Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/10/27/60_minutes_benghazi_was_planned_sophisticated_attack.html

    CBS News: When Chris Stevens was killed in Benghazi, Libya, on the anniversary of September 11th last year, it was only the sixth time that the United States had lost an ambassador to its enemies. The events of that night have been overshadowed by misinformation, confusion and intense partisanship. But for those who lived through it, there's nothing confusing about what happened, and they share a sense of profound frustration because they say they saw it coming.

    Tonight, you will hear for the first time from a security officer who witnessed the attack. He calls himself, Morgan Jones, a pseudonym he's using for his own safety. A former British soldier, he's been helping to keep U.S. diplomats and military leaders safe for the last decade. On a night he describes as sheer hell, Morgan Jones snuck into a Benghazi hospital that was under the control of al Qaeda terrorists, desperate to find out if one of his close friends from the U.S. Special Mission was the American he'd been told was there.

    Morgan Jones: I was dreading seeing who it was, you know? It didn't take long to get to the room. And I could see in through the glass. And I didn't even have to go into the room to see who it was. I knew who it was immediately.

    Lara Logan: Who was it?

    Morgan Jones: It was the ambassador, dead. Yeah, shocking.

    Morgan Jones said he'd never felt so angry in his life. Only hours earlier, Amb. Chris Stevens had sought him out, concerned about the security at the U.S. Special Mission Compound where Morgan was in charge of the Libyan guard force.

    Now, the ambassador was dead and the U.S. compound was engulfed in flames and overrun by dozens of heavily armed fighters.

    Although the attack began here, the more organized assault unfolded about a mile across the city at a top secret CIA facility known as the Annex. It lasted more than seven hours and took four American lives.

    Contrary to the White House's public statements, which were still being made a full week later, it's now well established that the Americans were attacked by al Qaeda in a well-planned assault.

    Five months before that night, Morgan Jones first arrived in Benghazi, in eastern Libya about 400 miles from the capital, Tripoli.

    He thought this would be an easy assignment compared to Afghanistan and Iraq. But on his first drive through Benghazi, he noticed the black flags of al Qaeda flying openly in the streets and he grew concerned about the guard forces as soon as he pulled up to the U.S. compound.

    Morgan Jones: There was nobody there that we could see. And then we realized they were all inside drinking tea, laughing and joking.

    Lara Logan: What did you think?

    Morgan Jones: Instantly I thought we're going to have to get rid of all these guys.

    Morgan Jones' job was training the unarmed guards who manned the compound's gates. A second Libyan force -- an armed militia hired by the State Department -- was supposed to defend the compound in the event of an attack. Morgan had nothing to do with the militia, but they worried him so much, he could not keep quiet.

    Morgan Jones: I was saying, "These guys are no good. You need to-- you need to get 'em out of here."

    Lara Logan: You also kept saying, "If this place is attacked these guys are not going to stand and fight?"

    Morgan Jones: Yeah. I used to say it all the time. Yeah, in the end I got quite bored of hearing my own voice saying it.

    Andy Wood: We had one option: "Leave Benghazi or you will be killed."

    Green Beret Commander, Lieutenant Colonel Andy Wood, was one of the top American security officials in Libya. Based in Tripoli, he met with Amb. Stevens every day.

    The last time he went to Benghazi was in June, just three months before the attack. While he was there, al Qaeda tried to assassinate the British ambassador. Wood says, to him, it came as no surprise because al Qaeda -- using a familiar tactic -- had stated their intent in an online posting, saying they would attack the Red Cross, the British and then the Americans in Benghazi.

    Lara Logan: And you watched as they--

    Andy Wood: As they did each one of those.

    Lara Logan: --attacked the Red Cross and the British mission. And the only ones left--

    Andy Wood: Were us. They made good on two out of the three promises. It was a matter of time till they captured the third one.

    Lara Logan: And Washington was aware of that?

    Andy Wood: They knew we monitored it. We included that in our reports to both State Department and DOD.

    Andy Wood told us he raised his concerns directly with Amb. Stevens three months before the U.S. compound was overrun.

    Andy Wood: I made it known in a country team meeting, "You are gonna get attacked. You are gonna get attacked in Benghazi. It's gonna happen. You need to change your security profile."

