Were four Americans sacrificed so Obama could fake defeating AlQaeda before election?

Little-Acorn

Gold Member
Jun 20, 2006
10,025
2,410
Finally, after puttering around with stories and videos and lies after the attacks, Congress is beginning to get at the real scandal in Benghazi.

What happened after the attacks, and who lied to whom and how, is less important than why security there was left to deteriorate for months, even while attacks were going on, bombs were blowing 12-foot holes in the consulate walls, and Amb. Stevens was pleading for months for more security.

That summer, Obama was crowing over "Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive!". He was desperately trying to fool American voters into thinking he had defeated Al Qaeda and they were "on the run". And the increasing attacks by Al Qaeda were not fitting into the glossy image he was trying to project.

Sending MORE security into areas like Benghazi, Cairo etc. would have done even more harm to his story... so he simply didn't do it. Instead he reduced security, pulled out American agents, and in some cases substituted Libyan personnel for the American security troops. He was hoping this would look good to American voters who weren't paying much attention.

By the first week in September 2012, there were exactly three American security personnel at the consulate in Benghazi. The gate guards and patrols had been replaced by Libyans... and they were unarmed, with nothing but whistles and batons. And so, when the major attack came on Sept. 11, 2012, the people in the consulate didn't have much chance.

Basically, the lives of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans, were sacrificed so that Obama could get more votes three weeks later in the November, 2012 election.

And that is the real scandal of Benghazi. Obama hopes fervently that people will keep complaining about Susan Rice and lies about a video afterward... because then they aren't complaining about what killed Amb. Stevens and three other Americans: Months of fatal, flagrant neglect of consulate security for the purpose of gaining votes.

------------------------------------------------------

http://m.cbsnews.com/fullstory.rbml?catid=57528567&feed_id=2&videofeed=38

The Obama administration -- and the State Department in particular -- has been accused by Republican lawmakers and some former U.S. officials who worked in Libya of ignoring warning signs and even rejecting pleas for increased security around American offices in the country ahead of the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, which left U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three others dead.

The House Oversight Committee will begin questioning three senior State Department staff on Capitol Hill Wednesday over claims that dozens of U.S. security personnel were removed from Libya in the six months leading up to the attack, in spite of alleged requests to increase personnel levels from American officials on the ground.

According to one of the key witnesses expected to testify before the committee this week, even Ambassador Stevens himself had repeatedly requested more security personnel, but was turned down.

Lt. Col. Andy Wood, the former head of a U.S. Special Forces "Site Security Team" in Libya, has told CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson that he and many other senior staff at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, "felt we needed more, not less" security personnel in the country, but were told "to do with less.

For what reasons, I don't know."

This begins to get at the real scandal in Benghazi.
 
Last edited:
benghazi-mccain-demand.jpg


Thank you. We needed another Benghazi thread...
 
The Obama administration even kept the charade going AFTER the attacks, trying to pretend they were not done by Al Qaeda even while everyone who was there, said they were.

But the worst aspect of the whole sorry affair, was the deliberate and systematic reduction in security at these American facilities, in the spring and summe of 2012, even while Al Qaeda attacks grew stronger and Consulate personnel kep sounding alarms over the inadequacy of the security.
 
No, and the Libyian Militas responsible will soon pay for their actions.

Also.....

Army Gen. Carter Ham, then the head of the U.S. Africa Command, did not wait for the separate cable, however. Instead, after reading the Aug. 16 cable, Ham phoned Stevens and asked if the embassy needed a special security team from the U.S. military. Stevens told Ham it did not, the officials said.

Weeks later, Stevens traveled to Germany for an already scheduled meeting with Ham at AFRICOM headquarters. During that meeting, Ham again offered additional military assets, and Stevens again said no, the two officials said.

“He didn’t say why. He just turned it down,” a defense official who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject told McClatchy.

The offers of aid and Stevens’ rejection of them have not been revealed in either the State Department’s Administrative Review Board investigation of the Benghazi events or during any of the congressional hearings and reports that have been issued into what took place there.

Read more here: Ambassador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security, U.S. officials say | McClatchy
 
Perhaps that's one of the reasons Ham was relieved. He might contradict the newest democrat defense. Get him on the stand and ASK him. Not a report of what a democrat controlled media says what a democrat told them. Ask Ham directly. Then ask him why obama dismissed him.
 
