Why Benghazi Matters

[Wehrwolfen]

It's also possible that a nation can't just send attack helicopters into other sovereign nations whenever they feel like it. Funny how the right wing hasn't figured that out yet. For some reason, they seem to think that is an OK thing to do.

Who talked about helicopters. The C-130 Spectres are equipt to fly into situations of that sort. Do you think they were shot at during the Nam war? And as far as flying over a sovereign country, especially when that country is charged with the safety of those diplomats. Why would those on the ground in Ben Ghazi be asking for the where the Spectres were? Hmm? Did Gen. Ham dispatch the gunship that was recalled by Panetta? Is this the reason for General Ham being relieved of duty?

 

[BlindBoo]

The only reason Faux tried this false story is to try and Swift-boat the President. Most normal people are aware of this tactic. Looks like it didn't work. Not even close. The poll numbers on foriegn policy seem to be increasing for the President.

So then, you don't give a fuck about Obama's lies or incompetence, only about your party winning?

And the poll numbers show WHAT?

WH2012: General

No no , specifically it's when you say that they lie or are incompetent that I don't give a fuck about.

 

[Conservative]

It's also possible that a nation can't just send attack helicopters into other sovereign nations whenever they feel like it. Funny how the right wing hasn't figured that out yet. For some reason, they seem to think that is an OK thing to do.

Should Reagan have asked permission to go into Greneda and rescue those students, and waited until he got it?

 

[Wehrwolfen]

"Rogue"U.S. General Arrested for Activating Special Forces Teams; Ignoring Libya Stand-Down Order​

»
2012-10-29
PinkTeaPatriot




The official story surrounding the events of September 11, 2012 in Bengzahi, Libya which left four Americans dead, has now officially fallen apart.

After numerous flips and flops by the Obama administration, which originally attempted to paint the incident as a Muslim outcry over an anti-Islamic video, whistle blowers throughout the U.S. government, including within the White House, the State Department, national intelligence agencies and the U.S.military have made available stunning details that suggest not only did operational commanders have live visual and audio communications from drones overhead and intelligence assets on the ground, but that some commanders within the military were prepared to go-it-alone after being told to "stand down."

Africom commanding officer U.S. General Carter Ham, after being ordered to essentially surrender control of the situation to alleged Al Queda terrorists and let Americans on the ground die, made the unilateral decision to ignore orders from the Secretary of Defense and activated special operations teams at his disposal for immediate deployment to the area.

According to reports, once the General went rogue he was arrested within minutes by his second in command and relieved of duty.


"(The) basic principle is that you don't deploy forces into harm's way without knowing what's going on; without having some real-time information about what's taking place," Panetta told Pentagon reporters. "And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation."

The information I heard today was that General Ham as head of Africom received the same e-mails the White House received requesting help/support as the attack was taking place. General Ham immediately had a rapid response unit ready and communicated to the Pentagon that he had a unit ready.


http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2...-ignoring-libya-stand-down-order-2466104.html

 

[PredFan]

1. It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.

2. It demonstrates the unconscionable elevation of politics over protection of American citizens.

3. It demonstrates pervasive corruption/coverup throughout the Executive Branch of our government.

4. It demonstrates the pervasive corruption of journalism in our mainstream media.

5. It demonstrates the corruption of political partisans who support their candidate no matter what harm is done to their country.

Which of course is bullshit.

Letting Gaddafi off for Lockerbie..by paying blood money is what the Bush administration did in Libya.

Going after Gaddafi when he was threatening genocide is what the Obama administration did.

Deflection noted.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You basically got owned..and can't admit it.

Are you on drugs?

That's fine.

Reagan's attempt to seem "manly" blew up in his face.

The bombing attack in 1986 was in response to a terrorist attack. Lockerbie was in 1988, December 1988.

How exactly is that "blowing up in his face?"

The bombing happened before any conclusive evidence of Libyan involvement..and the book is still not entirely not closed on it.

After Lockerbie (not Lockerbei), Reagan didn't do squat.

ROFL

After Lockerbie, Reagan was out of office. It happened when Reagan had 2 weeks left in his term.

