I could really care less about this as a political issue. This is a serious issue. This is not something that gets a person elected, its something that gets a person (whoever that should be) sent packing.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>CIA was on the ground in <a href="https://twitter.com/search/%23Benghazi">#Benghazi</a>, asked for back up, were told to <a href="https://twitter.com/search/%23StandDown">#StandDown</a>... and Obama went to bed and flew to Vegas the day after.</p>— RB (@RBPundit) <a href="https://twitter.com/RBPundit/status/261883828589711360" data-datetime="2012-10-26T17:35:44+00:00">October 26, 2012</a></blockquote> <script src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
RB is an idiot. He left out the part where Obama met with those involved the day after. I know that isn't convenient for the made up narrative you guys like, but it's the truth, and it's what happened.
The more we find out about this, the worse it looks for Obama. He should have come out weeks ago, held a news conference about what the administration knew and this matter would have been difused as simply another tragic event in a long line of them in the middle east. Instead, we find out drips and drabs and this new report that the CIA operatives on the ground were begging for help as the SEVEN HOUR ATTACK proceeded only to be denied later is DISGRACEFUL When an embasy or consulate is under attack...when nobody knows exactly where the ambassador is....i'm sorry... but either the President knew this while the attack was under way or he should have known it. Either way, it is gross negligence on the part of the administration when the former SEALS responsible for security get their calls for help denied 3 TIMES...while the attack is under way. President Nixon was forced to resign or face impeachment over Watergate...a political burglary and subsequent cover up. But NOBODY DIED during Watergate.....
Biden should be impeached just for insensitivity: Mr Woods told Mr Beck that he was disappointed by his meeting with senior officials at the event marking the return of the dead men's bodies. He said that Mr Biden had acted inappropriately, asking the Woods family in a 'loud and boisterous' tone, 'Did your son always have balls the size of cue balls?' Mr Woods asked, 'Are these the words of someone who is sorry?'
But nobody from the American government committed a crime during Benghazi. Yes someone made a mistake not sending the help. However the more that comes out, the less like a cover up it looks.
The boners some of you get over dead people and the political consequences it could have for people you disagree with is sickening.
Wow Basso, your are typical. Why do you have to change the content of a news to suit whatever agenda you have? It is already Fox News. Who denied their initial requests for support? Below is what the news said, which you changed above. Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. consulate and subsequent attack several hours later on the annex itself was denied by the CIA chain of command -- who also told the CIA operators twice to "stand down" rather than help the ambassador's team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11. And to suit your narrative, you have to cut-out this part as well: CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Youngblood, though, denied the claims that requests for support were turned down. "We can say with confidence that the Agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi," she said. "Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. In fact, it is important to remember how many lives were saved by courageous Americans who put their own safety at risk that night-and that some of those selfless Americans gave their lives in the effort to rescue their comrades."
Obama is refusing to give details on what happened for the sake of the election. He's hiding behind 'under investigation'. You blame Romney for making this political? Also, ****ing up the handling of an attack that led to 4 American's death is not off limits.
I am not sure which Benghazi thread to post this in so I will go ahead and put it here. From witnesses there is much evidence that this was planned but also evidence that the "Innocence of Muslims" film played a role and that the militants did use it as cover and / or to drum up support for the attack. This is one reason why there may have been a lot of confusion over the attack. http://t.news.msn.com/us/witnesses-recount-organized-benghazi-attack Witnesses recount organized Benghazi attack Witness accounts corroborate the conclusion largely reached by American officials that it was a planned militant assault. But also suggests the militants may have used the film controversy as a cover for the attack. TRIPOLI, Libya — It began around nightfall on Sept. 11 with around 150 bearded gunmen, some wearing the Afghan-style tunics favored by Islamic militants, sealing off the streets leading to the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. They set up roadblocks with pick-up trucks mounted with heavy machine guns, according to witnesses. The trucks bore the logo of Ansar al-Shariah, a powerful local group of Islamist militants who worked with the municipal government to manage security in Benghazi, the main city in eastern Libya and birthplace of the uprising last year that ousted Moammar Gadhafi after a 42-year dictatorship. There was no sign of a spontaneous protest against an American-made movie denigrating Islam's Prophet Muhammad. But a lawyer passing by the scene said he saw the militants gathering around 20 youths from nearby to chant against the film. Within an hour or so, the assault began, guns blazing as the militants blasted into the compound. One of the consulate's private Libyan guards said masked militants grabbed him and beat him, one of them calling him "an infidel protecting infidels who insulted the prophet." The witness accounts gathered by The Associated Press give a from-the-ground perspective for the sharply partisan debate in the U.S. over the attack that left U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans dead. They corroborate the conclusion largely reached by American officials that it was a planned militant assault. But they also suggest the militants may have used the film controversy as a cover for the attack. The ambiguity has helped fuel the election-time bickering in the United States ever since. The Obama administration has sent out muddled messages whether it was a planned attack or a mob protest that got out of control. A day after the attack, President Barack Obama referred to "acts of terror." He told CBS' "60 Minutes" in an