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.
The administration KNEW that was a lie and still they kept at it. "Official Assessment" was revised by the CIA, you say?
Oh, of course!
All the more reason to doubt what really happened. Thanks for pointing that out.
How did the Administration know that it was a lie? The administration was relying on the official assessment of the intelligence services. Isn't that what the intelligence services are there for?
The administration stopped "harping" on the video when the CIA revised its official assessment around the 21rst of Sept. So it was around 2 weeks.
Hillary's own Emails tell the story that they knew right away it was not the video.
There is no denying that if you read them, no revision necessary at all.
Hillary's own Emails tell the story that they knew right away it was not the video.
There is no denying that if you read them, no revision necessary at all.
Think of all the expense we can save. We can eliminate the CIA and other intelligence agencies and just rely on off-cuff emails written by people who don't have access to all the information.
Hillary's own Emails tell the story that they knew right away it was not the video.
There is no denying that if you read them, no revision necessary at all.
The poster you're addressing will defend this administration no matter what. In case you didn't know.
The poster you're addressing will defend this administration no matter what. In case you didn't know.
The blind adoration of some on the left won't allow them to see that the transparent administration is anything but transparent. Not to worry. The revolt will be seen in the next Presidential election. It will be the antidote to Obama's poisonous policies.
The poster you're addressing will defend this administration no matter what. In case you didn't know.
Just curious, how do the actions of the Chief of Base in Benghazi on the night of the attack reflect either positively or negatively on the Obama Administration?
I would point out that I have posted multiple times in this thread that the State Department's own ARB report in 2012 was critical of how the State Department handle security in Benghazi prior to the attack.
You do understand that Glen Doherty himself was part of the rescue team that came to the aid of those in Benghazi. There were other units on the way which arrived later on 9/12.
Other units? You make it sound like our government had designated capable military security units to respond to a terrorist attack against our diplomats and state department employees in Libya.
It is obvious that the civilian contractors working over at the CIA annex were not in any way shape or form an emergency response plan to defend our people.
There was no plan from our state department to defend the consulate should it come under attack, none. Those poor souls were left to come up with their own means of defending themselves, they were hung out to dry.
If ambassador Stevens had called the state department to ask what type of emergency response plan Hilary had in place to repel an enemy assault, in the event the consulate came under terrorist attack, the answer would have been:
"Ummm.... we do not have any plan, no one will come to your rescue. Even if the attack goes on and on over an eight hour time period, you guys will be all on your own. Wait a tic, hey.... why not give those guys a call over at the CIA annex, they might be able to toss something together at the last minute."
Just curious, how do the actions of the Chief of Base in Benghazi on the night of the attack reflect either positively or negatively on the Obama Administration?
I would point out that I have posted multiple times in this thread that the State Department's own ARB report in 2012 was critical of how the State Department handle security in Benghazi prior to the attack.
I think the exact language they used was:
Systemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department resulted in a Special Mission security posture that was inadequate for Benghazi and grossly inadequate to deal with the attack that took place.
The administration stopped "harping" on the video when the CIA revised its official assessment around the 21rst of Sept. So it was around 2 weeks.
And this is what all the fuss around the YouTube video is about. That they didn't change the talking points for two weeks. Horrors! This is sooooo important that we've needed nine investigations. Beyond ridiculous.
And not even one fighter anywhere that could have flown over the sand rats. No SpecOps unit within 12 hours? No extra security given even though requested.
Nevermind:
See post #56.
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.
All the more reason to doubt what really happened. Thanks for pointing that out.
