Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Recliner Pilot

Is Benghazi Obama's Waterloo?

Recommended Posts

And we're tougher because we pull together, we leave nobody behind, we make sure we respond as a nation and remind ourselves that whenever an American is in need, all of us stand together to make sure we're providing the help that's necessary.
b.hussein.muhammed.o 10.30.12

 

hypocrisy must not resonate in those with narcissistic personality disorder? how can this not be defined as mental illness?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

b.hussein.muhammed.o 10.30.12

 

hypocrisy must not resonate in those with narcissistic personality disorder? how can this not be defined as mental illness?

 

Maybe he only meant that only if they have enough information to know what they're getting into. :dunno:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point nobody is thinking about Benghazi. The American people are more concerned about catastrophe here at home and how the Prez is handling it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Libya might be Obama's "Waterloo" but SANDY might be his saving grace. Romney was rising daily in the polls -- Sandy stunted it and provided Obama to be basically alone in the spotlight and a chance to show off like never before. Maybe Obama did find Bush's Keys to the Hurricane machine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The American people are more concerned about catastrophe here at home and how the Prez is handling it.

 

Sandy was terrible but politically for Obama it was better than secks with (insert hottest girl you can think of). Sandy and the timing of it may of gift wrapped this think for him -- If he blows this than he is even dumber than W.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point nobody is thinking about Benghazi. The American people are more concerned about catastrophe here at home and how the Prez is handling it.

Those who only have the cognitive ability to think about one subject at a time already support Obama.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point nobody is thinking about Benghazi. The American people are more concerned about catastrophe here at home and how the Prez is handling it.

no, at this point the obama campaign is hoping sandy distracts people like you from him leaving people behind to be slaughtered by terrorists while he watched it on the telly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those who only have the cognitive ability to think about one subject at a time already support Obama.

 

 

 

It would take an amazing person that could think about two subjects at the same. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe he only meant that only if they have enough information to know what they're getting into. :dunno:

if only we had any information or insights from people on the ground or from live feed videos from the compounds or drones. man, those types of things would've been really great to go along with the emails received asking for help while the attack was going on. if only we had stuff like that. :dunno:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sandy was terrible but politically for Obama it was better than secks with (insert hottest girl you can think of). Sandy and the timing of it may of gift wrapped this think for him -- If he blows this than he is even dumber than W.

i'm sure the union workers there in the big cities will expedite the cleanup in a miraculous, never-seen-before fashion. they have such a track record of quick and efficient work. newb already said he didn't expect power until next week. we know zero never loves to exploit these types of things, but he's relying on union infrastructure organizations that have never worked outside the pace of a snail. when folks are out of power for a week, they're going to be angry. when the rodents that inhabited the flood zones begin showing up in people's homes, people aren't going to be real thrilled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm sure the union workers there in the big cities will expedite the cleanup in a miraculous, never-seen-before fashion. they have such a track record of quick and efficient work. newb already said he didn't expect power until next week. we know zero never loves to exploit these types of things, but he's relying on union infrastructure organizations that have never worked outside the pace of a snail. when folks are out of power for a week, they're going to be angry. when the rodents that inhabited the flood zones begin showing up in people's homes, people aren't going to be real thrilled.

 

and the hardest hit states are all Obama states. He has nothing to gain and everything to lose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm sure the union workers there in the big cities will expedite the cleanup in a miraculous, never-seen-before fashion. they have such a track record of quick and efficient work. newb already said he didn't expect power until next week. we know zero never loves to exploit these types of things, but he's relying on union infrastructure organizations that have never worked outside the pace of a snail. when folks are out of power for a week, they're going to be angry. when the rodents that inhabited the flood zones begin showing up in people's homes, people aren't going to be real thrilled.