Like Shalllow, I was alive and remember it. Unlike Shallow, I don't lie about it. George H.W. Bush was President for Lockerbie, despite the lies that you leftist-regressives float.

George W. Bush..however, hungry for Libyan oil and wanting a political victory got the Libyans to "give up" their "nucular" ambitions and pay blood money to Lockerbie families. That was in exchange for normalizing relations.

It's also what the democratic legislature, both houses, demanded.

Fancy that..normalizing relations with a bonafide terrorist.

Good show.

I'm not going to defend Bush, I thought he was a fuckup at the time, and still do. I left the Republican party over Bush.

He let the leftists push him to appeasement - and YOU are the thanks he gets for it. Like Obama climbing into bed with Al Qaeda in Libya, Bush deserved to get betrayed by the leftists, he was stupid to appease them.

And zero intergrity? Your "integrity" went out the window when you defended Ted Nugent, Hack.

Seriously? I'll put Nugent up against fucktards like Kanye West or Jason Biggs.

 

[PredFan]

If it were Barrack Obama (R).... you'd be shitting yourselves over this and it would be on the 24/7 news cycle.

History says you're full of crap. Embassy attacks happened under Bush, several times. The Democrats never had a meltdown over it.

Remember, we here on the left are not like you. We refuse to tapdance on American corpses for political gain. That sort of vile hypocritical behavior is solely displayed by Republicans. Like the old Soviet Communists, modern American Republicans are only loyal to their party, not their country.

Because Bush didn't try to cover it up and lie about it.

 

[PredFan]

Well it seems we're at an empasse here. I don't think there's enough information available to make an intelligent evaluation of the situation nor do I see a reason to attack the President over this. You people are jumping up and down in outrage on the latest right wing anti-Obama trend that'll be replaced in a few weeks by some new outrage.

In other words, I like the lies don't confuse me with facts

Exactly.

 

[Uncensored2008]

No no , specifically it's when you say that they lie or are incompetent that I don't give a fuck about.

Obama did lie, that can't be covered up. And you don't care, except that it hurt his poll numbers. Keeping your party in power is the only issue for you.

 

[PredFan]

It's also possible that a nation can't just send attack helicopters into other sovereign nations whenever they feel like it. Funny how the right wing hasn't figured that out yet. For some reason, they seem to think that is an OK thing to do.

Ok, let's give you that.

Why did obama lie about the attacks?

 

[PredFan]

That just sounds like you're bashing the military for not being prefect. Obama wasn't flying those jets. That being said, I think Americans are more concerned about Romney lying about Jeeps-to-China. He can kiss MI and Oh good-bye.

I'm bashing Obama for lying to the America people. For 14 days, the administration engaged in a calculated and deliberate campaign of disinformation regarding the Benghazi attacks. Some, such as Shallow and Boo, will STILL attempt to use the YouTube video lie, trying for the "big lie" effect.

The fact is that Obama had based much of his reelection campaign on the idea that he had "defeated Al Qaeda and created a peaceful middle east." An Al Qaeda attack on 9/11, which is what this was, didn't fit with his narrative, so he lied, as did his staff, over and over. Further, when Romney called it for what it was, on day one, Obama further compounded his lies.

{“Gov. Romney seems to have a tendency to shoot first and aim later,” President Obama said in a CBS interview last night, criticizing Romney’s reaction to the embassy attack in Cairo. Romney criticized the Obama administration’s ‘apology’ in response to the attacks on the embassy and subsequent failure to condemn the attacks right away.}

Obama echoes Carter with

Obama is a scumbag. And these emails demonstrate a callous disregard for American lives.

This.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Should Reagan have asked permission to go into Greneda and rescue those students, and waited until he got it?

Grenada was the start of the fall of the USSR. Many, like Boo, get very angry over Grenada; Reagan destroyed the dream. While small, it was the first time in history that a Communist conquest had been reversed. Sure, Nicaragua and Afghanistan were what toppled the Soviet Empire, but Grenada was the keystone that started it all. It dispelled the idea that the Soviets were invincible, "unbeatable" as Carter had claimed.

