what conspiracy are you inferring? I still would like to know what government official chose to leave Americans to die and why. Are you claiming that's a conspiracy? I still would like to see someone brought to justice. conspiracy? I am sure the families of the victims would want the same. Not sure why I bother...... We know the Dems response 'Why does it matter?'
Funny. George Bush won't heed or even read a CIA memo that foretold of the 9/11 attack. What did he do to stop it? Let me put it in a math formula so you might understand: Jack S**t And I don't remember you screeching yourself hoarse over that one. How many dead on THAT 9/11? How long would you have kept up your crusade if Clinton had been President at that time? Not that Benghazi is nothing, but the "somebody has to pay!" isn't gonna get your reviled Obama impeached, so sorry. You're like that Henchman #12 in a James Bond movie who's clutching at nothing while sliding inexorably into the shredder: "No! No! NOOOOOOO!!! GAAAAHHHH!" whump whump whump!
I didn't post here in 2001...... What does Bush needing to read more CIA memos have to do with The White House not revealing who ordered American citizens be left for dead and why? So is Benghazi something or is it nothing?
I'm not a "Dem." After all officials involved in the Benghazi situation have already been interviewed, up to and including the Secretary of State, I believe that requests for yet MORE people to be interviewed are witch hunts driven by conspiracy theorists. Like you.
The thread title specifically says "coverup," that is the conspiracy to which I am referring. If you were saying "f***up" or even "f***up of epic proportions," you would have a point. But why would Obama need to answer questions about this when Reagan didn't have to answer **** about Lebanon, which was a MUCH bigger f***up than Benghazi?
I don't care who or how many are interviewed. I care about who ordered to leave Americans to die and why. Interviews are meaningless if the interviewees don't answer any questions. So do you know who ordered to not help the Americans and why?
no tinfoil hat here.. this is a coverup plain and simple. CBS News Source: Benghazi Documents Reveal White House ‘Specifically Warned of Imminent Attack LINK TO CBS VERSION
So, you call it a coverup, but link to a source who says that the administration has turned over more documents to the Senate Intelligence Committee. Hilarious.
My guess would be military logistics folks who determined that it was too risky to go in given the size of the crowd and the unknown nature of the entire situation. Benghazi was a f***up, but it could have been an ambush set up to take even more American lives than were ultimately lost. The point is that we need to learn the lessons that we can so that similar situations don't happen in the future. You seem to want answers which are, rightly so, classified. As pointed out in the post below yours, the Senate is getting more documents, but it is highly likely that you won't know the details for 20 years or so, once those documents are declassified. As it should be.
What would you call an attack with advance warning and heavily attributed to Al Queda, but pinned on a YouTube video and non-existent protests by the government? Not a coverup, but maybe just a barrel full of lies and deflection? Also, as pointed out in the link, the government has turned over documents, but not not unredacted interviews of the Benghazi survivors. As with previous administrations we know this administration to be ANYTHING, but transparent.
Confusion from a flurry of information? Thats not what it says. It says individuals believe it has not been turned over, IE they have no idea. I am sorry but there is jut nothing here. Perhaps if the right didn't constantly cry wolf and complain about EVERYTHING Obama, it might be something to look into, but right now it just looks like manufactured outrage from the usual suspects.
The article says the administration had specific warnings leading up to the attack and then the WH 'press shop' scrubbed the "talking points" reference to Al Qaeda. If this is true and the WH then goes on to blame a YouTube video something doesn't add up. Crying wolf or not it does seem like CBS has looked into and found some interesting details, so I hope we do find out if this is manufactured outrage or something else altogether.
You guess? So you admittedly don't don't know who gave the order to not go help Americans who where under attack for 8 hours and you admittedly don't know why the order was given. That just leaves one question. Do you want to know? You keep saying it was a '**** up'. How do you know? You have no clue what decisions where made and why. I also find it disgusting that you are satisfied with just 'it was a **** up'. Well that clears that up then . You couldn't care less what officials are to blame for said '**** up' and whether they are held accountable.