    Lara Logan: Shut down--

    Andy Wood: Shut down--

    Lara Logan: --the special mission--

    Andy Wood: --"Shut down operations. Move out temporarily. Ch-- or change locations within the city. Do something to break up the profile because you are being targeted. They are-- they are-- they are watching you. The attack cycle is such that they're in the final planning stages."

    Lara Logan: Wait a minute, you said, "They're in the final planning stages of an attack on the American mission in Benghazi"?

    Andy Wood: It was apparent to me that that was the case. Reading, reading all these other, ah, attacks that were occurring, I could see what they were staging up to, it was, it was obvious.

    We have learned the U.S. already knew that this man, senior al Qaeda leader Abu Anas al-Libi was in Libya, tasked by the head of al Qaeda to establish a clandestine terrorist network inside the country. Al-Libi was already wanted for his role in bombing two U.S. embassies in Africa.

    Greg Hicks: It was a frightening piece of information.

    Lara Logan: Because it meant what?

    Greg Hicks: It raised the stakes, changed the game.

    Greg Hicks, who testified before Congress earlier this year, was Amb. Stevens' deputy based in Tripoli - a 22-year veteran of the Foreign Service with an impeccable reputation.

    Lara Logan: And in that environment you were asking for more security assets and you were not getting them?

    Greg Hicks: That's right.

    Lara Logan: Did you fight that?

    Greg Hicks: I was in the process of trying to frame a third request but it was not allowed to go forward.

    Lara Logan: So why didn't you get the help that you needed and that you asked for?

    Greg Hicks: I really, really don't know. I in fact would like to know that, the answer to that question.

    In the months prior to the attack, Amb. Stevens approved a series of detailed cables to Washington, specifically mentioning, among other things, "the al Qaeda flag has been spotted several times flying over government buildings".

    When the attack began on the evening of September 11, Amb. Stevens immediately called Greg Hicks, who was back in Tripoli.

    Greg Hicks: Ambassador said that the consulate's under attack. And then the line cut.

    Lara Logan: Do you remember the sound of his voice?

    Greg Hicks: Oh yeah, it's indelibly imprinted on my mind.

    Lara Logan: How did he sound?

    Greg Hicks: He sounded frightened.

    In Benghazi, Morgan Jones, who was at his apartment about 15 minutes away, got a frantic call from one of his Libyan guards.

    Morgan Jones: I could hear gunshots. And I-- and he said, "There's-- there's men coming into the mission." His voice, he was, he was scared, you could tell he was really scared and he was running, I could tell he was running.

    His first thought was for his American friends, the State Department agents who were pinned down inside the compound, and he couldn't believe it when one of them answered his phone.

    Morgan Jones: I said, "What's going on?" He said, "We're getting attacked." And I said, "How many?" And he said, "They're all over the compound." And I felt shocked, I didn't know what to say. And-- I said, "Well, just keep fighting. I'm on my way."

    Morgan's guards told him the armed Libyan militia that was supposed to defend the compound had fled, just as Morgan had predicted. His guards -- unarmed and terrified -- sounded the alarm, but they were instantly overwhelmed by the attackers.

    Morgan Jones: They said, "We're here to kill Americans, not Libyans," so they'd give them a good beating, pistol whip them, beat them with their rifles and let them go.

    Lara Logan: We're here to kill Americans.

    Morgan Jones: That's what they said, yeah.

    Lara Logan: Not Libyans.

    Morgan Jones: Yeah.

    About 30 minutes into the attack, a quick reaction force from the CIA Annex ignored orders to wait and raced to the compound, at times running and shooting their way through the streets just to get there. Inside the compound, they repelled a force of as many as 60 armed terrorists and managed to save five American lives and recover the body of Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith. They were forced to fight their way out before they could find the ambassador.

    Not long afterwards, Morgan Jones scaled the 12-foot high wall of the compound that was still overrun with al Qaeda fighters.

    Morgan Jones: One guy saw me. He just shouted. I couldn't believe that he'd seen me 'cause it was so dark. He started walking towards me.

    Lara Logan: And as he was coming closer?

    Morgan Jones: As I got closer, I just hit him with the butt of the rifle in the face.

    Lara Logan: And?

    Morgan Jones: Oh, he went down, yeah.

    Lara Logan: He dropped?

    Morgan Jones: Yeah, like-- like a stone.

    Lara Logan: With his face smashed in?

    Morgan Jones: Yeah.

