Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT BENGHAZI! EVEN 60 MINUTES CAN NO LONGER IGNORE THIS SCANDAL!

+5
ZVUGKTUBM
2seaoat
Sal
Joanimaroni
Markle
9 posters

Go to page : 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 4]

Markle

Markle

TRUTH COMING OUT ABOUT BENGHAZI!  EVEN 60 MINUTES CAN NO LONGER IGNORE THIS SCANDAL!

Benghazi, The Deputy Director, The Greatest Show on Earth
October 27, 2013 8:00 PM

Benghazi was a planned, sophisticated attack by al Qaeda against a barely protected American outpost. Lara Logan reports; Then, an interview with ex-CIA No. 2 Mike Morell opens a rare window into the inside affairs of the U.S. intelligence agency during a trying time in U.S. history; and, Bob Simon reports on the Metropolitan Opera's mission: to make opera as popular -- and populist -- as it once was.

[...]

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."


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57609479/60-minutes-benghazi/?pageNum=2



Last edited by Markle on 10/28/2013, 10:55 pm; edited 3 times in total

Joanimaroni

Joanimaroni

I saw that.

Guest


Guest

Z and others will just call 60 Minutes racist...

Guest


Guest

It's interesting... the leftists consider this incident in much the same way the dos considered the threat in bengazi.

They too are either naive, incompetent, or ideologically incapacitated.

Sal

Sal

Oooohhhh ...

... Scandalicious ...

But, something seems to be missing ...

Oh, yeah ...

Why'd 60 Minutes leave out this little nugget ...


In the month before attackers stormed U.S. facilities in Benghazi and killed four Americans, U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens twice turned down offers of security assistance made by the senior U.S. military official in the region in response to concerns that Stevens had raised in a still secret memorandum, two government officials told McClatchy.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/05/14/191235/amb-stevens-twice-said-no-to-military.html


Whoopsie.

Guess that part wasn't conducive to the wingnut ratings bump they were hoping for.

BENGHAAAAAAAAAZIIIIIIII!!!!!!


Very Happy

Guest


Guest

I've been deployed to more countries across the pond than you can count and guess what? In these situations, the STATE DEPARTMENT chief overrides choices of security by the Ambassadors. The decision rest with one Hillary Rodham Clinton who's future as a POTUS is about as worthless as a bucket of spit.

Joanimaroni

Joanimaroni

Sal wrote:Oooohhhh ...

... Scandalicious ...

But, something seems to be missing ...

Oh, yeah ...

Why'd 60 Minutes leave out this little nugget ...


In the month before attackers stormed U.S. facilities in Benghazi and killed four Americans, U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens twice turned down offers of security assistance made by the senior U.S. military official in the region in response to concerns that Stevens had raised in a still secret memorandum, two government officials told McClatchy.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/05/14/191235/amb-stevens-twice-said-no-to-military.html


Whoopsie.

Guess that part wasn't conducive to the wingnut ratings bump they were hoping for.

BENGHAAAAAAAAAZIIIIIIII!!!!!!


Very Happy
.



Convenient.....a still secret memo.

Guest


Guest

The ambassador doesn't make security decisions such as these under those circumstances. Any undergrad polo sci major with knowledge of Nationsl Security policy knows that.

Sal

Sal

This is why I'm not concerned about the impact of the Obamacare rollout on the 2014 elections.

Repukes have the uncanny ability to take an issue which should reflect poorly on the Administration and overreach with such glaringly hypocritical and paranoid hyperbole that it ends up negatively impacting them instead.

Keep fucking that chicken.

Guest


Guest

Sal wrote:This is why I'm not concerned about the impact of the Obamacare rollout on the 2014 elections.

Repukes have the uncanny ability to take an issue which should reflect poorly on the Administration and overreach with such glaringly hypocritical and paranoid hyperbole that it ends up negatively impacting them instead.

Keep fucking that chicken.
It's really cute when you trivialize govt blunders... even if it's just when your team does it.

Afterall... what does it really matter that American's are killed... amiright?

HAHAHAHA... phuck those footballs... HAHAHAHA... yea democrats..!!

