Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They don't. That's why we give militarily commanders the authority to make judgment calls. Given the information they have at hand, and their best ability to assess the future, they decide whether or not they think the attacks are over.
In hindsight, the judgment calls about which you are complaining have proved to be spot on.
Don't forget that General Ham (AFRICOM Commander) and Admiral Gaouette were fired right after what happened in Libya. Where is Patraus? Oh they already put him through the coals for daring to say the CIA didn't order anyone to stand down everybody forgets about that too.
And the two that authored Hillary's exhaustive internal report retired and refused to testify.
How do they know when the attacks would stop? From what I am hearing Doherty was not a part of the response team, they were there for other purposes, they were on security detail. When they got the stand down order they went anyway.
Doherty did not get a stand down order. He and others traveled to Benghazi from Tripoli, the only hang up being according to Hicks testimony yesterday was that they did not have a way to get from the Benghazi airport to the CIA annex. Hicks' detailed testimony yesterday never mentioned anyone preventing the first response team from Tripoli going to Benghazi.
They don't. That's why we give militarily commanders the authority to make judgment calls. Given the information they have at hand, and their best ability to assess the future, they decide whether or not they think the attacks are over.
In hindsight, the judgment calls about which you are complaining have proved to be spot on.
Exactly they don't know when the attacks would be over. Obviously they must have a magic ball. Even the people on the ground were calling for help never came. The help was told to stand down.
Looking at youtube, there are many more anti muslim or muslim parodies with far better acting for a muslim to get upset about.
I sat and watched C-Span all day yesterday and was very enlightened by what unfolded. I look forward to the further hearings to hear what Dan Benjamin and Rice have to say as they contradict all that was mentioned yesterday. Were the Dems trying to shift blame away from Obama/Clinton - definitely and it was as blatant as the Reps trying to place the blame there. But the American people need to trust in their leaders whether they be Rep and Dem - and they don't and that's why we need answers as to why this happened.
No man is infallible - whether they be Rep, Dem or Jesus himself - but that man should have the morals and ethics to accept responsibility for his choices - especially if he is the leader of our country.
I too question where Obama was during this entire episode. Now before I start getting labeled as right winger, Rep ect -( which most do on these forums as they want to sterotype people) I've been a registered democray for 37 yrs - but that doesn't mean that I can't have my own thoughts, ideas and concerns that don't follow the party lines.
good for you, and we need more americans willing to question "their side" when their side goes awry.
see we have given Libya millions of dollars since 2011, even knowing that they aren't watching our backs:
I know that I am getting slightly off-topic here, but why are we paying to secure stockpiles of chemical weapons there---if the area is unstable, why not just destroy them?
This thread is hilarious. So let me see if I understand; the liberal media is totally ignoring the Benghazi hearings because the coverage that people admit to watching is not represented in a way that people agree with? You just can't make this stuff up.
I agree that all afforded equal protection under the law, and all are innocent until proven guilty.
How generous of you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXStrat
I also know that there is more to the administration's Benghazi narrative than has been released yet.
Bases on yesterday's testimony, it is not obvious why you would pretend to "know" anything of the sort. We once again covered the same ground, heard the same details, and in spite of the best efforts of the Republicans on the panel no smoking gun of malfeasance was uncovered.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXStrat
These 4 State Department employees have stated that there was never any connection between some obscure YouTube video and the events of 9/11/12.
Given the fact that such demonstrations were occurring elsewhere in the Muslim world at the same identical time, to include in front of US Embassies and consulates, it is no demonstration of brilliance or perspicacity to draw that conclusion months later and with 20-20 hindsight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXStrat
They have stated that State and the White House were told it was a terror attack from the start.
I am quite certain that they were told that... among other things they were told at time. And as we have seen, what was true and not true was sorted out in rather short order.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXStrat
The current administration has played duck and cover since this started.
That is the Republican accusation. Yesterday's hearings (again) do not support the claim.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXStrat
They have resisted any attempts to investigate, and clearly put spin on the events to prevent any fallout in the 2012 election cycle.
This thread is hilarious. So let me see if I understand; the liberal media is totally ignoring the Benghazi hearings because the coverage that people admit to watching is not represented in a way that people agree with? You just can't make this stuff up.
I don't get it either. Given technology and the access to CSPAN why would anyone want to watch on regular TV full of commercials and commentary ?
Exactly Democrats should not so uptight about the hearings they should welcome them. If I was accused of something that was not true you better damn well believe I would insist on "all" the facts coming out.
How would you insist that "all" the facts come out? It would most likely require someone working on your behalf, not just leaving it up to people who are out to get you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
