Were 4 Americans sacrificed at Benghazi so Obama could fake having defeated Al Qaeda?

Little-Acorn

Gold Member
Jun 20, 2006
10,025
2,410
290
San Diego, CA
Originally written May 2013

Finally, after puttering around with stories and videos and lies after the attacks, Congress is beginning to get at the real scandal in Benghazi.

What happened after the attacks, and who lied to whom and how, is less important than why security there was left to deteriorate for months, even while attacks were going on, bombs were blowing 12-foot holes in the consulate walls, and Amb. Stevens was pleading for months for more security.

That summer, Obama was crowing over "Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive!". He was desperately trying to fool American voters into thinking he had defeated Al Qaeda and they were "on the run". And the increasing attacks by Al Qaeda were not fitting into the glossy image he was trying to project.

Sending MORE security into areas like Benghazi, Cairo etc. would have done even more harm to his story... so he simply didn't do it. Instead he reduced security, pulled out American agents, and in some cases substituted Libyan personnel for the American security troops. He was hoping this would look good to American voters who weren't paying much attention.

By the first week in September 2012, there were exactly three American security personnel at the consulate in Benghazi. The gate guards and patrols had been replaced by Libyans... and they were unarmed, with nothing but whistles and batons. And so, when the major attack came on Sept. 11, 2012, the people in the consulate didn't have much chance.

Basically, the lives of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans, were sacrificed so that Obama could get more votes three weeks later in the November, 2012 election.

And that is the real scandal of Benghazi. Obama hopes fervently that people will keep complaining about Susan Rice and lies about a video afterward... because then they aren't complaining about what killed Amb. Stevens and three other Americans: Months of fatal, flagrant neglect of consulate security for the purpose of gaining votes.

------------------------------------------------------

CBS News - Breaking News, U.S., World, Business, Entertainment & Video

The Obama administration -- and the State Department in particular -- has been accused by Republican lawmakers and some former U.S. officials who worked in Libya of ignoring warning signs and even rejecting pleas for increased security around American offices in the country ahead of the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, which left U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three others dead.

The House Oversight Committee will begin questioning three senior State Department staff on Capitol Hill Wednesday over claims that dozens of U.S. security personnel were removed from Libya in the six months leading up to the attack, in spite of alleged requests to increase personnel levels from American officials on the ground.

According to one of the key witnesses expected to testify before the committee this week, even Ambassador Stevens himself had repeatedly requested more security personnel, but was turned down.

Lt. Col. Andy Wood, the former head of a U.S. Special Forces "Site Security Team" in Libya, has told CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson that he and many other senior staff at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, "felt we needed more, not less" security personnel in the country, but were told "to do with less.

For what reasons, I don't know."

This begins to get at the real scandal in Benghazi.
 
Liberals seem reluctant to address this matter.

Not hard to guess why.

I think that 4 Americans tragically died in Benghazi- probably due to some fundamental mistakes that were made regarding security and intelligence.

The far right wants to use their deaths to attack liberals- what a contrast to the 1983 Beirut bombings where over 200 American servicemen died.

No Democrats were claiming that those 200 Americans were 'sacrificed' so Reagan could pretend we were protecting Lebanon.

Instead- both parties rallied together and attempted to find out what happened- and what we could learn from the mistakes that led to the deaths of Americans.

Fast forward to Benghazi- and from the very beginning the Republican narrative was of blame- rather than of finding the cause, and addressing the errors that were made.
 
I think that 4 Americans tragically died in Benghazi- probably due to some fundamental mistakes that were made regarding security and intelligence.

The far right wants to use their deaths to attack liberals- what a contrast to the 1983 Beirut bombings where over 200 American servicemen died.

No Democrats were claiming that those 200 Americans were 'sacrificed' so Reagan could pretend we were protecting Lebanon.

Instead- both parties rallied together and attempted to find out what happened- and what we could learn from the mistakes that led to the deaths of Americans.

Fast forward to Benghazi- and from the very beginning the Republican narrative was of blame- rather than of finding the cause, and addressing the errors that were made.
That takes care of the obligatory "Let's try to change the subject to Republicans" non-response.

Back to the subject:
In 2012 during the summer runup to the Presidential election, Obama was crowing over "Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive!". He was desperately trying to fool American voters into thinking he had defeated Al Qaeda and they were "on the run". And the increasing attacks by Al Qaeda were not fitting into the glossy image he was trying to project.

Sending MORE security into areas like Benghazi, Cairo etc. would have done even more harm to his story... so he simply didn't do it. Instead he reduced security, pulled out American agents, and in some cases substituted Libyan personnel for the American security troops.

Obama hopes fervently that people will keep complaining about Susan Rice and lies about a video afterward... because then they aren't complaining about what killed Amb. Stevens and three other Americans: Months of fatal, flagrant neglect of consulate security for the purpose of gaining votes.
 
I think that 4 Americans tragically died in Benghazi- probably due to some fundamental mistakes that were made regarding security and intelligence.

The far right wants to use their deaths to attack liberals- what a contrast to the 1983 Beirut bombings where over 200 American servicemen died.

No Democrats were claiming that those 200 Americans were 'sacrificed' so Reagan could pretend we were protecting Lebanon.

Instead- both parties rallied together and attempted to find out what happened- and what we could learn from the mistakes that led to the deaths of Americans.

Fast forward to Benghazi- and from the very beginning the Republican narrative was of blame- rather than of finding the cause, and addressing the errors that were made.
That takes care of the obligatory "Let's try to change the subject to Republicans" non-response.

Back to the subject:
In 2012 during the summer runup to the Presidential election, Obama was crowing over "Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive!". He was desperately trying to fool American voters into thinking he had defeated Al Qaeda and they were "on the run". And the increasing attacks by Al Qaeda were not fitting into the glossy image he was trying to project.

Sending MORE security into areas like Benghazi, Cairo etc. would have done even more harm to his story... so he simply didn't do it. Instead he reduced security, pulled out American agents, and in some cases substituted Libyan personnel for the American security troops.

Obama hopes fervently that people will keep complaining about Susan Rice and lies about a video afterward... because then they aren't complaining about what killed Amb. Stevens and three other Americans: Months of fatal, flagrant neglect of consulate security for the purpose of gaining votes.
Wow, that is some real FICTIONAL story writing little acorn....!

Did Alqaeda attack Benghazi? Yes or No?
 
Originally written May 2013

Finally, after puttering around with stories and videos and lies after the attacks, Congress is beginning to get at the real scandal in Benghazi.

What happened after the attacks, and who lied to whom and how, is less important than why security there was left to deteriorate for months, even while attacks were going on, bombs were blowing 12-foot holes in the consulate walls, and Amb. Stevens was pleading for months for more security.

That summer, Obama was crowing over "Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive!". He was desperately trying to fool American voters into thinking he had defeated Al Qaeda and they were "on the run". And the increasing attacks by Al Qaeda were not fitting into the glossy image he was trying to project.

Sending MORE security into areas like Benghazi, Cairo etc. would have done even more harm to his story... so he simply didn't do it. Instead he reduced security, pulled out American agents, and in some cases substituted Libyan personnel for the American security troops. He was hoping this would look good to American voters who weren't paying much attention.

By the first week in September 2012, there were exactly three American security personnel at the consulate in Benghazi. The gate guards and patrols had been replaced by Libyans... and they were unarmed, with nothing but whistles and batons. And so, when the major attack came on Sept. 11, 2012, the people in the consulate didn't have much chance.

Basically, the lives of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans, were sacrificed so that Obama could get more votes three weeks later in the November, 2012 election.

And that is the real scandal of Benghazi. Obama hopes fervently that people will keep complaining about Susan Rice and lies about a video afterward... because then they aren't complaining about what killed Amb. Stevens and three other Americans: Months of fatal, flagrant neglect of consulate security for the purpose of gaining votes.

