Benghazi - The Nightmare Is Over!


So what's your point ?...You must think we're unaware of all the terrorists attacks in different parts of the world....as long as you're so interested,
Will this help you ?

2009 Feb. 9, Iraq: a suicide bomber kills four American soldiers and their Iraqi translator near a police checkpoint.

April 10, Iraq:
a suicide attack kills five American soldiers and two Iraqi policemen.

June 1, Little Rock, Arkansas:
Abdulhakim Muhammed, a Muslim convert from Memphis, Tennessee, is charged with shooting two soldiers outside a military recruiting center. One is killed and the other is wounded. In a January 2010 letter to the judge hearing his case, Muhammed asked to change his plea from not guilty to guilty, claimed ties to al-Qaeda, and called the shooting a jihadi attack "to fight those who wage war on Islam and Muslims."

Dec. 25:
A Nigerian man on a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit attempted to ignite an explosive device hidden in his underwear. The explosive device that failed to detonate was a mixture of powder and liquid that did not alert security personnel in the airport. The alleged bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, told officials later that he was directed by the terrorist group Al Qaeda. The suspect was already on the government's watch list when he attempted the bombing; his father, a respected Nigerian banker, had told the U.S. government that he was worried about his son's increased extremism.

Dec. 30, Iraq:
a suicide bomber kills eight Americans civilians, seven of them CIA agents, at a base in Afghanistan. It's the deadliest attack on the agency since 9/11. The attacker is reportedly a double agent from Jordan who was acting on behalf of al-Qaeda.

2010
May 1, New York City: a car bomb is discovered in Times Square, New York City after smoke is seen coming from a vehicle. The bomb was ignited, but failed to detonate and was disarmed before it could cause any harm. Times Square was evacuated as a safety precaution. Faisal Shahzad pleads guilty to placing the bomb as well as 10 terrorism and weapons charges.

May 10, Jacksonville, Florida:
a pipe bomb explodes while approximately 60 Muslims are praying in the mosque. The attack causes no injuries

Oct. 29: two packages are found on separate cargo planes. Each package contains a bomb consisting of 300 to 400 grams (11-14 oz) of plastic explosives and a detonating mechanism. The bombs are discovered as a result of intelligence received from Saudi Arabia's security chief. The packages, bound from Yemen to the United States, are discovered at en route stop-overs, one in England and one in Dubai in the United Arab Emirates.

2011
Jan. 17, Spokane, Washington: a pipe bomb is discovered along the route of the Martin Luther King, Jr. memorial march. The bomb, a "viable device" set up to spray marchers with shrapnel and to cause multiple casualties, is defused without any injuries.

2012
Sept. 11, Benghazi, Libya: militants armed with antiaircraft weapons and rocket-propelled grenades fire upon the American consulate, killing U.S. ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens and three other embassy officials. U.S. secretary of state Hillary Clinton said the U.S. believed that Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, a group closely linked to Al Qaeda, orchestrated the attack.

2013
Feb. 1, Ankara, Turkey: Ecevit Sanli detonates a bomb near a gate at the U.S. Embassy. Sanli dies after detonating the bomb. One Turkish guard is also killed. Didem Tuncay, a respected television journalist, is injured in the blast. Unlike the bombing at the embassy in Benghazi last September, the U.S. government immediately calls the bombing a terrorist attack. According to Turkish officials, the attack is from the Revolutionary People's Liberation Party, which has been labeled a terrorist organization by the U.S. and other nations.

April 15, Boston, Mass.:
multiple bombs explode near the finish line of the Boston Marathon. Two bombs go off around 2:50 in the afternoon as runners finish the race. At least three people are killed. One is an eight year old boy. More than 170 people are injured. Three days later, the FBI releases photos and video of two suspects in the hope that the public can help identify them. Just hours after the FBI releases the images, the two suspects rob a gas station in Central Square then shoot and kill a MIT police officer in his car. Afterwards, the two men carjack a SUV and tell the driver that they had set off the explosions at the marathon. Police pursue the vehicle into Watertown. During the shootout, a MBTA officer is shot and one of the suspects, identified as Tamerlan Tsarnaev, age 26, is killed. A suicide vest is found on his body. The other suspect, Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, age 19, remains at large for several hours, causing a massive manhunt and lockdown for all of Boston, Cambridge, and many other surrounding communities. The manhunt ends when he is found alive, but seriously injured, hiding in a boat behind a house in Watertown. The two suspects are brothers and had been living together on Norfolk Street in Cambridge. They have lived in the U.S. for about a decade, but are from an area near Chechnya, a region in Russia. See also U.S.-Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations; Suspected al-Qaeda Terrorist Acts.
 
bombing the shit out of him? hardly. He took out a few radar installations. period. shock and awe happened under Dubya.

