consulate in Benghazi

[Tgace]

 

[Makalakumu]

Qft.

The upside of Romney winning the election is that the ACLU and the antiwar left will actually kick back into gear.

 

[Big Don]

Qft.

The upside of Romney winning the election is that the ACLU and the antiwar left will actually kick back into gear.

QFT. Because hypocrisy is awesome.

 

[billc]

More on the timeline...of course, from Fox...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...als-on-ground-in-libya-challenge-cia-account/

The accounts, from foreign and American security officials in and around Benghazi at the time of the attack, indicate there was in fact a significant lag between when the threat started to show itself and help started to arrive.
According to the CIA, the first calls for assistance came at 9:40 p.m. local time from a senior State Department official at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, to the CIA annex about a mile away.

But according to multiple people on the ground that night, the Blue Mountain Security manager, who was in charge of the local force hired to guard the consulate perimeter, made calls on both two-way radios and cell phones to colleagues in Benghazi warning of problems at least an hour earlier. Those calls allegedly went to local security contractors who say that the CIA annex was also notified much earlier than 9:40 p.m. U.S. military intelligence also told Fox News that armed militia was gathering up to three hours before the attack began.

One source said the Blue Mountain Security chief seemed "distraught" and said "the situation here is very serious, we have a problem." He also said that even without these phone and radio calls, it was clear to everyone in the security community on the ground in Benghazi much earlier than 9:40 p.m. that fighters were gathering in preparation for an attack.
Many of these security contractors and intelligence sources on the ground in Benghazi met twice a week for informal meetings at the consulate with Blue Mountain and consulate staff, and at times other international officials. They were all very familiar with security at the consulate -- and said the staff seemed "complacent" and "didn't seem to follow the normal American way of securing a facility."

Both American and British sources say multiple roadblocks set up by fighters believed to be with Ansar al-Sharia were in place in Benghazi several hours before the 9:40 p.m. timeline and that communications also alluded to "heavily armed troops showing up with artillery." Fox News was told by both American and British contacts who were in Benghazi that night that the CIA timeline rolled out this past week is only "loosely based on the truth" and "doesn't quite add up."

Sooo...even before the actual attack people on the ground saw heavily armed, organized groups...not the disorganized crowds protesting a video that obama mentioned at the U.N. well after the event...

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...in-libya-challenge-cia-account/#ixzz2BBa5QKGV

 

[Tgace]

 

[billc]

CBS held back footage during their 60 minute interview with obama where he refused to call the attack in Bhengazi a terrorist attack, having just come from the rose garden...

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/11/05/Proof-Obama-Refused-to-Call-Benghazi-Terror-CBS-Covered-Up

KROFT: Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya Attack, do you believe that this was a terrorism attack?


OBAMA: Well it’s too early to tell exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.




​

CBS News held onto this footage for more than six weeks, failing to release it even when questions were raised during the Second Presidential Debate as to whether Obama had, in fact, referred to the Benghazi attack as an act of terror before blaming it falsely on demonstrations against an anti-Islamic video.

CBS News could have set the record straight, but held onto this footage, releasing it just before the election--perhaps to avoid the later charge of having suppressed it altogether.

Fox News' Bret Baier, who has been following the timeline of events closely, noted in his analysis this morning:
These are two crucial answers in the big picture. Right after getting out of the Rose Garden, where, according to the second debate and other accounts he definitively called the attack terrorism, Obama is asked point blank about not calling it terrorism. He blinks and does not push back.
Understand that this interview is just hours after he gets out of the Rose Garden.


How after this exchange and the CIA explanation of what was being put up the chain in the intel channels does the Ambassador to the United Nations go on the Sunday shows and say what she says about a spontaneous demonstration sparked by that anti-Islam video? And how does the president deliver a speech to the United Nations 13 days later where he references that anti-Islam video six times when referring to the attack in Benghazi?

There are many questions, and here are a few more.


Why did CBS release a clip that appeared to back up Obama's claim in the second debate on Oct. 19, a few days before the foreign policy debate, and not release the rest of that interview at the beginning?



Why on the Sunday before the election, almost six weeks after the attack, at 6 p.m. does an obscure online timeline posted on CBS.com contain the additional "60 Minutes" interview material from Sept. 12?


Why wasn't it news after the president said what he said in the second debate, knowing what they had in that "60 Minutes" tape -- why didn't they use it then? And why is it taking Fox News to spur other media organizations to take the Benghazi story seriously?



Whatever your politics, there are a lot of loose ends here, a lot of unanswered questions and a lot of strange political maneuvers that don't add up.
Actually, the conclusion to be drawn is quite simple: CBS News, in an effort to assist President Obama's re-election campaign, corruptly concealed information about two critical issues--namely, a terror attack and the president's dishonesty about it. When the players in the Libya scandal face investigation, so, too, should CBS News and those in the mainstream media who have wantonly assisted the administration's shameless lies.

 

[Master Dan]

It would seem that a majority on here believe in some Obama conspiracy that he deliberately allowed the Amabasador to be put in harms way or at best totally willfully dropped the ball and then covered it up? I am more concerned that someone in the military for political reason's put the Amassador at risk to make Obama look bad?

 

[seasoned]

It would seem that a majority on here believe in some Obama conspiracy that he deliberately allowed the Amabasador to be put in harms way or at best totally willfully dropped the ball and then covered it up? I am more concerned that someone in the military for political reason's put the Amassador at risk to make Obama look bad?