Highly doubt anyone gave an order "not to go". Most likely it was one of hundreds of threats the US receives every day and determined to be either murky or unreliable. That is just the nature of intelligence. And to answer your question: No, I don't want to know. I don't want to spend millions of tax payer dollars finding an answer to something that has little value. Much rather spend it either trying to track down the people who did it or better yet, not wasting any more time at it at all. While sad and tragic, we have much much bigger problems.
Yes, this administration is much like every other in history when it comes to turning over classified documents. Why are you outraged again?
I don't believe an order was given at all. I think there was a lack of an order to send Americans into a clusterf*** of a situation which we didn't have any intelligence about and which could easily have been an ambush attempt. Why do you think it went on for 8 hours? If they just wanted to kill the embassy personnel, surely it couldn't have taken that long to breach the facility. Honestly, it isn't my place to know the details of classified discussions having to do with high level military discussions. It isn't your place either. I find it disgusting that you look at every situation as a way to disparage Obama. I believe that if anyone is directly "to blame" for Benghazi, they will be held accountable, the military is pretty effective when it comes to meting out blame. However, I hold no illusions that I will actually be informed about who that person is or those people are until documents are declassified in 20 years or so. You know, like it has been in every administration in modern history.
Nope. It was an 8 hour assault on the embassy during which urgent calls for military aid were denied. This is irrelevant to you as you don't care who denied these people help or why. Way to hold your government accountable. You already disparaged Obama. You called it a '**** up'. Who do you think is Commander in Chief? The difference is I hold Obama accountable for his **** ups as opposed to you who derides anyone who asks questions about said '**** up'. Cmon guys, can't we all just leave Obama alone on this one. Lets just wait 20 years for explanations about why Americans were left for dead.
Yes, it was an 8 hour long assault in a remote location (long distance from supporting troops) and we didn't know jack **** about the situation on the ground. There could have been people with RPGs just waiting for a helicopter to show up so that they could inflict even more damage. Like I said, the military chain of command isn't going to put Americans into harms way when nothing is known about the situation they are being sent into. I don't have to know every detail about what happened in Benghazi, I heard the Secretary of State say that the important part is to get to the bottom of the problem, correct it, and go after the f***ers who perpetrated this act of violence. I agree with her and would rather our government ID and capture/kill the people responsible (by the way, the "people responsible" tag includes the terrorists and insurgents in Libya, not Americans) than go on a partisan witch hunt like you seem to want them to do. I didn't say it was directly Obama's f*** up. I think more of the responsibility belongs to State for not properly securing the embassy. That's one major difference between you and I, I don't attribute blame for anything and everything that goes wrong in government to Obama. I seriously doubt you attribute blame to Reagan for the car bomb in Lebanon, and the fact that you are so eager to find Obama liable for Benghazi shows you up for what you are: a partisan ideologue.
Yep, just make guesses and assumptions, don't ask questions. Create your own excuses. Perfect Obama supporter. you don't know any details. You didn't even know how long the thing took. You have no idea why soldiers where denied help. You have no idea why no military aid was provided. You just immediately make excuses for Obama. Shield the man. Who do you think Hillary Clinton's boss is/was? Let me get this straight, if Obama's secretary of state ****s up, that's not on Obama? Jesus, the protection you try to give this man. Reminds me of the media.
I didn't vote for Obama, neither did I vote for Reagan. Neither of them had complicity in either Lebanon or Benghazi and only the most biased partisans believe they did. No, I don't know the details, nor am I likely to in the next 20 years. I know that it was a military operation and, given what I know of the military, I would be willing to bet that it was about a risk/reward calculus. I don't even truly believe the f***up went all the way up to Clinton. The majority of what you seem to be concerned about was about the military not responding. The rest was about substandard security at the embassy, decisions about which are highly unlikely to have been made as high up as SecState. I know you and your Fox-watching mouth breathers are just itching to find something, ANYTHING with which to disparage Obama, but keep in mind that when the barracks in Beirut was bombed, 241 Americans died. Not once did anyone with any credibility blame Reagan, nobody ever asked him (or even his SecState) to testify before Congress, nothing like that. They looked for lessons to be learned, they found military officers responsible for security lapses, and they made changes to SOP so that it wouldn't happen again. This is a witch hunt and you are looking more and more like these guys... <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/zrzMhU_4m-g?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