2seaoat



U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens twice turned down offers of security assistance made by the senior U.S. military official

Of course he did. This was active CIA operations. We had tumbled Mr. K by the courage of people like Stevens who were not wussies and were on the streets of Libya working with Militia groups. Dangerous and risky as hell, but these brave patriots brought down a regime and saved America billions in our wealth, and saved thousands of lives if we had committed troops.

I think it is fair to say there were mistakes. Do we want a bureaucrat in Washington micro managing covert activities from a desk, or do we want to give these folks the latitude they need to get the job done? Four people died. These were the best and brightest who had stunning success in their operations in Libya. It is one thing in good faith to figure out if there are better ways for covert activity to get cover from our government, and it is an entirely different thing to use the death of these four men for political gain. I think sometimes somebody at a desk in Washington is going to have to override field CIA agents, but if you think that memo will remain secret forever.......nope......2016 it will be used to gut Hillary's opposition. You do realize that Hillary is from Chicago also.....

Joanimaroni

Joanimaroni

PkrBum wrote:
Sal wrote:This is why I'm not concerned about the impact of the Obamacare rollout on the 2014 elections.

Repukes have the uncanny ability to take an issue which should reflect poorly on the Administration and overreach with such glaringly hypocritical and paranoid hyperbole that it ends up negatively impacting them instead.

Keep fucking that chicken.
It's really cute when you trivialize govt blunders... even if it's just when your team does it.

Afterall... what does it really matter that American's are killed... amiright?

HAHAHAHA... phuck those footballs... HAHAHAHA... yea democrats..!!
Amen!

Sal

Sal

PkrBum wrote:
It's really cute when you trivialize govt blunders...
Exactly ...

... a blunder ...

... not some grand and sinister conspiracy.

Glad you finally got here.

Can we dispense with all the histrionics and hyperbole now, please?

I didn't think so.


2seaoat



Can we dispense with all the histrionics and hyperbole now, please?

I didn't think so.


What and miss a perceived political opportunity to use these patriots death for political gain......

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

2seaoat wrote:U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens twice turned down offers of security assistance made by the senior U.S. military official

Of course he did.  This was active CIA operations.   We had tumbled Mr. K by the courage of people like Stevens who were not wussies and were on the streets of Libya working with Militia groups.  Dangerous and risky as hell, but these brave patriots brought down a regime and saved America billions in our wealth, and saved thousands of lives if we had committed troops.

I think it is fair to say there were mistakes.   Do we want a bureaucrat in Washington micro managing covert activities from a desk, or do we want to give these folks the latitude they need to get the job done?  Four people died.   These were the best and brightest who had stunning success in their operations in Libya.  It is one thing  in good faith to figure out if there are better ways for covert activity to get cover from our government, and it is an entirely different thing to use the death of these four men for political gain.  I think sometimes somebody at a desk in Washington is going to have to override field CIA agents, but if you think that memo will remain secret forever.......nope......2016 it will be used to gut Hillary's opposition.   You do realize that Hillary is from Chicago also.....
Excellent analogy, Seaoat.  PaceDog and Markle love to use the deaths of those men for political gain. They do so every time they post that photo w faces in the dark cloud over the Whitehouse. The desperation of the extreme right knows no boundaries.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

2seaoat



I think it demeans the memory of Chris Stevens and his team who achieved unprecedented success with CIA covert activity in Libya. It was a stunning success. The key to that success was the courage that Chris had demonstrated and the rapport with the people of that country when they saw these guys work in very dangerous places with the militia groups fighting Mr. K. Now for political advantage, the portrayal is of failure and incompetency. Hardly. The core concept of the revisionist history is that if we only had competent people build a fortress four people would be alive......but our covert activity in Libya would have been doomed. It is a trade off of risk and benefit, and those who try to revise history for political gain will face the truth. That being said, I am not sure that in fact some mistakes were made. Certainly the CIAs rules of engagement are different than our military, and not all assets are available, but when a conscious choice was to accept this much risk by field agents, where was the umbrella of protection in a jam? I think those type of questions clear of political innuendo should be discussed and honed.

