CNN
Wed January 15, 2014

(CNN) -- The deadly attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, was "likely preventable" based on known security shortfalls and prior warnings that the security situation there was deteriorating, the majority of the Senate Intelligence Committee concluded in a report released on Wednesday.

Separately, the findings also noted what the FBI had told the panel -- that 15 people cooperating with its investigation had been killed in Benghazi, undercutting the investigation. It was not clear if the killings were related to the probe.

Moreover, it said that people linked with various al Qaeda-related groups in North Africa and elsewhere participated in the September 11, 2012, attack, but investigators haven't been able to determine whether any one group was in command.

The report placed some blame for the outcome on the State Department, saying it should have "increased its security posture more significantly" in Libya's second-largest city because of general warnings that U.S. personnel were at risk.

...

Senators: Benghazi attack 'likely preventable' - CNN.com