 

[Sallow]

You basically got owned..and can't admit it.

Are you on drugs?

That's fine.

Reagan's attempt to seem "manly" blew up in his face.

The bombing attack in 1986 was in response to a terrorist attack. Lockerbie was in 1988, December 1988.

How exactly is that "blowing up in his face?"



ROFL

After Lockerbie, Reagan was out of office. It happened when Reagan had 2 weeks left in his term.

Like Shalllow, I was alive and remember it. Unlike Shallow, I don't lie about it. George H.W. Bush was President for Lockerbie, despite the lies that you leftist-regressives float.



It's also what the democratic legislature, both houses, demanded.

Fancy that..normalizing relations with a bonafide terrorist.

Good show.

I'm not going to defend Bush, I thought he was a fuckup at the time, and still do. I left the Republican party over Bush.

He let the leftists push him to appeasement - and YOU are the thanks he gets for it. Like Obama climbing into bed with Al Qaeda in Libya, Bush deserved to get betrayed by the leftists, he was stupid to appease them.

And zero intergrity? Your "integrity" went out the window when you defended Ted Nugent, Hack.

Seriously? I'll put Nugent up against fucktards like Kanye West or Jason Biggs.

You put up a post about Reagan's reaction to terrorism after I had one about Obama's and Lockerbie.

Now..after I pointed it out..you realize that Reagan's bombings had nothing to do with Lockerbie at all.

Believe you me..this is amusing.



Another backflip jim.

 

[konradv]

No no , specifically it's when you say that they lie or are incompetent that I don't give a fuck about.

Obama did lie, that can't be covered up. And you don't care, except that it hurt his poll numbers. Keeping your party in power is the only issue for you.

I think Americans are more concerned about Mitt lying about jobs. Benghazi may make good talking points, but in the end, it's the economy, stupid.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You put up a post about Reagan's reaction to terrorism after I had one about Obama's and Lockerbie.

Dude, you claimed that REAGAN, not BUSH, but Reagan, did nothing to respond to terrorism. "Cut and Run," was your claim, right?

So I corrected your lie.

Now..after I pointed it out..you realize that Reagan's bombings had nothing to do with Lockerbie at all.

Really?

Cool, so you'll retract the claim that Lockerbie was a response? "Blew up in his face" I believe was the bullshit you floated?

Believe you me..this is amusing.

Oh, I agree.

Another backflip jim.

Because Reagan didn't respond to Lockerbie?

ROFL...

 

[Againsheila]

OOOOHHHH..., that hurt's. It's apparent the righties are beside themselves with worry, Benghazi isn't taking and Mitt just shot himself in the foot.

Not. Benghazi matters because it proves how much of an incompetent fool obamaturd and anyone who believes him is. Idiot.

The only thing Americans care about Re:benghazi is the how the Reps are trying to make political hay out of deaths and they're disgusted. What's more important is the economy and Mitt's willingness to lie about what's happening. Kiss Ohio and Michigan good-bye. Happy retirement, Mitt.

I don't give a crap about Romney. I do care that our country FAILED our people in Libya and people DIED. Your defense of Obama is turning you into an unthinking robot that cares nothing for our country or our people.

This had NOTHING to do with Romney, it has NOTHING to do with the election except for the fact that it proves Obama is unfit to lead our country and cares nothing for our own people in foreign lands. After all I've read, as far as I'm concerned, Obama could have just killed those people themselves and it would have been better because then at least their bodies wouldn't have been violated.

The media cover up of this is nothing new, our media has been covering up for both parties since Reagan.

 

[Caroljo]

Faux News has a habit of picking their talking points out of context of the larger picture. Like showing a businessman a short clip of a President speech saying "If you've got a business......you didn't build that" and then asking the businessman "Does that bother you?" So I'll wait until more facts are released. Since their looniest are on this story like flies on shit I'm betting it's not getting much traction.

That doesn't answer the question. If it comes out that Obama was in the situation room and knew that Americans, under attack, were requesting help and he did nothing, are you going to have a problem with that?