    Lara Logan: And no one saw you do it?

    Morgan Jones: No.

    Lara Logan: Or heard it?

    Morgan Jones: No, there was too much noise.

    The same force that had gone to the compound was now defending the CIA Annex. Hours later, they were joined by a small team of Americans from Tripoli. From defensive positions on these rooftops, the Americans fought back a professional enemy. In a final wave of intense fighting just after 5 a.m., the attackers unleashed a barrage of mortars. Three of them slammed into this roof, killing former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty.

    Lara Logan: They hit that roof three times.

    Andy Wood: They, they hit those roofs three times.

    Lara Logan: In the dark.

    Andy Wood: Yea, that's getting the basketball through the hoop over your shoulder.

    Lara Logan: What does it take to pull off an attack like that?

    Andy Wood: Coordination, planning, training, experienced personnel. They practice those things. They knew what they were doing. That was a-- that was a well-executed attack.

    We have learned there were two Delta Force operators who fought at the Annex and they've since been awarded the Distinguished Service Cross and the Navy Cross -- two of the military's highest honors. The Americans who rushed to help that night went without asking for permission and the lingering question is why no larger military response ever crossed the border into Libya -- something Greg Hicks realized wasn't going to happen just an hour into the attack.

    Lara Logan: You have this conversation with the defense attache. You ask him what military assets are on their way. And he says--

    Greg Hicks: Effectively, they're not. And I-- for a moment, I just felt lost. I just couldn't believe the answer. And then I made the call to the Annex chief, and I told him, "Listen, you've gotta tell those guys there may not be any help coming."

    Lara Logan: That's a tough thing to understand. Why?

    Greg Hicks: It just is. We--, for us, for the people that go out onto the edge, to represent our country, we believe that if we get in trouble, they're coming to get us. That our back is covered. To hear that it's not, it's a terrible, terrible experience.

    The U.S. government today acknowledges the Americans at the U.S. compound in Benghazi were not adequately protected. And says those who carried out the attack are still being hunted down.

    Just a few weeks ago, Abu Anas al-Libi was captured for his role in the Africa bombings and the U.S. is still investigating what part he may have played in Benghazi. We've learned that this man, Sufian bin Qumu, a former Guantanamo Bay detainee and long-time al Qaeda operative, was one of the lead planners along with Faraj al-Chalabi, whose ties to Osama bin Laden go back more than 15 years. He's believed to have carried documents from the compound to the head of al Qaeda in Pakistan.

    The morning after the attack, Morgan Jones went back to the compound one last time to document the scene. He took these photos which he gave to the FBI and has published in a book he has written. After all this time, he told us he's still haunted by a conversation he had with Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith, a week before the attack.

    Morgan Jones: Yeah, he was worried. He wasn't happy with the security.

    Lara Logan: And you didn't tell him all your worries?

    Morgan Jones: No. No, didn't want to--

    Lara Logan: Why not?

    Morgan Jones: I didn't want to worry him anymore, you know? He's a nice guy. I sort of promised him he'd be OK.

    Lara Logan: You think about that?

    Morgan Jones: Every day, yeah.

    The U.S. pulled out of Benghazi and al Qaeda has grown in power across Libya. When a member of our team went to the U.S. compound earlier this month, he found remnants of the Americans' final frantic moments still scattered on the ground. Among them Amb. Stevens' official schedule for Sept.12, 2012, a day he didn't live to see.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName9. Show UserName9's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!


    I saw the piece.  Curious what you think are "more answers"?

    I saw nothing new.  The story that was told seemed to be just like its always been told:  A poorly guarded outpost gets attacked and some heroic people were killed.  In hindsight, this outpost and many others had been undersecured and underfunded for a long time. 

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    This isnt really anything new.

    The scandal was supposed to be that Obama knew of the attack and ordered the CIA to let Americans die.

    Well, that was what it changed into after even the liars realized how transparently ret@rded it was to claim "Act of Terror" =/= "Terrorist Act."

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to UserName9's comment:


    I saw the piece.  Curious what you think are "more answers"?

    I saw nothing new.  The story that was told seemed to be just like its always been told:  A poorly guarded outpost gets attacked and some heroic people were killed.  In hindsight, this outpost and many others had been undersecured and underfunded for a long time. 