 

 

and the hardest hit states are all Obama states. He has nothing to gain and everything to lose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if only we had any information or insights from people on the ground or from live feed videos from the compounds or drones. man, those types of things would've been really great to go along with the emails received asking for help while the attack was going on. if only we had stuff like that. :dunno:

 

That's kinda where I was going with my feeble attempt at sarcasm....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we all agree that Obama was watching the YouTube video rather than the live feed of the assassinations.

 

 

Yes, he was busy searching youtube for an anti-muslim video that was added just before Sep 11th..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It'll be hard to prove he directly knew and ordered them to stand down, at least without a full investigation. It is clear however that the WH and State knew. If the inaction was contrary to Obama's policies, heads should be rolling. Instead they are hunkered down and hoping to ride it out through the election.

 

Why in God's name would Obama order them to stand down? That makes no sense whatsoever. None.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The U.S. Mission in Benghazi convened an “emergency meeting” less than a month before the assault that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, because Al Qaeda had training camps in Benghazi and the consulate could not defend against a “coordinated attack,” according to a classified cable reviewed by Fox News.

 

Summarizing an Aug. 15 emergency meeting convened by the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Aug. 16 cable marked “SECRET” said that the State Department’s senior security officer, also known as the RSO, did not believe the consulate could be protected.

 

“RSO (Regional Security Officer) expressed concerns with the ability to defend Post in the event of a coordinated attack due to limited manpower, security measures, weapons capabilities, host nation support, and the overall size of the compound,” the cable said.

 

 

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/31/exclusive-us-memo-warned-libya-consulate-couldnt-withstand-coordinated-attack/#ixzz2AwEyrkkX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why in God's name would Obama order them to stand down? That makes no sense whatsoever. None.

Like I said earlier, the obvious explanation, whether it was Obama who gave the order or someone else in the chain of command, is the fear that the soldiers would be ambushed, resulting in more deaths.

 

"(The) basic principle is that you don't deploy forces into harm's way without knowing what's going on; without having some real-time information about what's taking place," Panetta told Pentagon reporters. "And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said earlier, the obvious explanation, whether it was Obama who gave the order or someone else in the chain of command, is the fear that the soldiers would be ambushed, resulting in more deaths.

 

 

 

Since we are talking about things that make no sense whatsoever, I present this. The folks on the ground were laser-sighting the mortar positions for planes to take them out. We weren't going to invade Libya. To say we were afraid to assist with the rescue of our focking ambassador because they might shoot back makes no sense whatsoever.

 

Unless... we had reason to believe they had something like SAMs. Hmm... that might create a bigger military scene. I'm guessing we're confident that in the end the U.S. military could take out a well-armed terrorist group. But it might look bad.

 

I dunno, lots of stuff doesn't make sense. :dunno:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said earlier, the obvious explanation, whether it was Obama who gave the order or someone else in the chain of command, is the fear that the soldiers would be ambushed, resulting in more deaths.

 

I guess that's possible. Perhaps they were afraid of a Somalia-type situation. I don't know, I do hope we find out what really happened and where things went wrong, but clearly that's not going to happen right before a highly charged election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said earlier, the obvious explanation, whether it was Obama who gave the order or someone else in the chain of command, is the fear that the soldiers would be ambushed, resulting in more deaths.

 

You must have missed my previous post, I will repeat it:

 

The U.S. Mission in Benghazi convened an emergency meeting less than a month before the assault that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, because Al Qaeda had training camps in Benghazi and the consulate could not defend against a coordinated attack, according to a classified cable reviewed by Fox News.

 

Summarizing an Aug. 15 emergency meeting convened by the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Aug. 16 cable marked SECRET said that the State Departments senior security officer, also known as the RSO, did not believe the consulate could be protected.

 

RSO (Regional Security Officer) expressed concerns with the ability to defend Post in the event of a coordinated attack due to limited manpower, security measures, weapons capabilities, host nation support, and the overall size of the compound, the cable said.

