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

[Dragonlady]

Every one of Acorns questions have been answered, by every report written about Benghazi, including the reports written by Republicans. The answer is that everything Acorn said was false. That's not how it happened.

Republicans are just desparate to keep the name Benghazi alive until the next presidential election, since they got nothing for it the first time. People are sick of all of the time and money wasted trying to find some scandal or coverup. The time and money would have been better spent trying to find a way to prevent it happened again.

Shame on Republicans, playing politics using the deaths of these fine people instead of trying to prevent a repeat of this tragedy.

 

[TheOldSchool]

You know, if there truly was a vast left-wing conspiracy involving the media, the faux Benghazi scandal would've been stamped out LOOOOOOOOOONNNNG ago!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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

This fails as a loaded question fallacy.

 

[BULLDOG]

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.

Of course I'm not saying that. The right is saying that. That's the only reason they ever cared about it in the first place. According to their warped theory, Obama, along with Hillary, the CIA, and everybody else involved lied about the cause of the Benghazi attack to fool people into electing him. That's what this stupid thread is about.

 

[Little-Acorn]

The answer is that everything Acorn said was false. That's not how it happened.

(yawn)

Chaffetz Administration Pretended June 6 Terror Attack on Benghazi Consulate Never Happened

Chaffetz: Administration Pretended June 6 Terror Attack on Benghazi Consulate 'Never Happened’
By Michael W. Chapman and Jon Street | October 10, 2012 | 6:45 PM EDT

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) said at a Wednesday hearing that the Obama administration acted as if a June 6 terrorist attack against the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, had never happened.

The attack--which happened more than three months before the Sept. 11 terrorist attack that killed four Americans including the U.S. ambassador--was a clear warning of the terror threat in the country and the need for heightened security at U.S. diplomatic facilities there.

Showing photographs of the June 6 bombing attack, Chaffetz said, “We didn’t talk about it. We pretended it didn’t happen.”

Chaffetz made his remarks during a hearing today before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which is investigating the Sept. 11 terrorist attack in Benghazi.

In an Oct. 2 letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Chaffetz listed acts of violence and terrorism against Western interests in Libya that occurred before the Sept. 11 attack. In the hearing today, Chaffetz specifically noted the incident that occurred on June 6, 2012, in Benghazi when, as the letter reads, “Under cover of darkness, assailants placed an IED on the north gate of Consulate Benghazi, blowing a hole in the security perimeter that was described by one individual as ‘big enough for forty men to go through.’”

In his remarks, Chaffetz said, “These pictures are of an attack that happened in Benghazi. The first was a so-called fish bomb. This is the compound in Benghazi before the attack. ... The second bombing was an improvised explosive device [IED] that was placed on the north gate, breaching the wall [on June 6]. It was a test by terrorists and it was successful, and we didn’t respond fully and adequately.”

“We didn’t acknowledge it,” said Chaffetz. “We didn’t talk about it. We pretended it didn’t happen. It was a terrorist attack on a U.S. asset in Libya and it was never exposed. We pretended it didn’t happen.”

“Well, guess what?” he said. “The third time the terrorists came to attack us they were even more successful, killing four Americans. I believe personally, with more assets, more resource -- just meeting the minimum standards -- we could have and should have saved the life of Ambassador Stevens and the other people that were there.”

“Now this was a massive attack, no doubt about it,” said Chaffetz. “We’re getting new details, and I believe, Mr. Chairman, the reason we have those details is because of this hearing. Mysteriously, the State Department decided to give a press briefing last night. We weren’t invited, certain news outlets weren’t invited. Any reasonable person looking at the security situation in Libya had to come to the conclusion that it was tumultuous at best.”

 

[Little-Acorn]

Why did Benghazi security fall short Seattle Times Newspaper

Tuesday, October 30, 2012 - Page updated at 08:00 p.m.

Why did Benghazi security fall short?
By MICHAEL R. GORDON, ERIC SCHMITT and MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT
The New York Times
WASHINGTON —

In the months leading up to the Sept. 11 attacks on the American diplomatic mission in Benghazi, the Obama administration received intelligence reports that Islamic extremist groups were operating training camps in the mountains near the Libyan city and that some of the fighters were "al-Qaida-leaning," according to U.S. and European officials.

The warning about the camps was part of a stream of diplomatic and intelligence reports that indicated that the security situation throughout the country, and particularly in eastern Libya, had deteriorated sharply since the United States reopened its embassy in Tripoli after the fall of Col. Moammar Gadhafi's government in September 2011.

By June, Benghazi had experienced a string of assassinations as well as attacks on the Red Cross and a British envoy's motorcade. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, who was killed in the September attack, emailed his superiors in Washington in August alerting them to "a security vacuum" in the city. A week before Stevens died, the American Embassy warned that Libyan officials had declared a "state of maximum alert" in Benghazi after a car bombing and thwarted bank robbery.

