News Article: Benghazi attack: CIA reported 'within 24 hours' Islamist militants to blame

[Bazza]

Re: Mother Of Slain Benghazi Victim Rips Hillary Clinton: "I Blame Her"

This is a classic case of patriotism taking a backseat to politics.

What we as Americans have received prior to today - were nothing more than "Talking Points".

That is not only obscene....it is unacceptable.

I'm sick of Washington's "business as usual" mantra. It's one thing when they cater to special interests groups - but quite another when we leave our embassy staff members to die at the hands of terrorists.

Like I said.....after today's hearings...we will know the details of incident - the good, the bad, and the ugly. But more importantly - the truth.

 

[TidefaninOS]

Re: Mother Of Slain Benghazi Victim Rips Hillary Clinton: "I Blame Her"

The Boston bombings got the country and media riled up and rightly so.

Pretty much the same thing happened in Benghazi on a much larger scale and... crickets with the exception of a couple of media outlets. I do hope this thing gets exposed completely today.

I certainly hope so, too, but......I kinda got my doubts that any higher-ups responsible will be exposed. I kinda expect that some 2nd tier "administrative official' will end up falling on his/her sword and made to take any blame that is exposed. As far as Barry or Hillary are concerned, I'm afraid that it will be like water on a duck's back.

 

[TexasTideFan]

Re: Mother Of Slain Benghazi Victim Rips Hillary Clinton: "I Blame Her"

Benghazi was so last year.

and will be blamed on W anyway.

 

[CrimsonJag]

nm.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politic...t-12-revisions-scrubbed-of-terror-references/

Saw this this morning on Good Morning America. Looks like somebody dun got caught in sum lies. I'm shocked! Shocked I tell ya!!!

 

[Highway59]

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/05/benghazi-memo-drafts/65089/

Memo draft timeline......



It is best to follow link and view all the rewrites as it highlights the change of each rewrite. Nothing wrong with having someone make sure the memo is written correctly. But it is clearly being done to cover ones backside on the issue of the lack of security for these people in the embassy with the known threats surrounding them.

 

[Bama Reb]

What's unfortunate about this entire matter is that the major media outlets have abdicated their intended responsibility to remain objective. As a result, the politicians involved are able to change all the factors involved and thus manipulate the investigations and their findings.

When the media fails in it's responsibilities to keep our politicians honest, things like this are bound to happen. In fact, it becomes almost predictable that they will.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

What's unfortunate about this entire matter is that the major media outlets have abdicated their intended responsibility to remain objective. As a result, the politicians involved are able to change all the factors involved and thus manipulate the investigations and their findings.

When the media fails in it's responsibilities to keep our politicians honest, things like this are bound to happen. In fact, it becomes almost predictable that they will.

They ought to prosecute those involved in the cover up for the involvement of those Americans who died.

 

[Bama Reb]

They ought to prosecute those involved in the cover up for the involvement of those Americans who died.

Really? Considering that this administration is able to do as it pleases and whose every action is both protected and defended by everyone on the left, just who might "they" be?

 

[mikes12]

Really? Considering that this administration is able to do as it pleases and whose every action is both protected and defended by everyone on the left, just who might "they" be?

Racists. :wink:

 

[Highway59]

It just seems apparent that the State Department should have taken the request of additional security from Ambassador Stevens and got on top of the situation. With the events that had been unfolding around the Benghazi embassy it would seem to have been a quick and easy decision to come by. That is a question that needs to be answered. Why did "they" conclude that Stevens request was not to be granted, also who is "they". Then once the attack began, who decided that the embassy was own their own. Then once the dust settled and the realization set in about what had transpired and not everything had been done that could and should have been done to prevent this type of outcome. Who then decided that it would be in the best interest of themselves to begin the process of whitewashing the event. I know it can be said that the ones pressing the issue for full accountability have partisan reasons for not letting go of this event and its consequences. But does that alone make it not right to hold whomever responsible for the outcome at Benghazi responsible. Both parties are bad about the bickering and making mountains out of molehills. But this isn't one of those molehills. People made bad decisions or were just plain asleep at the wheel. People lost their lives on account of poor decisions of persons that should have had their best interest and safety in mind. If these people that made these mistakes had put as much thought into earlier request of their people in the field as they have in the covering up of their mistakes in the aftermath, you most likely would not have had four caskets delivered back home to grieving families.

 

[mittman]

Maybe I have missed something in all of this, but where did the idea that the YouTube video was the cause of this come from? Granted, I am not reading everything about this, but it seems to have come out of left field (pun slightly intended ) There does not seem to be ANY real evidence of this, and someone either had to think it up, or have some kind of reason to use it as a "talking point."

 

[dvldog]

Maybe I have missed something in all of this, but where did the idea that the YouTube video was the cause of this come from? Granted, I am not reading everything about this, but it seems to have come out of left field (pun slightly intended ) There does not seem to be ANY real evidence of this, and someone either had to think it up, or have some kind of reason to use it as a "talking point."

