In response to zinsncabs' comment:

That article also claimed that Glen Doherty was part of the CIA annex response team, when in fact he was in Tripoli at the time of the attack.  The article was later edited without a posted correction.  So now you not only have to believe the author of the article over reports from the CIA (whom Fox never reached for comment), but you have to overlook the fact that the "reporter" has an exclusive that no other journalist was able to procure, but somehow missed inaccuracies available to any school kid with an internet connection.  You also have to be fine with the idea that a journalist or news organization would simply edit the online version of a news report without issuing a correction.

Further, the fact that Glen Doherty was, in fact, dispatched from Tripoli, 600 miles away, should in itself disprove the underlying notion that no help was sent.

Disgraceful - I don't disagree with the adjective; just the application

 

 

[/QUOTE]


What stand down order?   Fox had a report from a source saying one was given and ignored by C.I.A. operatives who went anyways.  They went to the the attack site but only after the deaths of the Americans there.  Even in the Fox report there was a denial by the C.I.A. that this event actually took place.  CNN has other Pentagon sources that also deny that any such stand down order was given.  So there is very much contested information that there was such an order and in any event it was too late to do anything to save the people.  You are all caught up in a maybe story that would not have changed any of the history of the matter.  Don't you see a problem with that?

[/QUOTE]

The CIA later denied that a "stand down" order was given, but Fox also reported that the CIA operatives in the safehouse were ordered to stand down - twice as I recall.  They then disobeyed orders and went to the Embassy anyway.  Moreover, Delta Force operatives were stationed 3 to 4 hours out, but never ordered in.  At a minimum, the whole situation is disgraceful.

[/QUOTE]

Again, we do not know if this report is accurate that there was a stand down order.  But the same contested report says they disobeyed it and got to the embassy but too late to save the lives of the Americans there.  So what is the issue?  History could not be changed either way. And how does this get traced to Obama? 

It looks like it is just right wingers trying vainly to score points on a tragic situation. 

In response to Reubenhop's comment:

What stand down order?   Fox had a report from a source saying one was given and ignored by C.I.A. operatives who went anyways.  They went to the the attack site but only after the deaths of the Americans there.  Even in the Fox report there was a denial by the C.I.A. that this event actually took place.  CNN has other Pentagon sources that also deny that any such stand down order was given.  So there is very much contested information that there was such an order and in any event it was too late to do anything to save the people.  You are all caught up in a maybe story that would not have changed any of the history of the matter.  Don't you see a problem with that?

[/QUOTE]

The CIA later denied that a "stand down" order was given, but Fox also reported that the CIA operatives in the safehouse were ordered to stand down - twice as I recall.  They then disobeyed orders and went to the Embassy anyway.  Moreover, Delta Force operatives were stationed 3 to 4 hours out, but never ordered in.  At a minimum, the whole situation is disgraceful.

[/QUOTE]

Again, we do not know if this report is accurate that there was a stand down order.  But the same contested report says they disobeyed it and got to the embassy but too late to save the lives of the Americans there.  So what is the issue?  History could not be changed either way. And how does this get traced to Obama? 

It looks like it is just right wingers trying vainly to score points on a tragic situation. 

[/QUOTE]

Sure, and Obama didn't "score points" by putting forward a somewhat skewed version of the attack.  sigh.

Maybe the Bengazi survivors might be able to weigh in?  You do know there were survivors?  Or, is this the first you are hearing about American survivors of this attack?

[/QUOTE]

Sure, and Obama didn't "score points" by putting forward a somewhat skewed version of the attack.  sigh.

Maybe the Bengazi survivors might be able to weigh in?  You do know there were survivors?  Or, is this the first you are hearing about American survivors of this attack?

[/QUOTE]

So you ignore the points being made about the stand down order and bring up a different aspect of the situation.  You don't have real facts to make a valid theory so you just shift to another topic to criticize Obama.  I guess you are simply seeking to score political points on a tragic situation.  

This post has been removed.

In response to NO MO O's comment:

So you ignore the points being made about the stand down order and bring up a different aspect of the situation.  You don't have real facts to make a valid theory so you just shift to another topic to criticize Obama.  I guess you are simply seeking to score political points on a tragic situation.  

[/QUOTE]


I don't believe this fine and responsible administration has presented anything of substance to the American people to bring closure.  I assume there still a very good reason why this has not happened.. yet.

[/QUOTE]

There is no closure for you folks.  You play the blame game endlessly without bothering to have real facts to substantiate what you are saying.  You want an admission of guilt and that is not going to happen.  So you go around in circles              

In response to Reubenhop's comment:

Sure, and Obama didn't "score points" by putting forward a somewhat skewed version of the attack.  sigh.

Maybe the Bengazi survivors might be able to weigh in?  You do know there were survivors?  Or, is this the first you are hearing about American survivors of this attack?

[/QUOTE]

So you ignore the points being made about the stand down order and bring up a different aspect of the situation.  You don't have real facts to make a valid theory so you just shift to another topic to criticize Obama.  I guess you are simply seeking to score political points on a tragic situation.  

[/QUOTE]

Sure.  Sigh.

Obama played all of us, with the press as accomplices.

Did you even know there were survivors?

In response to Reubenhop's comment:

I don't believe this fine and responsible administration has presented anything of substance to the American people to bring closure.  I assume there still a very good reason why this has not happened.. yet.

[/QUOTE]

There is no closure for you folks.  You play the blame game endlessly without bothering to have real facts to substantiate what you are saying.  You want an admission of guilt and that is not going to happen.  So you go around in circles              

[/QUOTE]

CLOSURE????  What, do you think this is some sort of little game?

How about some info from the Prez?

This post has been removed.

In response to NO MO O's comment:

Write to Alex Jones

In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

I guess Harry Belafonte is right.  Let's just lock up disidents.

In response to skeeter20's comment:

Because that's what I said.......   ?

Seriously, stop boozing at lunch. Bad for the brain, bad for the job.

This post has been removed.

In response to NO MO O's comment:

Just like all the deaths of 3000 people @9/11, our soldiers and the people in Iraq (except Saddam and minions) were due to incompetence - don't see yopu crying about that and we know 100% Iraq was a BS effort by the Bush Admin - can't atch 9/11 and Iraq with Benghazi - it will NEVER  workand as I said before what makes you such FILTH  is that you could give a RATS AZZ about any of those people - All you want is to attack the president by any means possible and Susan Rice unfortunately/wrongly got caught up in the wave of BS.

America should be ashamed of you!

This post has been removed.

In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

Are you trying to make sense, or are you just running around in circles?

 

I love it.  You throw dow the "Alex Jones" card, then I throw down the "Harry Beleafonte" card, and I'm the one with a problem.  Sigh.  No talking to a liberal.  Can't fix stupid.

This post has been removed.