Either way, he still didn't have a glue what was going on.

 

[seasoned]

Either way, he still didn't have a glue what was going on.

That's right I said it, no glue or clue...

 

[Master Dan]

Either way, he still didn't have a glue what was going on.

Given that the Ambassador was a leading expert on thearea having personally infiltrated the area collecting data that showed thatparticular area supplied the largest number of insurgents to the Iraq war overthe last ten years why in his right mind given the instability and previousattacks by that training camp the last two years previous and current unresteven reports of threats to the embassy and a previous attack leaving a hole inthe outer wall It is a major failing and somebody should pay for that with theirjob and the president should have stepped in front of it and said he wasresponsible but some say with 230 embassies globally he can't know and controleverything but also given if we can believe ex CIA people being unbiased thatmen and material were available to protect and get them out and the president activelyrefused to do that if so he should explain why and if reelected I would like tohear him explain what was done wrong and how he intends to fix that. There willalways be high risk areas and Reagan and Clinton both dropped the ball each butthey countered for it possibly we are not to know what is being done?

 

[WC_lun]

The CIA has said there was no stand down order. They responded to the attacks as fast as they could. There are questions that need answered on this, but that isn't one of them.

 

[billc]

Well, it doesn't matter anymore what happened to those men in Bhengazi. There is nothing that will be discovered that will matter to anyone but the families of those who died there. The election ended this story.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap...fHfw7g?docId=c116e763ff084c0289aa2bd1b519032d

LOS ANGELES (AP) — The California man behind an anti-Muslim film that roiled the Middle East was sentenced Wednesday to a year in prison for violating his probation stemming from a 2010 bank fraud conviction by lying about his identity.
U.S. District Court Judge Christina Snyder immediately sentenced Mark Basseley Youssef after he admitted to four of the eight alleged violations, including obtaining a fraudulent California driver's license.
None of the violations had to do with the content of "Innocence of Muslims," a film that depicts Mohammad as a religious fraud, pedophile and a womanizer. The movie sparked violence in Libya and other parts of the Middle East, killing dozens.
Youssef, 55, was arrested in late September, just weeks after he went into hiding when deadly violence erupted in Libya and other parts of the Middle East in response to the movie.

So the manufactured truth about this is now back to the movie...incredible...but expected...

 

[seasoned]

Not going away.............

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/12/us/petraeus-cia-resignation/index.html?eref=igoogledmn_topstories

Days after Petraeus' resignation stunned Washington, information continues to emerge. Among other things, a video has surfaced of a speech by Petraeus' paramour in which she suggested the Libya attack was targeting a secret prison at the Benghazi consulate annex, raising unverified concerns about possible security leaks.

 

[arnisador]

I find the simplest solution the most believable here: David Petraeus is male, and did what men do.

 

[Big Don]

Gee, remember back in 1996 when having an affair with a much younger woman was no one's business and had absolutely no bearing on how a man would do his job no matter how highly placed he was in government?

 

[arnisador]

Gee, remember back in 1996 when having an affair with a much younger woman was no one's business and had absolutely no bearing on how a man would do his job no matter how highly placed he was in government?

Well, I remember when that wasn't an international conspiracy...

 

[seasoned]

I find the simplest solution the most believable here: David Petraeus is male, and did what men do.

(Thread drift) "Not all men, the loser types, yes". (Now back on thread).

 

[Bill Mattocks]

And here it comes...

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57550932/house-intel-chair-cia-story-on-benghazi-changed/

House Intel chair: CIA story on Benghazi changed
The talking points that the Obama administration initially used to explain the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya don't correspond with the CIA's original talking points, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Peter King said this morning after a closed door briefing with former CIA Director David Petraeus.
"The original talking points prepared by the CIA were different than the final ones put out," King said. Originally, he said, they were "much more specific on al Qaeda involvement."

After the CIA prepared its talking points, they were vetted by agencies including the Justice Department and the State Department, but "no one knows yet exactly who came up with the final talking points," King said.

Furthermore, King said that Petraeus insisted today that he was clear with Congress from the start that the event was a terrorist attack.

Petraeus briefed lawmakers on Sept. 14 about the Benghazi attack, in which four Americans were killed. At that time, King said, U.S. intelligence officials attributed the Sept. 11 attack to a spontaneous uprising spurred by backlash against an anti-Muslim video.

In brief, the CIA prepared 'talking points' and immediately delivered them to the White House, explaining that this was a terrorist attack. Sometime between the time the White House got the talking points and the time they began to issue statements, they CHANGED the talking points to make it appear that the attack was a response to the anti-Islamic video on YouTube.

Anyone still want to deny that the White House is involved in an epic, planned, set of lies and coverups?

I want to see impeachment articles drawn up. Yes, I do. This is worse than Watergate.

 

[Big Don]

And here it comes...

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57550932/house-intel-chair-cia-story-on-benghazi-changed/



In brief, the CIA prepared 'talking points' and immediately delivered them to the White House, explaining that this was a terrorist attack. Sometime between the time the White House got the talking points and the time they began to issue statements, they CHANGED the talking points to make it appear that the attack was a response to the anti-Islamic video on YouTube.

Anyone still want to deny that the White House is involved in an epic, planned, set of lies and coverups?

I want to see impeachment articles drawn up. Yes, I do. This is worse than Watergate.

Nobody died in Watergate...

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Nobody died in Watergate...

My point exactly.