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.
The Clinton State Department took the Libyan security detail from 30 men all the way down to 9 at a time when attacks by extremists against Western targets in Libya were spiking so badly that Great Britain and the Red Cross both pulled their people out. That's not 2 or 3 fat washouts we're talking about...that's 21 highly trained ex-special forces operators that were taken out of the equation. Think 21 of our special forces couldn't have made a difference in Benghazi?
The Clinton State Department took the Libyan security detail from 30 men all the way down to 9 at a time when attacks by extremists against Western targets in Libya were spiking so badly that Great Britain and the Red Cross both pulled their people out. That's not 2 or 3 fat washouts we're talking about...that's 21 highly trained ex-special forces operators that were taken out of the equation. Think 21 of our special forces couldn't have made a difference in Benghazi?
Nope, not for a minute. First, they probably wouldn't have all been in Benghazi. Most of them would have probably stayed in Tripoli where the Embassy was located.
Secondly, there were HUNDREDS (okay, not thousands) of attackers. Well armed, who have been hardened by being at war for a long time.
I still see no evidence the administration dictated to the CIA to remove Al-Qaeda references from their intelligence estimate. And again, you're stuck with 7 investigations confirming the administration got their information from the CIA, not the other way around; and you're stuck with 7 investigations confirming the administration did not lie about the protest narrative because they got that information from the CIA, who, according to the 7th investigation, pushed that narrative until 9.24.2012.Umm ... your evidence the administration told the CIA to omit Al-Qaeda from their intelligence estimate is ... ?Hell, Faun...the intelligence community knew that DAY that there was no demonstrations or protests prior to the attacks. It's the White House and the State Department that insisted on keeping that original incorrect assessment LONG after it was clear to everyone involved that there was no protest in Benghazi!
An hour and a half before the attack started, Ambassador Stevens walked the Turkish diplomat he'd been meeting with to the front gates of the Consulate. Don't you think he would have mentioned a "protest" if there was one going on? The streets were empty. There was no protest. So why is Susan Rice still making that case a week later? That isn't something the intelligence community is pushing...that's something that the White House and the State Department are pushing because they are DESPERATE to deflect criticism of their policy failures.
You scare me at times, Faun! Do you really not know that the revisions that were done removed a mention of Al Queda from the talking points? How can you NOT know that?
You're still running away from what I posted. In terms of the administration pushing the protest narrative, what difference does it make weather there were protests or not or what the IC first believed? As the report shows, the IC was informing the administration the attack was provoked by the video up until September 24th. Intel comes from the IC, not the administration. Obama, Clinton and Rice were echoing the IC. In terms of the rightwingnutty position that the administration lied about that, It doesn't matter what the IC thought according to you. What matters is what the IC conveyed to the administration. And what they conveyed, up until the 24th, was that the attack was a protest spurred by an anti-Islamic video.
Seven investigations into this have exonerated the administration of lying because their narrative of a protest came from the IC. But you Dreamers can't let go of your conspiracy theory. You're too invested.
It's obvious that only "approved" intel was being accepted by this Administration, Faun! This isn't a case of the CIA sending the White House it's best estimates of what took place...this was the CIA sending the White House a report stating what they thought took place and the White House saying..."You know what...we like the part about a protest that escalated...but we don't like the part about Al Queda...so take out the Al Queda parts and leave in the protest parts even though it looks like that was wrong to begin with!" Then the White House acts shocked when someone asks if they changed the talking points. "Who us? Gosh no...we only changed one word and that was "stylistic"."
Here's an interesting fact you didn't know. The CIA works for the White House. You learn something every day, don't you? The White House pointing fingers while being normal for them is still pointing in a mirror when they point it at their subordinates.
Sucks for you Dreamers, but it is what it is ... another rightwingnut conspiracy debunked. You're now relegated to the heap pile with Truthers and Birthers.
The Clinton State Department took the Libyan security detail from 30 men all the way down to 9 at a time when attacks by extremists against Western targets in Libya were spiking so badly that Great Britain and the Red Cross both pulled their people out. That's not 2 or 3 fat washouts we're talking about...that's 21 highly trained ex-special forces operators that were taken out of the equation. Think 21 of our special forces couldn't have made a difference in Benghazi?
Nope, not for a minute. First, they probably wouldn't have all been in Benghazi. Most of them would have probably stayed in Tripoli where the Embassy was located.
Secondly, there were HUNDREDS (okay, not thousands) of attackers. Well armed, who have been hardened by being at war for a long time.
There is no argument here. I simply posted the facts. The Republicans have admitted there's no scandal to Benghazi.
http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/Benghazi Report.pdf
......and yet FOUR men held them off for HOURS.
Sorry dipshit, Hillary did not renew the request for the Security Detail to continue.
30 Marines would have destroyed that rag tag bunch of pussies.
Okay...let's say that half of the security force stayed in Tripoli to guard the Embassy...that leaves 10 or 11 that would have accompanied Stevens to Benghazi. You can have your 100 to 150 terrorists, Joey...I'll take the 10 or 11 US ex-special forces guys! And if all of them accompanied the Ambassador then it wouldn't even be a contest. 20 guys is a full Seal Team platoon! They'd have kicked the tar out of those "extremists".
......and yet FOUR men held them off for HOURS.