If is the most powerful word in the universe.

Following a pair of denials by the CIA and the National Security Council to a Fox News story published Friday, the Pentagon has come under scrutiny for its response to the assault on the U.S. compound in Benghazi. However, in a statement to The Atlantic Wire, a senior defense official says the Pentagon never rejected requests for military intervention in Benghazi. Not only that, the official said no such requests were ever made.

"The Pentagon took action by moving personnel and assets in the region shortly after it learned of the attack on the Benghazi consulate," said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity. "There was no request made for military intervention in Benghazi. To be successful, such an operation, if requested, would have required solid information about what was happening on the ground. Such clarity just wasn't available as the attack was unfolding."

The statement follows a loud outcry from conservative critics in wake of a report by Fox News that armed CIA operatives near the U.S. compound in Benghazi were repeatedly told to "stand down" after asking for permission to assist on the night of Sept. 11. According to Fox News national security reporter Jennifer Griffin, former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods was part of a CIA outfit one mile away from the U.S. compound housing Ambassador Chris Stevens. "When he and others heard the shots fired, they informed their higher-ups at the annex to tell them what they were hearing and requested permission to go to the consulate and help out," reported Griffin. "They were told to 'stand down,' ... Soon after, they were again told to 'stand down.'" The report also said that repeated requests for outside military backup were denied.

But the report did not say who denied those requests. Was it the CIA? The Pentagon? The White House? Critics of the administration want to know in their efforts to assign blame for the tragedy. On Monday morning, MSNBC's Joe Scarborough asked that very question to President Obama who said the matter was still under investigation and he couldn't give further comment. "If we find out we that there was a big breakdown, and somebody didn't do their job, they'll be held accountable," he said. Meanwhile, the agencies involved with the Benghazi attack have been issuing independent denials.

Pentagon Denies Fox News Benghazi Report - Global - The Atlantic Wire

Yep if there was really a wolfe attacking that boy this time......opps, guess not!

Yup....you still couldn't answer that question i see. This is why you love Obama so much, you're just like him.

He won't answer any straight forward questions either.....nice job!

 

[Wehrwolfen]

1. It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.

2. It demonstrates the unconscionable elevation of politics over protection of American citizens.

3. It demonstrates pervasive corruption/coverup throughout the Executive Branch of our government.

4. It demonstrates the pervasive corruption of journalism in our mainstream media.

5. It demonstrates the corruption of political partisans who support their candidate no matter what harm is done to their country.

Which of course is bullshit.

Letting Gaddafi off for Lockerbie..by paying blood money is what the Bush administration did in Libya.

Going after Gaddafi when he was threatening genocide is what the Obama administration did.

Deflection noted.

So accordingly, the death of Ambassador Stevens and three employees of the United States of America are inconsequential because they interfere with with the political re-election aspirations of Barack Hussein Obama.

 

[PredFan]

This needs to be posted again, because it's the truth and the left has been straffing this thread with lies, eflections, and derailing attempts.

1. It demonstrates the failure of our appeasement towards hostile Muslim countries.

2. It demonstrates the unconscionable elevation of politics over protection of American citizens.

3. It demonstrates pervasive corruption/coverup throughout the Executive Branch of our government.

4. It demonstrates the pervasive corruption of journalism in our mainstream media.

5. It demonstrates the corruption of political partisans who support their candidate no matter what harm is done to their country.

 

[tinydancer]

If it were Barrack Obama (R).... you'd be shitting yourselves over this and it would be on the 24/7 news cycle.

History says you're full of crap. Embassy attacks happened under Bush, several times. The Democrats never had a meltdown over it.

Remember, we here on the left are not like you. We refuse to tapdance on American corpses for political gain. That sort of vile hypocritical behavior is solely displayed by Republicans. Like the old Soviet Communists, modern American Republicans are only loyal to their party, not their country.

Because Bush didn't try to cover it up and lie about it.

Exactly.

I don't remember Bush's UN Ambassador running around all all the Sunday talk shows lying his ass off that it was a "spontaneous" attack caused by an anti Islam video.