Guest


Guest

I think it demeans their memory by not investigating thoroughly

Guest


Guest

To not investigate thoroughly suggests a coverup

2seaoat



I think it demeans their memory by not investigating thoroughly


We are talking about an active CIA operation in a middle east nation where we have replicated the same in many other of the regions countries. I agree that a secure internal review and investigation should be conducted without the hoopla of political innuendo. However, public open door hearings in the house will never get to the classified stuff, and are only being used to suggest cover up and inflame political manipulation.

Magically, in early to late 2016 some of the classified reports are going to be released.....bet on it.

Guest


Guest

Lesser things have been investigated Ssaoat. It's absolute fraud not doing this investigation. And with a TS/SCI classification it'll be in the least 25 years unless a court gets sind cahones and moves this along

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

2seaoat wrote:I think it demeans their memory by not investigating thoroughly


We are talking about an active CIA operation in a middle east nation where we have replicated the same in many other of the regions countries.  I agree that a secure internal review and investigation should be conducted without the hoopla of political innuendo.  However, public open door hearings in the house will never get to the classified stuff, and are only being used to suggest cover up and inflame political manipulation.
Magically, in early to late 2016 some of the classified reports are going to be released.....bet on it.
But that is exactly what PaceDoge and Markle are hoping for....

Do you think those two are really deeply concerned about the four who were killed and their families? Hardly. If they were, they would stop using the names and photos of the four operatives in their their political posturing and endless innuendo.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Markle

Markle

Sal wrote:Oooohhhh ...

... Scandalicious ...

But, something seems to be missing ...

Oh, yeah ...

Why'd 60 Minutes leave out this little nugget ...


In the month before attackers stormed U.S. facilities in Benghazi and killed four Americans, U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens twice turned down offers of security assistance made by the senior U.S. military official in the region in response to concerns that Stevens had raised in a still secret memorandum, two government officials told McClatchy.http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/05/14/191235/amb-stevens-twice-said-no-to-military.html


Whoopsie.

Guess that part wasn't conducive to the wingnut ratings bump they were hoping for.

BENGHAAAAAAAAAZIIIIIIII!!!!!!


Very Happy
A SECRET MEMO, FROM ANONYMOUS SOURCES.

Peculair that every other source says he was asking for more security and the Department of Defense and State Department knew of the threats to Benghazi and the Ambasador himself.

Markle

Markle

Joanimaroni wrote:
PkrBum wrote:
Sal wrote:This is why I'm not concerned about the impact of the Obamacare rollout on the 2014 elections.

Repukes have the uncanny ability to take an issue which should reflect poorly on the Administration and overreach with such glaringly hypocritical and paranoid hyperbole that it ends up negatively impacting them instead.

Keep fucking that chicken.
It's really cute when you trivialize govt blunders... even if it's just when your team does it.

Afterall... what does it really matter that American's are killed... amiright?

HAHAHAHA... phuck those footballs... HAHAHAHA... yea democrats..!!
Amen!
cheers cheers 

Sal

Sal

Markle wrote:
A SECRET MEMO, FROM ANONYMOUS SOURCES.

... and confirmed by an aide to Darrell Issa and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff ...

... so, there's that.

lol

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:I think it demeans their memory by not investigating thoroughly


We are talking about an active CIA operation in a middle east nation where we have replicated the same in many other of the regions countries. I agree that a secure internal review and investigation should be conducted without the hoopla of political innuendo. However, public open door hearings in the house will never get to the classified stuff, and are only being used to suggest cover up and inflame political manipulation.

Magically, in early to late 2016 some of the classified reports are going to be released.....bet on it.
An "active CIA operation" that armed even one enemy of the united states of America would be treason. Sure you want to go there? What you really enable and support is obfuscation... protecting the ruling elite. You are no steward of open govt.

I think it plays into your superiority complex. If you can rationalize that you are above those around you... it's a small leap that a higher authority would know what's best for you. You may seek comfort in that enlightenment... but it is built for you.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 4]

Go to page : 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum