PDA

View Full Version : US knew for 7 hours about the Libya attack



SarasotaRepub
10-23-2012, 10:27 PM
Breaking on Fox, Greta's show.

Someone is lying their asses off...

SaintLouieWoman
10-23-2012, 10:32 PM
Liz Cheney was on Greta's show. Fox got an exclusive----the emails that showed that they knew in real time that the attack was going on. For 7 hours they did nothing, absolutely nothing. They let those people die without sending any assets to save them. They said that there were planes in Italy, not that far, that could have been dispatched.

Obama lied last night again. He's caught red handed. I have a suspicion that you don't throw the CIA under the bus without repercussions. Fox has the actual emails.

October surprise, anyone?

SaintLouieWoman
10-23-2012, 11:02 PM
Here's a link from NBC. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/49528284/

Funny how the White House hasn't commented yet. I guess it takes the story spinners a while to get their multitude of lies straight. This one claims it's not from intelligence sources. Again makes me wonder how Fox got their's---which shows an even closer time line.

SarasotaRepub
10-24-2012, 07:52 AM
Oh nooooes!!! (http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/24/us/libya-benghazi-e-mails/index.html?hpt=hp_t1)




By Elise Labott, CNN Foreign Affairs Reporter
updated 7:01 AM EDT, Wed October 24, 2012


Washington (CNN) -- Two hours after the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, the White House, the State Department and the FBI were told that an Islamist group had claimed credit, government e-mails obtained by CNN show.

One of the e-mails -- sent from a State Department address to various government agencies -- specifically identifies Ansar al-Sharia as claiming responsibility for the attack on its Facebook page and on Twitter.

The e-mails raise further questions about the seeming confusion on the part of the Obama administration to determine the nature of the September attack and those who planned it.

The attack left U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans dead.



But Lord oBAMA and Hillary and that other dipshit insisted otherwise.



U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland and Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, all cited the video as a motivating factor in the attack.

txradioguy
10-24-2012, 12:54 PM
http://a57.foxnews.com/www.foxnews.com/images/root_images/0/0/102412_clintonemails_20121024_124403.jpg

Correct me if I'm wrong...but didn't we give aid and weapons to Ansar al-Sharia to help them kick Gaddafi our of power?

Oh and say what you want to about "social media" Madam Secretary...but .gov emails from Microsoft Exchange/Enterprise servers don't count as social media.

Your own people were trying to tell you something was going down...and it didn't have to do with some stupid movie!!

Elspeth
10-24-2012, 01:06 PM
There's only one reason I can see an administration sitting on its hands for 7 hours and letting an ambassador die: False Flag.

There's something way below the surface here. I don't buy the incompetence dodge.

txradioguy
10-24-2012, 01:11 PM
There's only one reason I can see an administration sitting on its hands for 7 hours and letting an ambassador die: False Flag.

There's something way below the surface here. I don't buy the incompetence dodge.

I'm not so sure it was some kind of false flag.

I think it was more CYA because for some time Obama had been talking about how al-Qaeda was defeated and on the run in his stump speeches.

"bin-Laden's dead and GM is alive".

To have to utter the words "al-Qaeda terrorist attack"...especially on 9/11 and ESPECIALLY in the middle of a campaign wouldn't make the President look too good.

IMHO this is a case of compromising American security for politics.

Elspeth
10-24-2012, 01:22 PM
I'm not so sure it was some kind of false flag.

I think it was more CYA because for some time Obama had been talking about how al-Qaeda was defeated and on the run in his stump speeches.

"bin-Laden's dead and GM is alive".

To have to utter the words "al-Qaeda terrorist attack"...especially on 9/11 and ESPECIALLY in the middle of a campaign wouldn't make the President look too good.

IMHO this is a case of compromising American security for politics.

But why let people die?

You can always spin who the responsible parties are. Hell, he could have blamed it on rogue elements from any one of a dozen Middle Eastern countries. Most Americans can't tell one ME nation from another. (Sadly)

But to sit on your hands and let people die? To not try and rescue them? I don't get the advantage there.

txradioguy
10-24-2012, 01:26 PM
But why let people die?

You can always spin who the responsible parties are. Hell, he could have blamed it on rogue elements from any one of a dozen Middle Eastern countries. Most Americans can't tell one ME nation from another. (Sadly)

But to sit on your hands and let people die? To not try and rescue them? I don't get the advantage there.

"Acceptable loss". I believe that is the term that would be used by the folks at the State Department and WH in a situation like this.

To their way of thinking it's better (for them) politically to lose four Americans and blame it on some mythical video than have to admit that an al-Qaeda based group...that we helped in the Libyan civil war...sodomized murdered and drug the body of our ambassador through the streets.

Elspeth
10-24-2012, 01:29 PM
"Acceptable loss". I believe that is the term that would be used by the folks at the State Department and WH in a situation like this.

To their way of thinking it's better (for them) politically to lose four Americans and blame it on some mythical video than have to admit that an al-Qaeda based group...that we helped in the Libyan civil war...sodomized murdered and drug the body of our ambassador through the streets.

But they could have blamed it on the video anyway and saved the ambassador. What's the ambassador going to do? Contradict them when he owes his life to them?

No, I still think there is more to this.

txradioguy
10-24-2012, 01:36 PM
But they could have blamed it on the video anyway and saved the ambassador.

I think they completely miscalculated the fact that everyone would remain silent...get tossed under the Obama bus and not say a word.



What's the ambassador going to do? Contradict them when he owes his life to them?

I think he would have been honest. Remember there were intel reports showing as much as 6 months ago an attack was coming. Stevens himself asked more than once to have security beefed up.



No, I still think there is more to this.