 

 

Read more: http://www.foxnews.c.../#ixzz2AwEyrkkX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess that's possible. Perhaps they were afraid of a Somalia-type situation. I don't know, I do hope we find out what really happened and where things went wrong, but clearly that's not going to happen right before a highly charged election.

If there were nothing there he would tell us. His silence makes him guilty in the minds of many Americans. Remember this is Mr. Transparency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More stuff coming out.

 

Exclusive: Classified cable warned consulate couldn't withstand 'coordinated attack'

 

 

 

The U.S. Mission in Benghazi convened an “emergency meeting” less than a month before the assault that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, because Al Qaeda had training camps in Benghazi and the consulate could not defend against a “coordinated attack,” according to a classified cable reviewed by Fox News.

 

Summarizing an Aug. 15 emergency meeting convened by the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Aug. 16 cable marked “SECRET” said that the State Department’s senior security officer, also known as the RSO, did not believe the consulate could be protected.

 

“RSO (Regional Security Officer) expressed concerns with the ability to defend Post in the event of a coordinated attack due to limited manpower, security measures, weapons capabilities, host nation support, and the overall size of the compound,” the cable said.

 

According to a review of the cable addressed to the Office of the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Emergency Action Committee was also briefed "on the location of approximately ten Islamist militias and AQ training camps within Benghazi … these groups ran the spectrum from Islamist militias, such as the QRF Brigade and Ansar al-Sharia, to ‘Takfirist thugs.’” Each U.S. mission has a so-called Emergency Action Committee that is responsible for security measures and emergency planning.

 

The details in the cable seemed to foreshadow the deadly Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. compound, which was a coordinated, commando-style assault using direct and indirect fire. Al Qaeda in North Africa and Ansar al-Sharia, both mentioned in the cable, have since been implicated in the consulate attack.

 

In addition to describing the security situation in Benghazi as “trending negatively,” the cable said explicitly that the mission would ask for more help. “In light of the uncertain security environment, US Mission Benghazi will submit specific requests to US Embassy Tripoli for additional physical security upgrades and staffing needs by separate cover.”

 

As for specific threats against the U.S., the cable warned the intelligence was not clear on the issue, cautioning that the militias in Benghazi were not concerned with any significant retaliation from the Libyan government, which had apparently lost control in Benghazi. A briefer explained that they “did not have information suggesting that these entities were targeting Americans but did caveat that (there was not) a complete picture of their intentions yet. RSO (Regional Security Officer) noted that the Benghazi militias have become more brazen in their actions and have little fear of reprisal from the (government of Libya.)”

 

While the administration’s public statements have suggested that the attack came without warning, the Aug. 16 cable seems to undercut those claims. It was a direct warning to the State Department that the Benghazi consulate was vulnerable to attack, that it could not be defended and that the presence of anti-U.S. militias and Al Qaeda was well-known to the U.S. intelligence community.

 

In a three-page cable on Sept 11, the day Stevens and the three other Americans were killed, Stevens wrote about “growing problems with security” in Benghazi and “growing frustration” with the security forces and Libyan police. The ambassador saw both as “too weak to keep the country secure.”

 

Fox News asked the State Department to respond to a series of questions about the Aug. 16 cable, including who was specifically charged with reviewing it and whether action was taken by Washington or Tripoli. Fox News also asked, given the specific warnings and the detailed intelligence laid out in the cable, whether the State Department considered extra measures for the consulate in light of the anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks – and if no action was taken, who made that call.

 

The State Department press office declined to answer specific questions, citing the classified nature of the cable.

 

"An independent board is conducting a thorough review of the assault on our post in Benghazi," Deputy Spokesman Mark Toner said in written statement. "Once we have the board's comprehensive account of what happened, findings and recommendations, we can fully address these matters."

 

 

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/31/exclusive-us-memo-warned-libya-consulate-couldnt-withstand-coordinated-attack/#ixzz2AySHBO2P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see after reading this abortion of a thread that it really gets Republicans twisted up that most Americans don't really care about this subject. Hell, even Mitt Romney doesn't want to talk about it.