Team Clinton never tried to convince the American people of the certainty of Saddam's WMD stockpiles and they certainly never tried to convince them about a Saddam/Al Qaeda connection. Those lies were critical to gaining public support and they were ALL team Bush.

If you can say that with a straight face, you're an extremely goo liar, or deeply in denial....the quotes are their for all to see....

Our own intelligence agency's suspected those ties....suspected and Bush never tried to convince the people of anything other than that.

The Dem whining for the previous 10 years, 8 of them pre-Bush had already conditioned the people to believe Saddam had WMD just like they preached for so long....

You may be able to ignore reality, I can't and won't .....
 
Oh...this is going to drive Issa and his buddies absolutely more nuts!

So much for the whistleblowers. I guess they sucked instead!

The “whistleblowers” at today’s House Oversight Committee hearing on what really happened in Benghazi, Libya last September were supposed to break the dam that would lead to President Obama’s eventual downfall, in the eyes of conservatives. Instead, these witness actually served to debunk several theories that the right-wing has pushed on Benghazi, leaving the hearing a fizzle for the GOP:

1. F-16s could have been sent to Benghazi

Part of the prevailing theory surrounding the events the night of the Benghazi attacks is that the Obama administration did not do enough militarily to respond to the crisis. Gregory Hicks — a Foreign Service Officer and the former Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya — claimed during his pre-hearing testimony that fighter jets could have been flown over Benghazi, preventing the second wave of the attack from occurring.

Ranking Member Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) questioned that statement, asking Hicks whether he disagreed with Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff Gen Martin Dempsey’s assessment that no air assets were in range the night of the attack. Hicks didn’t disagree, saying he was “speaking from [his] perspective” and what “veteran Libyan revolutionaries” told him, rather than Pentagon assessments.

2. Hillary Clinton signed cables denying additional security to Benghazi

House Republicans came to the conclusion in their interim report on Benghazi that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton lied to them about what she knew and when during her testimony this January. This includes her statement that at no time was she aware of requests for additional security at the diplomatic facility in Benghazi prior to the attack.

Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) used her time to take issue with this claim, asking all three witnesses about standard protocol for cables leaving the State Department. All three agreed with Maloney, that the Secretary of State’s name is placed at the bottom of all outgoing cables and telegrams from Foggy Bottom, whether the Secretary has viewed them or not, shooting down the GOP claim.

3. A Special Forces Team that could have saved lives was told to stand down

One of the most shocking reveals in the lead-up to today’s hearing was that a team of Special Forces in Tripoli were told not to deploy to Benghazi during the attack. That decision has led to an uproar on the right, including claims of dereliction of duty towards Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey for not taking actions that could have saved lives.

During questioning, Hicks confirmed that the team was ready to be deployed — not to join the fighting at the CIA annex — but “to secure the airport for the withdrawal of our personnel from Benghazi after the mortar attack.” Hicks also confirmed that it was the second such team to be readied for deployment, with the first having proceeded to Benghazi earlier. Despite the second team not deploying, the staff was all evacuated first to Tripoli, then to Germany, within 18 hours of the attack taking place.

4. The State Department’s Accountability Review Board isn’t legitimate

Republicans have been attacking the State Department’s official in-house review of the shortcomings seen before, during, and after the assault in Benghazi. That criticism prompted House Republicans to write their own report. When asked point blank about the recommendations of the Board, however, the witnesses didn’t cooperate with the GOP narrative. “Absolutely,” Eric Nordstrom, the Regional Security Officer for Libya prior to the assault in Benghazi, answered when asked if he believes implementing the recommendations would improve security. “I had an opportunity to review that along with other two committee reports. I think taken altogether, they’re fairly comprehensive and reasonable.” Hicks, when questioned, said that while he had some issues with the process by which the Board gathered its information, he demurred on criticizing the report itself.
 