    I don't remember any MSM telling the truth about what EVERYONE on the ground knew was coming, reported to Washington repeatedly, and requested support for the imminent attack that was part of a series of attacks that were forecast by alqeida when they said we have three planned attacks that we will carry out and they did while our govt sat on their a55 and did nothing to help!
    How can our govt know these things that were reported and still come out and try to act totally clueless to what actually happened and blame it in a video???

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    Who pushed the video excuse?

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    Who pushed the video excuse?



    It was a month before an election!!

    This intelligence shows that the USA intelligence community knew of alqeida planning and carrying out attacks (2 of the 3 alqeida broadcast attacks had been carried out) with the 3rd being the consulate yet, nothing was done to protect or evacuate our people. They did nothing to save lives!!

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    This intelligence shows that the USA intelligence community knew of alqeida planning and carrying out attacks (2 of the 3 alqeida broadcast attacks had been carried out) with the 3rd being the consulate yet, nothing was done to protect or evacuate our people.


    Given your history of defending or attacking Presidents based on the letter next to their name, are you sure you really want to open that can of worms?

    Failure to respond to a threat with intelligence?

    Proper vetting and response to intelligence?

     

     

     

    If there was clear intelligence of an imminent attack, then the last person in the chain of intelligence reporting who failed to act is arguably in remiss.

    Did Obama know?

    Should he have reasonably known? If so, why, based on specific facts?

    So far all you've got is that Obama is a D, and was in office that it happened. Oh, and a claim that "act of terror" doesn't mean "terrorist act."

    It means azalias.

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    Who pushed the video excuse?



    It was a month before an election!!

    This intelligence shows that the USA intelligence community knew of alqeida planning and carrying out attacks (2 of the 3 alqeida broadcast attacks had been carried out) with the 3rd being the consulate yet, nothing was done to protect or evacuate our people. They did nothing to save lives!!



    Everybody involved in the interview seems to be confusing Al Qaeda with Ansar al Sharia.

    Ansar Al Sharia claimed credit for the attack on Facebook.

    Ansar Al Sharia controlled the hospital where Stevens was brought: http://nation.foxnews.com/benghazi/2013/05/08/benghazi-whistle-blower-amb-stevens-was-taken-hospital-under-enemy-control

    It was Ansar al Sharia's headquarters that were stormed by angry Libyan citizens shouting "no more militias" after the attacks.

    It was Ansar al Sharia's leader who was actually criminally charged with the attack.

    And it was the same Ansar al Sharia's leader who condemned the youtube video in his interview with Reuters.

    If you want me to take the word of an anonymous (because Obama might take his life to keep his youtube lie alive) former British soldier who was at the scene of the attack, the firefight at the annex, and the hospital (where he snuck in despite being in terrorist control), he should at least be able to differentiate between a global terror network and a militia of religious extremists with no real interests outside of Libya.

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

    Did Obama know?

    Should he have reasonably known? If so, why, based on specific facts?

    So far all you've got is that Obama is a D, and was in office that it happened. Oh, and a claim that "act of terror" doesn't mean "terrorist act."

    It means azalias.



    I ignored the "Bush was worse" old tired argument /excuse.

    Did Obama know? I don't know. But, it was his job to put competent people in place to protect these people; whether in admin positions, intelligence or communications.

    I could not care less whether he called it a terrorist attack or act of terror the next day in a broad speech.

    He did tout that it was about a video had his admin touting the video was the problem for over 5 days afterwards and even told the UN it was protest over a video gone bad!

    He basically called the leader in Libya a f-in liar when he stated it had nothing to do with a video 24 hours after the attack!

     

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    I ignored the "Bush was worse" old tired argument /excuse.


    argument/excuse?

    I'm calling you a dishonest hypocrite for defending far worse failures under Bush, while making such a big deal about this.

    If you can't respond to your own failures I don't know why you expect anyone to do anything but ignore your complains about Obama.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    I could not care less whether he called it a terrorist attack or act of terror the next day in a broad speech.


    OH? Do we really need to dig up the hundreds of posts in which you absolutely DID care and were fighting all day about it?

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

    If there was clear intelligence of an imminent attack, then the last person in the chain of intelligence reporting who failed to act is arguably in remiss.

    Did Obama know?

    Should he have reasonably known? If so, why, based on specific facts?



     

     

    ?