------------------------------------------------------

CBS News - Breaking News, U.S., World, Business, Entertainment & Video

The Obama administration -- and the State Department in particular -- has been accused by Republican lawmakers and some former U.S. officials who worked in Libya of ignoring warning signs and even rejecting pleas for increased security around American offices in the country ahead of the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, which left U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three others dead.

The House Oversight Committee will begin questioning three senior State Department staff on Capitol Hill Wednesday over claims that dozens of U.S. security personnel were removed from Libya in the six months leading up to the attack, in spite of alleged requests to increase personnel levels from American officials on the ground.

According to one of the key witnesses expected to testify before the committee this week, even Ambassador Stevens himself had repeatedly requested more security personnel, but was turned down.

Lt. Col. Andy Wood, the former head of a U.S. Special Forces "Site Security Team" in Libya, has told CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson that he and many other senior staff at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, "felt we needed more, not less" security personnel in the country, but were told "to do with less.

For what reasons, I don't know."

This begins to get at the real scandal in Benghazi.

No. Don't think so. Benghazi was a complete and utter failure by his State Department run by Hilbat.

After all, "What difference does it make."
 
Of course.
If the question ever arises: Is the administration doing this purely for political reasons, the answer is always, yes of course they are.
That is all they care about. Look at the clusterfuck deal with Iran. It is solely for domestic consumption so Obama can say he got a deal. The Iranians know this and they are beating every ounce of concession out of him they can.
 
No of course not. As the President saidin May 2001,


"The death of bin Laden marks the most significant achievement to date in our nation’s effort to defeat al Qaeda.

Yet his death does not mark the end of our effort. There’s no doubt that al Qaeda will continue to pursue attacks against us. We must –- and we will -- remain vigilant at home and abroad.

Osama Bin Laden Dead The White House

And so, when the major attack came on Sept. 11, 2012, the people in the consulate didn't have much chance.

Except all but two inside the consulate were rescued.
 
Except all but two inside the consulate were rescued.
It takes a liberal to conclude with a straight face, that since "only a few" Americans were killed after the Obama admin left them all but defenseless in the face of ongoing attacks, then it's not bad enough to worry about.
 
Except all but two inside the consulate were rescued.
It takes a liberal to conclude with a straight face, that since "only a few" Americans were killed after the Obama admin left them all but defenseless in the face of ongoing attacks, then it's not bad enough to worry about.
Well Reagan let AMerican Marines get killed in Lebanon.
The left has no end of spin.
 
I think that 4 Americans tragically died in Benghazi- probably due to some fundamental mistakes that were made regarding security and intelligence.

The far right wants to use their deaths to attack liberals- what a contrast to the 1983 Beirut bombings where over 200 American servicemen died.

No Democrats were claiming that those 200 Americans were 'sacrificed' so Reagan could pretend we were protecting Lebanon.

Instead- both parties rallied together and attempted to find out what happened- and what we could learn from the mistakes that led to the deaths of Americans.

Fast forward to Benghazi- and from the very beginning the Republican narrative was of blame- rather than of finding the cause, and addressing the errors that were made.
That takes care of the obligatory "Let's try to change the subject to Republicans" non-response.

Back to the subject:
In 2012 during the summer runup to the Presidential election, Obama was crowing over "Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive!". He was desperately trying to fool American voters into thinking he had defeated Al Qaeda and they were "on the run". And the increasing attacks by Al Qaeda were not fitting into the glossy image he was trying to project.

Sending MORE security into areas like Benghazi, Cairo etc. would have done even more harm to his story... so he simply didn't do it. Instead he reduced security, pulled out American agents, and in some cases substituted Libyan personnel for the American security troops.

Obama hopes fervently that people will keep complaining about Susan Rice and lies about a video afterward... because then they aren't complaining about what killed Amb. Stevens and three other Americans: Months of fatal, flagrant neglect of consulate security for the purpose of gaining votes.


So you think that the one week when the Benghazi attack was thought to be a result of that video, just like so many other attacks and deaths were proven to be, is the only reason Obama was elected? Is that really all this is about? You trying to find something to blame for Romney being thrashed so badly? Romney sucked, and he lost. Get over it dumbass.
 
So you think that the one week when the Benghazi attack was thought to be a result of that video, just like so many other attacks and deaths were proven to be, is the only reason Obama was elected?
Why do you say that that one issue for one week, was "the only reason Obama was elected"?

What an obtuse and narrow-minded view. No one else on this board has said anything like that... only you.
 
Except all but two inside the consulate were rescued.
It takes a liberal to conclude with a straight face, that since "only a few" Americans were killed after the Obama admin left them all but defenseless in the face of ongoing attacks, then it's not bad enough to worry about.

In reality they almost made it.

"..the DS agent began leading the Ambassador and Mr. Smith toward the emergency escape window to escape the smoke. 14 Nearing unconsciousness himself, the agent opened the emergency escape window and crawled out. He then realized he had become separated from the Ambassador and Sean Smith in the smoke, so he reentered and searched the building multiple times."

But a rescue attempt destroys the rabid rights narrative of no rescue attempt made and stand down orders given.

But then again when you base your conclusions on bullshit headlines and talking points, it's no wonder it is a contradiction of known reality.
 
Except all but two inside the consulate were rescued.
It takes a liberal to conclude with a straight face, that since "only a few" Americans were killed after the Obama admin left them all but defenseless in the face of ongoing attacks, then it's not bad enough to worry about.

That's your specious spin. Do you deny that all but two American in the consulate were rescued?
 
Originally written May 2013

Finally, after puttering around with stories and videos and lies after the attacks, Congress is beginning to get at the real scandal in Benghazi.

What happened after the attacks, and who lied to whom and how, is less important than why security there was left to deteriorate for months, even while attacks were going on, bombs were blowing 12-foot holes in the consulate walls, and Amb. Stevens was pleading for months for more security.

That summer, Obama was crowing over "Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive!". He was desperately trying to fool American voters into thinking he had defeated Al Qaeda and they were "on the run". And the increasing attacks by Al Qaeda were not fitting into the glossy image he was trying to project.

Sending MORE security into areas like Benghazi, Cairo etc. would have done even more harm to his story... so he simply didn't do it. Instead he reduced security, pulled out American agents, and in some cases substituted Libyan personnel for the American security troops. He was hoping this would look good to American voters who weren't paying much attention.

By the first week in September 2012, there were exactly three American security personnel at the consulate in Benghazi. The gate guards and patrols had been replaced by Libyans... and they were unarmed, with nothing but whistles and batons. And so, when the major attack came on Sept. 11, 2012, the people in the consulate didn't have much chance.

Basically, the lives of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans, were sacrificed so that Obama could get more votes three weeks later in the November, 2012 election.

And that is the real scandal of Benghazi. Obama hopes fervently that people will keep complaining about Susan Rice and lies about a video afterward... because then they aren't complaining about what killed Amb. Stevens and three other Americans: Months of fatal, flagrant neglect of consulate security for the purpose of gaining votes.

------------------------------------------------------

CBS News - Breaking News, U.S., World, Business, Entertainment & Video

The Obama administration -- and the State Department in particular -- has been accused by Republican lawmakers and some former U.S. officials who worked in Libya of ignoring warning signs and even rejecting pleas for increased security around American offices in the country ahead of the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, which left U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three others dead.

The House Oversight Committee will begin questioning three senior State Department staff on Capitol Hill Wednesday over claims that dozens of U.S. security personnel were removed from Libya in the six months leading up to the attack, in spite of alleged requests to increase personnel levels from American officials on the ground.

According to one of the key witnesses expected to testify before the committee this week, even Ambassador Stevens himself had repeatedly requested more security personnel, but was turned down.

Lt. Col. Andy Wood, the former head of a U.S. Special Forces "Site Security Team" in Libya, has told CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson that he and many other senior staff at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, "felt we needed more, not less" security personnel in the country, but were told "to do with less.

For what reasons, I don't know."

This begins to get at the real scandal in Benghazi.

Obama never claimed he had defeated Al Qaeda.
 

Forum List

Back
Top