The nightmare is over?

Wishful thinking perhaps?

It appears that both the BBC and the Guardian disagree ...

After Benghazi revelations, heads will roll
There's new evidence, obtained by ABC, that the Obama administration did deliberately purge references to "terrorism" from accounts of the attack on the Benghazi diplomatic mission, which killed four people including the US ambassador to Libya.

excerpt

---

Black and white

Republicans are certain to use the Benghazi affair against Clinton should she run in 2016

In the interests of full disclosure I have to say I have not in the past been persuaded that allegations of a cover-up were a big deal. It seemed to me a partisan attack based on very little.

I remember listening to reports from the BBC and others at the time that did suggest the attack in Benghazi was a spontaneous reaction to a rather puerile anti-Islamic video.

I understand President Barack Obama's careful use of the word "terrorism" when it actually means something, rather than as a knee-jerk description of any violence by foreigners against Americans, often in order to justify a "war on terror".

But the evidence is there in black and white, unless we doubt the documents obtained by ABC, which I don't.

---

As Ms Nuland puts it, such a report "could be abused by members [of Congress] to beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings, so why would we want to feed that either?"

However you read the motives, the state department and apparently the White House did get the CIA to change its story.

This is now very serious, and I suspect heads will roll. The White House will be on the defensive for a while.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22483768

This is even worse ..

US officials blocked rescue effort while Benghazi burned, Congress told
Diplomat Gregory Hicks accuses State Department of cover-up in evidence that may yet hurt Hillary Clinton's White House bid
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/may/08/benghazi-us-officials-blocked-congress-hearing

If Obama has done nothing wrong .. what's wrong with investigations?
 
If you can say that with a straight face, you're an extremely goo liar, or deeply in denial....the quotes are their for all to see....

Our own intelligence agency's suspected those ties....suspected and Bush never tried to convince the people of anything other than that.

The Dem whining for the previous 10 years, 8 of them pre-Bush had already conditioned the people to believe Saddam had WMD just like they preached for so long....

You may be able to ignore reality, I can't and won't .....

Ignoring reality is literally all that you do.

You should read back through Rana's link - it owns you.

None of those quotes call for invasion. That was Bush's call, and it came at a time when inspections were working. Instead of doing everything he could to avoid war, he made the decision & then fixed the intel to support the policy. This is historical fact.
 
bombing the shit out of him? hardly. He took out a few radar installations. period. shock and awe happened under Dubya.

Team Clinton never tried to convince the American people of the certainty of Saddam's WMD stockpiles and they certainly never tried to convince them about a Saddam/Al Qaeda connection. Those lies were critical to gaining public support and they were ALL team Bush.

This was SHOCK if not AWE....

More Iraqis died under the peaceful Clinton years than during the Iraq War. But, don't expect to read or hear about it from the American Pravda because it doesn't fit their liberal agenda.

"In 1996 Secretary of State Madeleine Albright admitted that Bill Clinton's policy that resulted in 500,000 dead Iraqi children was worth it.
In a much forgotten exchange between Lesley Stahl and Madeleine Albright on '60 Minutes' back on May 12, 1996:
'Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it.'
The United Nations estimated that a total of 1 million Iraqi civilians died as result of the sanctions on Iraq.

Who knows how many more killed by Clinton's airstrikes and missile strikes....
http://tinyurl.com/cjlal48
 
and spin all you like, Bravo. If I said that there is no doubt that the Red Sox will win the AL East this year, that is a LIE, even before the season comes to an end, because there is, in fact, doubt. When Team Bush said "there is no doubt that Saddam has stockpiles of WMD's", that was a lie for the very same reason.

Now... if I said, that I personally have no doubt that the Red Sox will win the AL East, that is a different statement altogether. Words have meanings and people ought to be held accountable for what they say, not for what they meant to say, but, oops, didn't quite say.


When Team Bush said "there is no doubt that Saddam has stockpiles of WMD's", that was a lie for the very same reason. ?

