Smoking Gun: "We had no actionable intelligence"

Uh, maybe take a few precautions.....like not letting her go out until he gets it cleared up.

What he shouldn't do is NOTHING.

Does that answer you question....or do you need more ?

What sorts of "precautions?"

Send two armed guards to her,
since you don't know WHEN it might happen?

I'm assuming, for the sake of the analogy, that she's GOING to go out with the dude,
will be In Harm's Way, as it were, even WITH the unvalidated warning,
until some sort of evidence is turned up which nails the man.

Your try at an analogy was fail, this time.

Did you miss the part where I said....don't let her go out....that's a precaution.

Your second statement is simply stupid. You don't when it might happen. If it can happen at all....you don't let her go out. Is that really hard ?

No, she's not going out with the dude, as long as the potential exist (or she shouldn't) until you get it cleared up.

Letting things proceed and taking no action is STUPID.

Again...what is so hard to understand here ?

Your whole analogy is stupid. Go get raped.
 
Turns out that 72 hours before the attack of the Libyan Consulate in Bhengazi; US diplomats were warned of the impending attacks.

It turns out that you're thread title is misleading as your link proves nothing of the sort (big surprise). Nowhere in the article you cited does it say that Americans were warned of the attack; only that, "Mabrouk said it was not the first time he has warned foreigners about the worsening security situation in the face of the growing presence of armed jihadist groups in the Benghazi area".

I've read that quote over and over again and have yet to find the part where Americans were warned of this specific attack. Perhaps you could point it out for me? I'll wait :eusa_whistle:

Look retard, 72 hours before the attack the Americans were warned that armed Jihadists were running in the area. That the local Command could not provide adequate protection. The response? Nothing, no additional security, no removal of non essential staff and the Ambassador was there.

Pretty damning to an intelligent non butt sniffing Obama's ass buffoon .

Yup. Seems kinda funny to me that these lefty idiots expected Bush to stop 9-11 because he had vauge warnings about an impending attack. An attack somewhere in America.

Yet here we have warnings about attacks on Americans in Libya and they are willing to let Barry and his posse slide becuase hey, the warnings were vague.
 
It turns out that you're thread title is misleading as your link proves nothing of the sort (big surprise). Nowhere in the article you cited does it say that Americans were warned of the attack; only that, "Mabrouk said it was not the first time he has warned foreigners about the worsening security situation in the face of the growing presence of armed jihadist groups in the Benghazi area".

I've read that quote over and over again and have yet to find the part where Americans were warned of this specific attack. Perhaps you could point it out for me? I'll wait :eusa_whistle:

Look retard, 72 hours before the attack the Americans were warned that armed Jihadists were running in the area. That the local Command could not provide adequate protection. The response? Nothing, no additional security, no removal of non essential staff and the Ambassador was there.

Pretty damning to an intelligent non butt sniffing Obama's ass buffoon .

Yup. Seems kinda funny to me that these lefty idiots expected Bush to stop 9-11 because he had vauge warnings about an impending attack. An attack somewhere in America.

Yet here we have warnings about attacks on Americans in Libya and they are willing to let Barry and his posse slide becuase hey, the warnings were vague.

Why didn't you jump on Bush about the vague warnings he had about 9-11?

Ohh wait I recall now. That would be unamerican and for the terrorists if one did that.
 

Forum List

Back
Top