 

Where's the outrage????

 

:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see after reading this abortion of a thread that it really gets Republicans twisted up that most Americans don't really care about this subject. Hell, even Mitt Romney doesn't want to talk about it.

 

Where's the outrage????

 

:rolleyes:

Romney 300+

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yeah, I doubt any of our embassies could withstand a "concerted attack." Its a freaking office building with a wall around it, not a ###### foxhole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I doubt any of our embassies could withstand a "concerted attack." Its a freaking office building with a wall around it, not a ###### foxhole.

How many of them are sending off urgent emails to Obama saying Al Queda is training down the street to come kill us.....please do something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see after reading this abortion of a thread that it really gets Republicans twistedtwisted up that most Americans don't really care about this subject. Hell, even Mitt Romney doesn't want to talk about it.

 

Where's the outrage????

 

:rolleyes:

Sad sign of the times and the lefts hypocrisy. Where is the cindy sheehan crowd supporting the father of the seal ?

Pathetic yet expected display.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's with the rape thing?? I've seen that word thrown around a few times in regards to this. Was the guy actually raped on top of everything else, or is this just another case of people being dramatic??

Did you see the pics of them carrying him around the street with his pants down???

 

Maybe they just wanted to see what a white cack looks like. :dunno:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sad sign of the times and the lefts hypocrisy. Where is the cindy sheehan crowd supporting the father of the seal ?

Pathetic yet expected display.

 

There is a certain amount of truth to this. :thumbsup:

 

Of course, there is also a massive stinking pile of hypocrisy on your end too. To you and your ilk, It wasn't such a disgrace when Bush let 9/11 happen, in spite of warnings about Bin Laden. It was absurd to suggest that Bush lied when he said there was reliable intel on WMD's in Iraq. But this is Watergate x 10, and Obama should be prosecuted for treason.

 

If you think Obama "has blood on his hands" then you must conclude that YOUR guy had an olympic size swimming pool full. But of course, you won't, cause your'e a hypocrite. :rolleyes:

 

For the record... A pretty damn major ball was dropped pretty damn hard here. Investigations need to take place, similar to the 9/11 commission. But to assume that Obama watched it live and chose to abandon people based on the lack of evidence availiable is as stupid as birther nonsense, Secret Allah Code Rings, and Magic underwear. Which of course, is all stuff the GOP loves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a certain amount of truth to this. :thumbsup:

 

Of course, there is also a massive stinking pile of hypocrisy on your end too. To you and your ilk, It wasn't such a disgrace when Bush let 9/11 happen, in spite of warnings about Bin Laden. It was absurd to suggest that Bush lied when he said there was reliable intel on WMD's in Iraq. But this is Watergate x 10, and Obama should be prosecuted for treason.

 

If you think Obama "has blood on his hands" then you must conclude that YOUR guy had an olympic size swimming pool full. But of course, you won't, cause your'e a hypocrite. :rolleyes:

 

For the record... A pretty damn major ball was dropped pretty damn hard here. Investigations need to take place, similar to the 9/11 commission. But to assume that Obama watched it live and chose to abandon people based on the lack of evidence availiable is as stupid as birther nonsense, Secret Allah Code Rings, and Magic underwear. Which of course, is all stuff the GOP loves.

I appreciate your honest assessment. :thumbsup:

 

That being said, I think it is tough to compare the two events. It would have been pragmatically impossible to have avoided 9/11; hindsight is 20/20, and we could not have put in TSA and the associated bullshiot without 9/11 happening. People hate TSA procedures as it is; could you imagine our mindset if it was just preventive for some theoretically possible attack?