Security at consulates and embassies, though it sometimes uses U.S. military personnel, is usually arranged by the State Department. Ham's offer was going around "the usual channels". And Stevens, being a career diplomat, probably preferred to rely on the usual channels.

Stevens sent four separate cables to the State Dept. pleading for more security. They were regularly turned down. We don't know who made that decision... yet.
 
If there was a plot to pretend Al Qaeda was finished, which the president never said or even implied in any statement,

how would letting Al Qaeda kill Americans make that 'plot' work?

Could you people please think before you post? Is that too much to ask? Consider it a humanitarian gesture to the rest of us.
 
No, and the Libyian Militas responsible will soon pay for their actions.

When?

The attacks were EIGHT MONTHS ago.

And our government just got around to publishing some grainy "Have you seen this person?" photos last week.
 
Finally, after puttering around with stories and videos and lies after the attacks, Congress is beginning to get at the real scandal in Benghazi.

What happened after the attacks, and who lied to whom and how, is less important than why security there was left to deteriorate for months, even while attacks were going on, bombs were blowing 12-foot holes in the consulate walls, and Amb. Stevens was pleading for months for more security.

That summer, Obama was crowing over "Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive!". He was desperately trying to fool American voters into thinking he had defeated Al Qaeda and they were "on the run". And the increasing attacks by Al Qaeda were not fitting into the glossy image he was trying to project.

Sending MORE security into areas like Benghazi, Cairo etc. would have done even more harm to his story... so he simply didn't do it. Instead he reduced security, pulled out American agents, and in some cases substituted Libyan personnel for the American security troops. He was hoping this would look good to American voters who weren't paying much attention.

By the first week in September 2012, there were exactly three American security personnel at the consulate in Benghazi. The gate guards and patrols had been replaced by Libyans... and they were unarmed, with nothing but whistles and batons. And so, when the major attack came on Sept. 11, 2012, the people in the consulate didn't have much chance.

Basically, the lives of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans, were sacrificed so that Obama could get more votes three weeks later in the November, 2012 election.

And that is the real scandal of Benghazi. Obama hopes fervently that people will keep complaining about Susan Rice and lies about a video afterward... because then they aren't complaining about what killed Amb. Stevens and three other Americans: Months of fatal, flagrant neglect of consulate security for the purpose of gaining votes.

------------------------------------------------------

http://m.cbsnews.com/fullstory.rbml?catid=57528567&feed_id=2&videofeed=38

The Obama administration -- and the State Department in particular -- has been accused by Republican lawmakers and some former U.S. officials who worked in Libya of ignoring warning signs and even rejecting pleas for increased security around American offices in the country ahead of the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, which left U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three others dead.

The House Oversight Committee will begin questioning three senior State Department staff on Capitol Hill Wednesday over claims that dozens of U.S. security personnel were removed from Libya in the six months leading up to the attack, in spite of alleged requests to increase personnel levels from American officials on the ground.

According to one of the key witnesses expected to testify before the committee this week, even Ambassador Stevens himself had repeatedly requested more security personnel, but was turned down.

Lt. Col. Andy Wood, the former head of a U.S. Special Forces "Site Security Team" in Libya, has told CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson that he and many other senior staff at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, "felt we needed more, not less" security personnel in the country, but were told "to do with less.

For what reasons, I don't know."

This begins to get at the real scandal in Benghazi.
Wait....first the RW declares that Obama IGNORED the terrorist aspect of the attack...........................and now you say Obama wanted this to be a terrorist act all along?
 
If there was a plot to pretend Al Qaeda was finished, which the president never said or even implied in any statement,

how would letting Al Qaeda kill Americans make that 'plot' work?

Could you people please think before you post? Is that too much to ask? Consider it a humanitarian gesture to the rest of us.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39_MDzf7zPM]Obama drops al Qaeda 'on the run' line from stump speech - YouTube[/ame]
 
Wait....first the RW declares that Obama IGNORED the terrorist aspect of the attack...........................and now you say Obama wanted this to be a terrorist act all along?

Of course, I said nothing of the kind.

(yawn) yet another attempt to pretend I said something I didn't, and then bash me for it.....

Don't you people have ANY new material? This tactic is getting SO old and tired.
 
If there was a plot to pretend Al Qaeda was finished, which the president never said or even implied in any statement,

how would letting Al Qaeda kill Americans make that 'plot' work?

Could you people please think before you post? Is that too much to ask? Consider it a humanitarian gesture to the rest of us.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39_MDzf7zPM]Obama drops al Qaeda 'on the run' line from stump speech - YouTube[/ame]

When did Obama ever say al qaeda was defeated?
 