Maybe. But remember you're dealing with a mindset that believes if we don't have U.S. military guarding the embassy...if we don't let the security put bullets in their guns...it will show these goons that we come in peace and they won't attack us.

I think it's nothing more than incompetence.

txradioguy
10-24-2012, 02:09 PM
(CBS News) It was six weeks ago on Tuesday that terrorists attacked the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

Now, CBS News has obtained email alerts that were put out by the State Department as the attack unfolded. Four Americans were killed in the attack, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens.

These emails contain the earliest description so far of what happened at Benghazi the night of the attack.

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/Benghazi_alerts.pdf?tag=contentMain;contentBody


At 4:05 p.m. Eastern time, on September 11, an alert from the State Department Operations Center was issued to a number government and intelligence agencies. Included were the White House Situation Room, the office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the FBI.

"US Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack" -- "approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well. Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four COM (Chief of Mission/embassy) personnel are in the compound safe haven."

At 4:54 p.m., less than an hour later, another alert: "the firing... in Benghazi...has stopped...A response team is on site attempting to locate COM (embassy) personnel."

Then, at 6:07 p.m., State sent out another alert saying the embassy in Tripoli reported the Islamic military group "Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibilty for Benghazi Attack"... "on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli."

The emails are just a few in what are likely a large number traded throughout the night. They are likely to become part of the ongoing political debate over whether the administration attempted to mislead in saying the assault was an outgrowth of a protest, rather than a planned attack by terrorists.


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57538689/emails-detail-unfolding-benghazi-attack-on-sept-11/?tag=AverageMixRelated

Adam Wood
10-24-2012, 02:56 PM
"Acceptable loss". I believe that is the term that would be used by the folks at the State Department and WH in a situation like this.

To their way of thinking it's better (for them) politically to lose four Americans and blame it on some mythical video than have to admit that an al-Qaeda based group...that we helped in the Libyan civil war...sodomized murdered and drug the body of our ambassador through the streets.


http://i45.tinypic.com/2ymzurb.jpg

SaintLouieWoman
10-24-2012, 03:05 PM
Rush today was talking and saying it's possible that Obama just wasn't engaged. These phone calls and emails were coming in during his Letterman visit, Beyonce and the trip to Vegas. Possibly he had the do not disturb sign out and they were afraid to call him.

It all boils down to who has the right to push the button to authorize planes or special forces to be sent to rescue those folks. I personally think that it probably was their reluctance to say that the Annointed One was wrong and that getting Bin Laden didn't tamp down the terrorism. He seems to be the type person who never wants to admit a mistake. His people are probably afraid to cross him. Look at those eyes of his, particularly when he was glaring down Romney. He's a nasty individual. Nice my rear end.

That's pretty sick that 4 people are dead as a possible result of his ego and his desire for reelection. He should not be in that office. No matter which way they spin it, he's not fit for office. And this sure doesn't put Hillary in too good of a light, either. She should get over that "stand by your man" routine. It's inexcusable that she's still trying to put out excuses, but this time she's probably trying to save her own posterior.

SarasotaRepub
10-24-2012, 03:13 PM
I wonder what's going to trigger SOS Clinton to bail on oBAMA????

I'd say the micro-second she determines it will affect her run for the White House she'll dump Lord O
like a load of smelly horseshit...:single_eye:

txradioguy
10-25-2012, 12:55 AM
I wonder what's going to trigger SOS Clinton to bail on oBAMA????

I'd say the micro-second she determines it will affect her run for the White House she'll dump Lord O
like a load of smelly horseshit...:single_eye:

That trigger has already been reached SR. IRRC right after the 2010 mid terms she said she wasn't gonna be around for a second term.

Problem is...this Libya mess has probably screwed her chances in 2016.

Adam Wood
10-25-2012, 08:05 AM
That trigger has already been reached SR. IRRC right after the 2010 mid terms she said she wasn't gonna be around for a second term.

Problem is...this Libya mess has probably screwed her chances in 2016.She's not interested in running for President any more. She knows that she has no chance in 2016 (she'll be, what? 72 then?).

She wants to see the words "Supreme Court Justice Hillary Clinton" in print.

SaintLouieWoman
10-25-2012, 09:26 PM
The bad guys are winning, even here. Folks have lost interest and not posting.

Did anyone see Judge Jeanine on O'Reilly? She called O a liar, outright, and repeated it. She's incensed about how the MSM is repressing the info.

I was furious at O'Reilly, supposedly being the devil's advocate. Megyn Kelly was also on, also angry about the O administration.

O'Reilly is only interested in O'Reilly, all pumped up that O or one of his minions listened to the No Spin show and are adopting some of Bill's suggestions. His ego knows no bounds.

Elspeth
10-25-2012, 10:49 PM
The bad guys are winning, even here. Folks have lost interest and not posting.

Here at CU?


Did anyone see Judge Jeanine on O'Reilly? She called O a liar, outright, and repeated it. She's incensed about how the MSM is repressing the info.

I was furious at O'Reilly, supposedly being the devil's advocate. Megyn Kelly was also on, also angry about the O administration.

O'Reilly is only interested in O'Reilly, all pumped up that O or one of his minions listened to the No Spin show and are adopting some of Bill's suggestions. His ego knows no bounds.

Maybe it's all that time he spends hobnobbing with Jon Stewart.

SarasotaRepub
10-26-2012, 08:29 AM
The problem here now people and I'm sure what oBAMA's folks are counting on, is the American public's short attention span.

Except for people who really care, this story is drifting away to the bottom of the heap, I hope I'm wrong.

And the MSM is doing all it can to protect our Fearless Leader and that in itself is disgusting.

If it weren't for Fox News, this story would have been dead over a week ago if it would have ever been reported at all...