 

Benghazi was specific, surgical, and the risk was identified. It could have easily been prevented, or at least made much more difficult. Not to mention the little problem of not helping them when the shiot hit the fan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate your honest assessment. :thumbsup:

 

That being said, I think it is tough to compare the two events. It would have been pragmatically impossible to have avoided 9/11; hindsight is 20/20, and we could not have put in TSA and the associated bullshiot without 9/11 happening. People hate TSA procedures as it is; could you imagine our mindset if it was just preventive for some theoretically possible attack?

 

Benghazi was specific, surgical, and the risk was identified. It could have easily been prevented, or at least made much more difficult. Not to mention the little problem of not helping them when the shiot hit the fan.

 

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a certain amount of truth to this. :thumbsup:

 

Of course, there is also a massive stinking pile of hypocrisy on your end too. To you and your ilk, It wasn't such a disgrace when Bush let 9/11 happen, in spite of warnings about Bin Laden. It was absurd to suggest that Bush lied when he said there was reliable intel on WMD's in Iraq. But this is Watergate x 10, and Obama should be prosecuted for treason.

 

If you think Obama "has blood on his hands" then you must conclude that YOUR guy had an olympic size swimming pool full. But of course, you won't, cause your'e a hypocrite. :rolleyes:

 

For the record... A pretty damn major ball was dropped pretty damn hard here. Investigations need to take place, similar to the 9/11 commission. But to assume that Obama watched it live and chose to abandon people based on the lack of evidence availiable is as stupid as birther nonsense, Secret Allah Code Rings, and Magic underwear. Which of course, is all stuff the GOP loves.

Cliff: Obama has no responsibility because Bush was bad :mad:

 

With all the cables coming out identifying specific threats and pleading for help, the is entirely different than 9/11... And while you are being ridiculous, the only reason it wasn't repeated on Obamas watch was that the Christmas Bomber was retarded... It wasn't anything in the Obama security platform that prevented it other than luck/incompetance, which we are all thankful for. But nonetheless its a security failure...

 

This whole mindset is like reparations logic taken to an even more twisted absurd degree....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see after reading this abortion of a thread that it really gets Republicans twisted up that most Americans don't really care about this subject. Hell, even Mitt Romney doesn't want to talk about it.

 

Where's the outrage????

 

:rolleyes:

Its only being covered on one news outlet... Romney is avoiding being unfairly lumped into the republican/warmonger caracature, and MSM is running block for Obama to the extent it can...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

getting worse for the criminals in white house....they didn't even consult with their resources. this was an intended incident that went bad. all the evidence points to a staged theater and a doublecross.

 

CBS News has learned that during the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Obama Administration did not convene its top interagency counterterrorism resource: the Counterterrorism Security Group, (CSG).

 

"The CSG is the one group that's supposed to know what resources every agency has. They know of multiple options and have the ability to coordinate counterterrorism assets across all the agencies," a high-ranking government official told CBS News. "They were not allowed to do their job. They were not called upon."

cbs

 

propaganda media is starting to turn on hussein muhammed on this.

 

either amb stevens was in on the fake kidnapping scheme or he was intentionally hit for something he had on obama. there's more to this. anderson cooper and stevens knew each other. cooper ends up with the diary somehow. cooper knows something about this.

 

the head of africom finally authorized help and was immediately arrested by his second in command. he is now being transitioned out of africom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sad sign of the times and the lefts hypocrisy. Where is the cindy sheehan crowd supporting the father of the seal ?

Pathetic yet expected display.

 

Hey, if Mitt Romney doesn't care, why should I?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its only being covered on one news outlet... Romney is avoiding being unfairly lumped into the republican/warmonger caracature, and MSM is running block for Obama to the extent it can...

 

Because the vast majority of the stuff coming out on it is nonsense. Mistakes were made, there will be investigations, heads will roll, but trying to use this incident to paint the President as a Muslim sympathizer demon spawn baby eater isn't working with the general public since people can figure out for themselves that being an ambassador to a dangerous Middle East country probably entails a little more risk than being an ambassador to England or the Bahamas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×