THIS IS A QUOTE FROM former VICE PRESIDENT AL GORE....
Sept of 2002 I believe.
 
Ignoring reality is literally all that you do.

You should read back through Rana's link - it owns you.

None of those quotes call for invasion. That was Bush's call, and it came at a time when inspections were working. Instead of doing everything he could to avoid war, he made the decision & then fixed the intel to support the policy. This is historical fact.
You are a complete dope.
The evidence that made the decision happen was contained in the Downing St Document.
A Document prepared by UK intelligence services under a leftist government.
 
Ignoring reality is literally all that you do.

You should read back through Rana's link - it owns you.

None of those quotes call for invasion. That was Bush's call, and it came at a time when inspections were working. Instead of doing everything he could to avoid war, he made the decision & then fixed the intel to support the policy. This is historical fact.


The quotes can't be denied....in context or standing alone they expose the truth......Democrats whining about Saddam and WMD for 10 years, up to

a few weeks before the 2002 mid-terms elections.....undeniable stuff.....


They confirm everything I've said in the past and what I claim now........ especially Al Gores little rant....gotta love that one.

I can't figure out what you think you read but you better re-read it with some help if necessary.
 
Last edited:
I take it all back. There is a conspiracy. At the highest levels.

Yup.

The guy who dared infamy by opening Al Capone's "vault" to find nothing, who reported to be reporting from Afghanistan when he wasn't, who claimed to be raped by a TSA agent, who claimed Trayvon Martin's hoodie was responsible for his death, and finally the same guy who less than six months ago screamed to Eric Bolling "He is being led down a primrose path of misinformation that is making it look as if President Obama went gambling in Las Vegas when he could've been saving people in Benghazi and that's a lie!"; yes Geraldo Rivera, the guy from FOX News and admitted Republican, has now declared...

IT WAS ALL A CONSPIRACY!




For those of you who don't understand GeraldoSpeak, I'll translate all of this for you.



Geraldo: "I'M NOT GETTING ANY ATTENTION AND FOX IS RENEWING CONTRACTS THIS MONTH!!!!!!!"
 
More attempts 4th Estate manipulation by the Obama team.

White House Holds Secret Benghazi Briefing, Incensing Some Reporters

The White House found itself with another press corps controversy on its hands on Friday, after it emerged that it held a secret briefing about the Benghazi attacks with a select group of White House reporters.

Spokesperson Jay Carney was initially supposed to hold a briefing at 12:30 PM on Friday. However, ABC's Jon Karl threw a wrench in that plan when he reported that the State Department had been involved in lengthy revisions of CIA talking points about the attacks.

All of a sudden, the press briefing was pushed back to 1:45 PM. Then, Politico reported that the White House had held a secret briefing about the Benghazi developments with reporters. The site reported that, while the contents of the briefing were on "deep background," meaning that they could be used as background information in reporting, the existence of the meeting itself was off the record.

However, not all reporters were invited to the briefing. White House journalists have complained many times in the past about their level of access to administration officials.

more
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...t-benghazi-briefing-jay-carney_n_3254800.html

All this secrecy and manipulations tell me that the White House is indeed worried about something.
 
When Team Bush said "there is no doubt that Saddam has stockpiles of WMD's", that was a lie for the very same reason. ?

THIS IS A QUOTE FROM former VICE PRESIDENT AL GORE....
Sept of 2002 I believe.
Gore should know, he invented the Internet afterall!!
 
Secrecy and subterfuge is business as usual for the Obama team.

Obama's Closed Government: The Allure And Hazards Of Secrecy

More than four years ago, a newly elected Barack Obama instructed the heads of departments and agencies under his watch to deal openly and honestly with the public, promising in a 2009 memorandum that his ascendant presidency would usher in "an unprecedented level of openness" in government.

"Information maintained by the federal government is a national asset," Obama declared. "My administration will take appropriate action, consistent with law and policy, to disclose information rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use."

A growing chorus of critics suggest that has not happened.

Instead, the administration has been repeatedly decried for its obsessive insistence on "off-the-record" and "background only" conversations with reporters; for its reflexive demand that all official quotes be "approved" by agency flacks; and for its abysmally slow, unresponsive or militantly piecemeal approach to requests for materials under the federal Freedom of Information Act.