Finally, after puttering around with stories and videos and lies after the attacks, Congress is beginning to get at the real scandal in Benghazi.

What happened after the attacks, and who lied to whom and how, is less important than why security there was left to deteriorate for months, even while attacks were going on, bombs were blowing 12-foot holes in the consulate walls, and Amb. Stevens was pleading for months for more security.

That summer, Obama was crowing over "Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive!". He was desperately trying to fool American voters into thinking he had defeated Al Qaeda and they were "on the run". And the increasing attacks by Al Qaeda were not fitting into the glossy image he was trying to project.

Sending MORE security into areas like Benghazi, Cairo etc. would have done even more harm to his story... so he simply didn't do it. Instead he reduced security, pulled out American agents, and in some cases substituted Libyan personnel for the American security troops. He was hoping this would look good to American voters who weren't paying much attention.

By the first week in September 2012, there were exactly three American security personnel at the consulate in Benghazi. The gate guards and patrols had been replaced by Libyans... and they were unarmed, with nothing but whistles and batons. And so, when the major attack came on Sept. 11, 2012, the people in the consulate didn't have much chance.

Basically, the lives of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans, were sacrificed so that Obama could get more votes three weeks later in the November, 2012 election.

And that is the real scandal of Benghazi. Obama hopes fervently that people will keep complaining about Susan Rice and lies about a video afterward... because then they aren't complaining about what killed Amb. Stevens and three other Americans: Months of fatal, flagrant neglect of consulate security for the purpose of gaining votes.

------------------------------------------------------

http://m.cbsnews.com/fullstory.rbml?catid=57528567&feed_id=2&videofeed=38

The Obama administration -- and the State Department in particular -- has been accused by Republican lawmakers and some former U.S. officials who worked in Libya of ignoring warning signs and even rejecting pleas for increased security around American offices in the country ahead of the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, which left U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three others dead.

The House Oversight Committee will begin questioning three senior State Department staff on Capitol Hill Wednesday over claims that dozens of U.S. security personnel were removed from Libya in the six months leading up to the attack, in spite of alleged requests to increase personnel levels from American officials on the ground.

According to one of the key witnesses expected to testify before the committee this week, even Ambassador Stevens himself had repeatedly requested more security personnel, but was turned down.

Lt. Col. Andy Wood, the former head of a U.S. Special Forces "Site Security Team" in Libya, has told CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson that he and many other senior staff at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, "felt we needed more, not less" security personnel in the country, but were told "to do with less.

For what reasons, I don't know."

This begins to get at the real scandal in Benghazi.
Wait....first the RW declares that Obama IGNORED the terrorist aspect of the attack...........................and now you say Obama wanted this to be a terrorist act all along?

The Obama haters are in blind man's bluff mode now, lurching this way and that way, grasping blindly at thin air hoping to grab onto something.
 
Why do you say there was a plot to pretend Al Qaeda was finished? No one here has said such a thing, except you.

Why do you believe this?

You say it in your thread title you fucking idiot.

Ah, so you are telling a flat lie about what I said, and hoping no one will catch you at it.

Run along.

Is there a difference between 'defeated' and 'finished'?

Is there a difference between sacrificing 4 Americans and letting 4 Americans die?

No and no.

You're claiming that Obama sacrificed the 4 Americans so he could pretend he defeated al qaeda?

I have never heard an actual retarded person say anything that retarded.
 
If there was a plot to pretend Al Qaeda was finished, which the president never said or even implied in any statement,

how would letting Al Qaeda kill Americans make that 'plot' work?

Could you people please think before you post? Is that too much to ask? Consider it a humanitarian gesture to the rest of us.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39_MDzf7zPM]Obama drops al Qaeda 'on the run' line from stump speech - YouTube[/ame]

When did Obama ever say al qaeda was defeated?

And of course the answer is 'Never'.

And thus the main attack on Obama over Benghazi, that he wanted to cover up the POSSIBILITY that it was an al qaeda attack,

so as to preserve his claim that al qaeda had been defeated,

is rendered nonsensical by the simplest of facts...

...Obama never ever once made that claim.
 
Were 3 women kidnapped, abused as sex slaves and terrorized by a sociopath in Cleveland?

The answer to that question is also yes.

The difference here is that only one of the offenders will be prosecuted.
 

Forum List

Back
Top