Okay...let's say that half of the security force stayed in Tripoli to guard the Embassy...that leaves 10 or 11 that would have accompanied Stevens to Benghazi. You can have your 100 to 150 terrorists, Joey...I'll take the 10 or 11 US ex-special forces guys! And if all of them accompanied the Ambassador then it wouldn't even be a contest. 20 guys is a full Seal Team platoon! They'd have kicked the tar out of those "extremists".
Yeah, okay, maybe you've been watching too many John Wayne movies.
If our guys are so much tougher than the terrorists, then why haven't we won the war yet? Seems to me that if you are war for 12 years, you should have won by now.
......and yet FOUR men held them off for HOURS.
You are watching cowboys and Indians or somthing. That is not at all what happened at the consulate first and at the CIA annex later.
Stevens perished due to smoke asphyxiation after being seperated from the CiA team and Libyans that came to rescue them. Dozens were rescued at the consulate and moved to the CIA annex. Woods and Doigherty were killed during a 11 minute mortar barrage from locations unknown within a city populated at 500,000.
24 Marines could not has stopped a city of 500,000 from doing harm to Americans.
Stevens counted on the friendship he had developed with the people of Benghazi that he helped save from annihilation by Ghadhafi's artillery, tanks and bombs.
Stevens just missed surviving - too close to call as to whether security was enough.
Why stop at 24 Marines - lets put an armored battalion with air support around every diplomat that serves on foreign soil.
However we won't because its cost prohibitive and we know from past experience that Republicans believe strongly in cutting taxes during wartime and specifically for their wealthy donors.
.
Their side attacks with IED's, car bombs and talks the naive into wearing suicide vests to blow themselves up. They fight from behind the cover of women and children using civilians as human shields. They cut the heads off helpless prisoners whose hands are tied behind their backs. Our guys do none of those things and yet we've defeated them in nearly every firefight we've ever gotten into with them despite their usually having the element of surprise to work with. If you don't know by now that the average Navy Seal is worth twenty of the enemy then you've got your head buried somewhere in your posterior, Joey.
As for why we haven't "won yet"? We've got a Commander in Chief that let's the enemy march troops and heavy arms across miles of open desert to seize city after city without lifting a finger to stop them but you wonder why we're now struggling against a bunch of cowardly thugs?
......and yet FOUR men held them off for HOURS.
You are watching cowboys and Indians or somthing. That is not at all what happened at the consulate first and at the CIA annex later.
Stevens perished due to smoke asphyxiation after being seperated from the CiA team and Libyans that came to rescue them. Dozens were rescued at the consulate and moved to the CIA annex. Woods and Doigherty were killed during a 11 minute mortar barrage from locations unknown within a city populated at 500,000.
24 Marines could not has stopped a city of 500,000 from doing harm to Americans.
Stevens counted on the friendship he had developed with the people of Benghazi that he helped save from annihilation by Ghadhafi's artillery, tanks and bombs.
Stevens just missed surviving - too close to call as to whether security was enough.
Why stop at 24 Marines - lets put an armored battalion with air support around every diplomat that serves on foreign soil.
However we won't because its cost prohibitive and we know from past experience that Republicans believe strongly in cutting taxes during wartime and specifically for their wealthy donors.
.
[
LOL,horse hockey.
There weren't 500,000 attackers.
4 men indeed held them at bay for hours.
Their side attacks with IED's, car bombs and talks the naive into wearing suicide vests to blow themselves up. They fight from behind the cover of women and children using civilians as human shields. They cut the heads off helpless prisoners whose hands are tied behind their backs. Our guys do none of those things and yet we've defeated them in nearly every firefight we've ever gotten into with them despite their usually having the element of surprise to work with. If you don't know by now that the average Navy Seal is worth twenty of the enemy then you've got your head buried somewhere in your posterior, Joey.
Hey, guy, this is the problem you fuckheads don't get- WE INVADED THEIR COUNTRIES. or specifically, we sent poor brown people in to do it because you chickenhawks don't go down and sign up for the military. And at the end of the day, people stop signing up, and the military takes guys like Bradley Manning and Bowe Bergdahl because no one else is signing up after a certain point in futility.
The notion that "we beat them in every firefight".... you know, i might be an old man, but I remember that kind of chest-thumping being said about Vietnam. You can win every battle and still lose the war. The War on Terror was lost at Abu Grahib.
As for why we haven't "won yet"? We've got a Commander in Chief that let's the enemy march troops and heavy arms across miles of open desert to seize city after city without lifting a finger to stop them but you wonder why we're now struggling against a bunch of cowardly thugs?
Here's the thing, guy. If the people who LIVE in those cities weren't going to fight for them, why do we need to?
When you and every other Chickenhawk goes down to a recruiting center to go fight for Zionism and the Oil Companies, then I will take you seriously.
[
LOL,horse hockey.
There weren't 500,000 attackers.
4 men indeed held them at bay for hours.
Well, they really didn't.
The two CIA Mercenaries were killed by a mortar attack and Steven's died from smoke inhalations.
So the notion that if we just had a couple more paid mercenaries on the ground would have made the difference is just- silly.
[
LOL,horse hockey.
There weren't 500,000 attackers.
4 men indeed held them at bay for hours.
Well, they really didn't.
The two CIA Mercenaries were killed by a mortar attack and Steven's died from smoke inhalations.
So the notion that if we just had a couple more paid mercenaries on the ground would have made the difference is just- silly.