They had to have some reason other than "terrorist attack". Based on past reactions to certain videos, I would guess they thought this would be plausible to the news outlets etc. It worked, at least up to this point.

 

[bamachile]

They had to have some reason other than "terrorist attack". Based on past reactions to certain videos, I would guess they thought this would be plausible to the news outlets etc. It worked, at least up to this point.

It worked, my fellow gyrene, but only on those who wanted to believe it. I have avoided this thread because the whole topic makes my blood boil, but look at our thread on this forum as the news broke and you can see that anyone with a reasonably level head (say less than a 40 degree tilt) and two or more brain cells bumping saw through that ridiculous hogwash quickly.

The Benghazi debacle is a shame and a disgrace and a reproach on all involved. It should not and can not be swept under the rug for the sake of political expediency. Anyone who chooses to ignore or cover up this story is guilty of a crime at least as great as those who covered up the Steubenville incident, and I think greater.

 

[RammerJammer14]

It just seems apparent that the State Department should have taken the request of additional security from Ambassador Stevens and got on top of the situation. With the events that had been unfolding around the Benghazi embassy it would seem to have been a quick and easy decision to come by. That is a question that needs to be answered. Why did "they" conclude that Stevens request was not to be granted, also who is "they".

Heard an interview with the guy in charge of security just previous to the attack, and he said that the State Department had decided that enough time had passed since the overthrow of Gaddafi to normalize relations (meaning downgrading security levels) and were hellbent on implementing normalization regardless of the threat level on the ground. In other words, somebody somewhere had a timeline they wanted met and refused to accept evidence that it was unreasonable.

 

[Tide1986]

People lost their lives on account of poor decisions of persons that should have had their best interest and safety in mind. If these people that made these mistakes had put as much thought into earlier request of their people in the field as they have in the covering up of their mistakes in the aftermath, you most likely would not have had four caskets delivered back home to grieving families.

What's scary is that these decisions may have been purposeful, not simply "bad decisions" or unintended consequences of being "asleep at the wheel".

 

[Highway59]

The White House has been in damage control from day 1 to re-frame what happened at Benghazi. Not delving into other policy matters that I question about the current administration, just keeping focus on the attack and the events leading up to the attack of our embassy, there should be some real answers and not just "talking points" given. I don't see where any national security issues would be put at risk by having some officials put under oath and made to give accounts of the decisions that were made before, during, and after the attack. But no, they are trying to be lead us down the path that it was all unavoidable, nothing that could have been done prevent the deaths of our officials at the Benghazi embassy. And if that's really the case, then answer the questions with real answers, not canned talking points. Help me understand. But right now it just looks like a "huge failure" on the part of the officials in charge. They can try to frame it as something else. But the old saying, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck.......well you know.

 

[banjeaux]

Top Obama official’s brother, CBS News pres., may drop reporter over Benghazi.

• 
  [*=center]

The brother of a top Obama administration official is also the president of CBS News, and the network may be days away from dropping one of its top investigative reporters for covering the administration’s scandals too aggressively.

CBS News executives have reportedly expressed frustration with their own reporter, Sharyl Attkisson, who has steadily covered the Obama administration’s handling of the Benghazi terrorist attack in Libya since late last year.

“Network sources” told Politico Wednesday that CBS executives feel Attkisson’s Benghazi coverage is bordering on advocacy, and Attkisson “can’t get some of her stories on the air.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/11/t...eporter-over-benghazi-coverage/#ixzz2T6NX4yF7



Just another example of our mainstream media being an arm of The Democrat Party. With a Republican in The White House, would it be entirely different. You betcha!

 

[banjeaux]

REPORT: NBC spiked story ID'ing whistleblower as Obama/Clinton voter

Victoria Toensing, attorney for Benghazi whistleblower Gregory Hicks, says Hicks is a Democrat who voted for Hillary Clinton during the 2008 primaries, and President Obama twice for President. Toensing also said that NBC News "spiked" the story this week, prior to Hicks' dramatic testimony before Congress. Toensing appeared on WMAL-FM in Washington DC Saturday with host Steve Malzberg.

"He voted for Hillary in the primary and Obama twice. NBC spiked the story where I told it before the hearings...
...It’s just amazing what the press is still trying to do to cover this up. So they try to make this partisan because of the lawyer. Well I’m not the messenger, he’s the messenger! The modus operandi is to find anything they can do to just attack.” ​

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/05/12/Benghazi-Whistleblower-NBC-Spiked-Obama-Voter

Benghazi whistleblower, Gregory Hicks

​

 

[swoop10]

Re: REPORT: NBC spiked story ID'ing whistleblower as Obama/Clinton voter

I'm still amazed that the same people who were so upset over Iraq, Iran-Contra, and Watergate don't seem to have any feelings towards this one way or the other and Seebell the wack-a-nut excuse has already been played. To have a President claim to have killed Bin Laden and now is trying to act like he wasn't present just doesn't wash in my book.