interview aired the following Sunday that he believed those involved "were looking to target Americans from the start." Within 24 hours of the attack, both the embassy in Tripoli and the CIA station chief sent word to Washington that it was a planned militant attack. Still, days later, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Susan Rice, said the attack began as a spontaneous protest over the film. Republicans, embroiled in a heated presidential campaign, seized on the confusion. They have accused the Obama administration of being hesitant to call it a "terrorist attack" linked to al-Qaida because that would weaken one of Obama's key campaign selling points — that under his watch, al-Qaida had been weakened and Osama bin Laden had been killed.. As that debate roiled, the actual events — and their meaning — became somewhat skewed in the mouths of politicians. One assumption often made in the back-and-forth is that if the attack was planned, then it must have been linked to al-Qaida. Ansar al-Shariah, the group whose members are suspected in the attack, is made up of militants with an al-Qaida-like ideology, but it is not clear whether it has any true ties to the terror organization. Made up mainly of veterans of last year's civil war, it is one of the many powerful, heavily armed militias that operate freely in Libya and in Benghazi, while government control remains weak. Some Benghazi officials have praised Ansar al-Shariah for helping keep order in the city, even as they note its jihadi ideology. With its arsenal of weapons, the group is capable of carrying out such an attack on the consulate on its own and even on relatively short notice. Islamist militias in Benghazi had in previous months threatened to attack the compound. U.S. officials say they are still investigating whether there is an al-Qaida connection. They say members of Ansar al-Shariah called members of al-Qaida's branch in North Africa outside of Libya and boasted of the attack. The administration has even said it is prepared to carry out drone strikes against the branch, known as al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb, or AQIM, if a link is proven. But the officials also acknowledge the calls alone do not yet prove AQIM was involved. A day after the Benghazi attack, an unidentified Ansar al-Shariah spokesman said the militia was not involved "as an organization" — leaving open the possibility members were involved. He praised the attack as a popular "uprising" sparked by the anti-Islam film, further propagating the image of a mob attack against the consulate. So far, the attackers' motives can only be speculated at. Yasser el-Sirri, a former Egyptian militant who runs the Islamic Observation Center in London closely tracking jihadi groups, said the attack "had nothing to do with the film but it was a coincidence that served the (militants') purpose." He believes the ambassador was the target and the attackers may have been inspired by an al-Qaida call to avenge the death of a top Libyan jihadist on the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks on the United States in 2001. But he offered no firm evidence that was the motive. The news trickled out slowly the night of the attack, with initial reports overshadowed by the storming of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo by protesters angry over the film. It was only the next morning that Stevens' death was confirmed. On the day of the attack and the next day, The Associated Press referred to it as a mob attack, based on Libyan officials' comment that there was a significant unarmed protest at the time. In reporting the following days, AP referred to it as an "armed attack" and detailed its organized nature. The past week, the AP has gathered accounts from five witnesses, including one of the embassy guards and several people living next door to the consulate compound who were present when the militants first moved in. Most spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals for talking about the attack. The neighbors all described the militants setting up checkpoints around the compound at about 8 p.m. The State Department's timeline says the attack itself began at around 9:40 p.m. Khaled al-Haddar, a lawyer who passed by the scene as he headed to his nearby home, said he saw the fighters gathering a few youths from among passers-by and urged them to chant against the film. "I am certain they had planned to do something like this, I don't know if it was hours or days, but it was definitely planned," said al-Haddar. "From the way they set up the checkpoints and gathered people, it was very professional." The guard said he saw no protesters. He heard a few shouts of "God is great," then a barrage of automatic weapons fire and rocket-propelled grenades began, along with barrages from heavy machine guns mounted on trucks. The attackers set fire to the main consulate building. Stevens and another staffer, caught inside amid the confusion, died of smoke inhalation. The attack came from the front and the side. A neighbor whose house is on side of the consulate compound said militants with their faces wrapped in scarves attacking. Because of the checkpoints, "it felt like our neighborhood was occupied, no one could get out or in," he said. The effectiveness of the roadblocks was later revealed in the State Department's account of the evacuation. It described how the rescue force came under heavy fire and grenade attacks as they tried to leave the consulate area. They evacuated staffers to a security compound across town, where they continued to come under fire. A precision mortar hit the compound's building at 4 a.m., killing two other Americans. (Michael reported from Cairo. Osama Alfitory in Benghazi contributed to this report.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/W196uHCVPQk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Everyone just wait until after the election to talk about Libya. For Obama's sake. The removed image:
You can just smell the desperation on their side. Truly pathetic. Not a word from any of these individuals, mind you, when things like this happened from 2000 to 2008. Not one peep. Any of you show me evidence that you showed remorse or criticized Bush for any of the numerous embassy attacks during that time period, I'll withdraw my statement. Otherwise, I say that it is repulsive how the only reason you act like you care about the Americans killed in Libya is that it happened under Obama rather than Bush. You all would care absolutely zero, zero about these individuals if it were Bush, and you ought to be thoroughly embarrassed for doing so now solely because it happened under Obama.