---

Writing in Slate last month, Paul Thacker, the journalist, former Senate investigator and current fellow at the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard University, summarized the administration's record:

In March 2010, the Associated Press found that, under Obama, 17 major agencies were 50 percent more likely to deny FOIA requests than under Bush. The following year, the presidents of two journalism societies -- the Association of Health Care Journalists and the Society of Professional Journalists -- called out President Obama for muzzling scientists in much the same way President Bush had.

Last September, Bloomberg News tested Obama’s pledge by filing FOIA requests for the 2011 travel records of top officials at 57 agencies. Only about half responded. In fact, this president has prosecuted more whistleblowers under the Espionage Act than all prior administrations combined. And an analysis released [March 11th] by the Associated Press found that the administration censored more FOIA requests on national security grounds last year than in any other year since President Obama took office.

more
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-zeller-jr/obamas-secretive-side-a-b_b_3111699.html
 
The nightmare in Libya is over???

Really?

Marines on Alert : Possible Libyan Embassy Evacuation
Marines on Alert : Possible Libyan Embassy Evacuation

British embassy temporarily withdraws some staff from Libya

TRIPOLI- The British embassy is temporarily withdrawing some of its staff from Libya over concerns about political uncertainty and the risk of clashes between rival armed groups in the capital, it said on its website.

"Given the security implications of the ongoing political uncertainty, the British Embassy is temporarily withdrawing a small number of staff," the statement said, and added that the embassy would continue to operate as usual.
http://www.jpost.com/Breaking-News/...rarily-withdraws-some-staff-from-Libya-312766

Police stations bombed, British embassy cuts Libya staff
http://news.yahoo.com/police-station-bombed-libyas-benghazi-east-101951641.html

Libya car bomb hits French embassy, wounds guards
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/23/us-libya-attack-idUSBRE93M05320130423

The invasion of Libya is turning out to be the disaster that everyone with a brain knew that it would be .. and democrats, you own it..
 
sirteforte2.jpg
 
Ignoring reality is literally all that you do.

You should read back through Rana's link - it owns you.

None of those quotes call for invasion. That was Bush's call, and it came at a time when inspections were working. Instead of doing everything he could to avoid war, he made the decision & then fixed the intel to support the policy. This is historical fact.

and only ONE democrat, Al Gore, AFTER he left office, claimed certainty about Saddam's WMD's. ONLY ONE. And even though lots of people thought he MIGHT have had them, or even PROBABLY had them, that is a totally different statement than WE ABSOLUTELY KNOW FOR CERTAIN that he has them. If we know for certain, and we tell AMericans that Saddam is buddy-buddy with OBL, and has been even before 9/11... then, and only then, does there attach an entire level of uber-urgency to invading right this minute... to ignoring the wording of the use of force resolution which stated that armed invasion was to the be LAST resort and, instead, to make it the first and only resort... to kick the UN inspectors out even after you had scored a major diplomatic victory in getting Saddam to let them back in... invasion had to be done RIGHT THAT VERY MINUTE. Last resort? fuck that... ONLY resort. Feed a few days of shock and awe and then we're goin' in... to do, as Bush himself said was our primary mission: to disarm Saddam. Oooops. Looks like your little lie about absolute certainty bit ya in the ass, Dubya, and all the Bush lickers here and elsewhere with their tongues attached to your rectum... no WMD's. Now... Dubya could JOKE about that at the White House Correspondent's dinner, but 50K dead and wounded Americans and two trillion dollars down the shitter really isn't anything I think is worth laughing about.
 
Why does no one talk about the fact that in 2011 there was a bill to increase spending for security for diplomatic missions and the Republicans in the house KILLED it. Why does no one talk about the fact that from 2001-2008 there were 54 attacks on US diplomatic missions and 13 people died. In all that time there were THREE hearings. THREE! IF there was a cover up, and IF if can be linked to the President then there should be some hell to pay, but all I hear republicans saying is IF there was a cover up and IF the administration was behind it and IF this and IF that. So far there is no there there.
 
Back
Top