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     


    http://www.hdwallpapersinn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/question-mark-nothing.jpg

     

     

     

     

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    I could not care less whether he called it a terrorist attack or act of terror the next day in a broad speech.


    OH? Do we really need to dig up the hundreds of posts in which you absolutely DID care and were fighting all day about it?


    I could not care less today.

    Care to go back through the archives and show my posted where I was extrememly critical of policies and decisions during the Bush years.

    Calling for the ceasefire in Tora Bora was a hug mistake and let bilk laden escape.

    Dispersing the Iraqi army was a huge mistake.

    Allowing alqeida to hunker down in fallejah was stupid and created more casualties

    CFR was a joke

    The perscription drug plan was not funded.

     

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    I could not care less whether he called it a terrorist attack or act of terror the next day in a broad speech.


    OH? Do we really need to dig up the hundreds of posts in which you absolutely DID care and were fighting all day about it?

    I could not care less today.

    Care to go back through the archives and show my posted where I was extrememly critical of policies and decisions during the Bush years.

    Calling for the ceasefire in Tora Bora was a hug mistake and let bilk laden escape.

    Dispersing the Iraqi army was a huge mistake.

    Allowing alqeida to hunker down in fallejah was stupid and created more casualties

    CFR was a joke

    The perscription drug plan was not funded.



    Can you please direct me to the archives? As far as I'm aware, the farthest back it goes is hitting the 'last' button....    which lands in the run-up to the 2008 election.

    I really don't recall you making any of those criticisms under your tboater names. Sk8ter2008 was active in ..well..2008, and just about every time someone has slammed Bush on getting us into Iraq, etc., you've defended him ("but the no-fly zone!!!")

     

    If you really did post those criticism, then I would conceded that you do in fact have some standing to criticize Obama on security..

    ...which would lead us back to the question of what exactly he did wrong here in terms of allowing the attack to happen?

     

     

    I don't think the President can be fairly blamed for every last thing that happens on his watch.

    If all he did was fail to appoint someone who failed to hire someone who wouldn't hire the person who actually failed to act on the intelligence, that seems rather weak?

     

     

    What did he know. What should he have known. And is it fair to apply that to all the other agencies operating under him?

    If the FDA mistakenly approves a faulty medical device and people die, is that the President's fault - because he didn't appoint careful enough people to run the FDA? Didn't re-vet the people his appointees hired? Etc.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    Let me put it this way: A company delivers flowers, right? Let's say it's flower.com and they have 2 million employees. A driver reports problems with some vans. The reports work their way up to middle management, where they get buried. A van malfunctions, people die.

    The company can get sued because of vicarious liability, sure.

    They CEO does NOT get fired. So while he might eventually say sorry on behalf of the company on a "buck stops here" principle, he still isn't BLAMED for the thing as if it was his fault.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

    Let me put it this way: A company delivers flowers, right? Let's say it's flower.com and they have 2 million employees. A driver reports problems with some vans. The reports work their way up to middle management, where they get buried. A van malfunctions, people die.

    The company can get sued because of vicarious liability, sure.

    They CEO does NOT get fired. So while he might eventually say sorry on behalf of the company on a "buck stops here" principle, he still isn't BLAMED for the thing as if it was his fault.



    Let me say this again!

    Ive never called for Obama to be fired over benghazi! I think someone should be held accountible. I would like to know from a govt official why these guys on the ground, the libyan govt, and virtually everyone else with a brain knew just by the damage and sustained fighting ability that this was NOT a protest gone wrong yet, a month before an election this admin stuck with that preposturious story for almost a week then, wouldn't allow people to be interviewed and apparently were not forcoming with information??

    You know this is true but, yet you are so committed you choose to ignore these things.

     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    I think someone should be held accountible

     


    Well, when you can name names, let us know. I'm sure everyone will agree that they should be held accountible if in fact they are accountable.


    Until then, you're just jumping up and down screaming about it as if it is Obama's fault while professing to not think that it is his fault.

    You also keep jumping between:

    1. Claiming that you're upset that Obama or unidentified persons let the attack happen.

    2. Taking issue with what Obama said about the attack immediately after it happened.

     

     

     

     

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    You know this is true but, yet you are so committed you choose to ignore these things

    LOL. You're the one ignoring things because you are committed to having a scandal here.

    Despite what you now say, you repeatedly claimed that Obama didn't call it a terrorist act despite his using the words "act of terror" the next morning. OK Fine, you don't care about that anymore. Whatever.

     

    You ignore the fact that there REALLY WERE spontaneous demonstrations in roughly 19 other cites that REALLY WERE because they became aware of the video.

    In addition, intelligence indicated that one of the attackers told a bystander that they planned the attack.....wait for it...because they were mad about learning of the video.

     

     

    Well guess what: If you have a problem with 'spontaneous protest', you need to be able to identify where the chain of transmission of information failed. Did Obama know about prior security requests specifically identifying believed threats from Al Queda at the time? SHOULD he have known?

    And if Obama blamed it on a "spontaneous protest", then what was "act of terror" doing in his speech the morning after, just two sentences after he referred to learning of events from Benghazi from teh day before?

    Well?

    Etc.

    The dissonance is astounding. You are blaming Obama without proof that he knowingly or negiligently did anything wrong, all the while claiming that you aren't blaming him.

    Well who ARE you blaming?

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    We know the identity of one person facing criminal charges for the Benghazi attack - that's Ahmed Abu Khattala.

    This is what that man had to say about the youtube video ...

    "The film which insulted the Prophet was a direct attack on our values and if America wants good relations with the Muslim world it needs to do so with respect," Abu Khattala said. "If they want to do it with force, they will be met with force."

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/18/us-libya-consulate-attack-idUSBRE89H19P20121018

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    Why was Abu Khattala blaming the video five weeks after the attack?  Was the prime suspect in the attack hoping to get Obama re-elected?

    This was and always will be largely the result of a youtube video.  That's not the end-all be-all, but it was certainly a factor - the timing, the cover, the rallying of militia that have no real interest in affairs outside of Libya.  Without the video, maybe something happens in Benghazi, but not on this scale.

    Dems eventually stopped talking about the video altogether.  It didn't play well for the uninformed voter, and the mainstream media did a horrible job explaining how everybody became aware of it.  There are members of this board who still insist nobody saw the video, despite the fact that it was aired on Egyptian TV, and was the impetus for all the protests throughout the region.  

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfilio. Show portfilio's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

     

    Far more Americans died in foreign embassy attacks during the Bush regime.


    Where was CBS and the rest of the controlled right wing media during that time?  Why didn't they pose as many questions as they do today??

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to slomag's comment:

    We know the identity of one person facing criminal charges for the Benghazi attack - that's Ahmed Abu Khattala.

    This is what that man had to say about the youtube video ...

    "The film which insulted the Prophet was a direct attack on our values and if America wants good relations with the Muslim world it needs to do so with respect," Abu Khattala said. "If they want to do it with force, they will be met with force."

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/18/us-libya-consulate-attack-idUSBRE89H19P20121018




    He must be lying to protect Obama. Obama's that good. He's got Al Queda working for him.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!


    Its not about the tragedy of loss of life at this point. Its about a govt that wouldn't get it right. Tried to make is something it wasnt in order to not interfere with their re-election process and then withheld people and information and still are!

    It's about a govt that is NOT for the people. Its not just obama and he is just one man; this administration and the washington established is the most secretive and most corrupt I've ever experienced, they intimidate journalist and hide the truth very well unfortunately. Fortunately they have people like you making excuses for them. You are part of the 47% Romney was talking about when he said no matter what I say or they do 47% will still support them.

     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    Its about a govt that wouldn't get it right. Tried to make is something it wasnt in order to not interfere with their re-election process and then withheld people and information and still are!


    Is there a reason you will not or cannot respond to the counter-points being made?

    THE lead bad guy SAYS the attack WAS because of the video.

    Obama DID call it an "act of terror" the day after.

    You CANNOT show that the line of blame traces all the way back to Obama.

     

     

    Yet you rant about the "administration" anyway:

     

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    It's about a govt that is NOT for the people. Its not just obama and he is just one man; this administration and the washington established is the most secretive and most corrupt I've ever experienced, they intimidate journalist and hide the truth very well unfortunately. Fortunately they have people like you making excuses for them. You are part of the 47% Romney was talking about when he said no matter what I say or they do 47% will still support them.


    Ok, we get it. You are a hyperpartisan tool who hates Obama due to ideology, and this is why you cannot respond to the central problems with your claim.

    Every time someone calls you out on it, you just shoot the messenger.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share