The number of State Department security agents at the compound in Benghazi fluctuated, sometimes dipping to as few as two. Five U.S. security agents were at the compound Sept. 11 — three stationed there and two traveling with Stevens.

The Americans were also able to call on the February 17 Martyrs Brigade, a militia supportive of the Libyan government. Yet another small group of unarmed Libyan guards stood watch at the gates.

When it came to weapons, the U.S. security team was outgunned. The Americans were equipped with M4 rifles and side arms. But Libya was rife with rocket-propelled grenades, machine guns, mortars and AK-47s.

Much of the security depended on maintaining a low profile. At one point, Nordstrom, the regional security officer, proposed establishing guard towers, but the State Department rejected that on the grounds that it would make the compound more conspicuous.

There was no doubt, however, that there were many in Benghazi who knew the compound's location. On June 6, a bomb was planted near the American Mission's outer wall, blowing out a 12-foot-wide hole. No one was injured.

On June 11, the lead vehicle of the British ambassador's convoy was hit by an armor-piercing rocket-propelled grenade, wounding a British medic and driver. The British envoy left Benghazi the next day, and the British post in the city was closed June 17.

About the same time, the Red Cross pulled out after it was attacked a second time. "When that occurred, it was apparent to me that we were the last flag flying in Benghazi; we were the last thing on their target list to remove," said Lt. Col. Andrew Wood, the head of the military security team in Tripoli.

In the event of a significant attack, Oliveira noted, the Americans were counting on the February 17th Brigade to rush to their aid, as it had during the June 6 bombing. The embassy had also established a series of "trip wires," classified benchmarks about intelligence on attack preparations or escalating unrest that would prompt the United States to evacuate the Benghazi compound. But the trip wires were not set off.

 

[Care4all]

The answer is that everything Acorn said was false. That's not how it happened.

(yawn)

Chaffetz Administration Pretended June 6 Terror Attack on Benghazi Consulate Never Happened

Chaffetz: Administration Pretended June 6 Terror Attack on Benghazi Consulate 'Never Happened’
By Michael W. Chapman and Jon Street | October 10, 2012 | 6:45 PM EDT

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) said at a Wednesday hearing that the Obama administration acted as if a June 6 terrorist attack against the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, had never happened.

The attack--which happened more than three months before the Sept. 11 terrorist attack that killed four Americans including the U.S. ambassador--was a clear warning of the terror threat in the country and the need for heightened security at U.S. diplomatic facilities there.

Showing photographs of the June 6 bombing attack, Chaffetz said, “We didn’t talk about it. We pretended it didn’t happen.”

Chaffetz made his remarks during a hearing today before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which is investigating the Sept. 11 terrorist attack in Benghazi.

In an Oct. 2 letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Chaffetz listed acts of violence and terrorism against Western interests in Libya that occurred before the Sept. 11 attack. In the hearing today, Chaffetz specifically noted the incident that occurred on June 6, 2012, in Benghazi when, as the letter reads, “Under cover of darkness, assailants placed an IED on the north gate of Consulate Benghazi, blowing a hole in the security perimeter that was described by one individual as ‘big enough for forty men to go through.’”

In his remarks, Chaffetz said, “These pictures are of an attack that happened in Benghazi. The first was a so-called fish bomb. This is the compound in Benghazi before the attack. ... The second bombing was an improvised explosive device [IED] that was placed on the north gate, breaching the wall [on June 6]. It was a test by terrorists and it was successful, and we didn’t respond fully and adequately.”

“We didn’t acknowledge it,” said Chaffetz. “We didn’t talk about it. We pretended it didn’t happen. It was a terrorist attack on a U.S. asset in Libya and it was never exposed. We pretended it didn’t happen.”

“Well, guess what?” he said. “The third time the terrorists came to attack us they were even more successful, killing four Americans. I believe personally, with more assets, more resource -- just meeting the minimum standards -- we could have and should have saved the life of Ambassador Stevens and the other people that were there.”

“Now this was a massive attack, no doubt about it,” said Chaffetz. “We’re getting new details, and I believe, Mr. Chairman, the reason we have those details is because of this hearing. Mysteriously, the State Department decided to give a press briefing last night. We weren’t invited, certain news outlets weren’t invited. Any reasonable person looking at the security situation in Libya had to come to the conclusion that it was tumultuous at best.”

What was the results of these hearings Acorn...what did they find out? This was 3 years ago when Chavetz grand standed in this hearing...

And when Chavetz says the term "we", is he including himself? Did Congress ignore the first attack as well, or did they INCREASE funding so they could have more money to secure it?

 

[NYcarbineer]

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.

So according to this conspiracy theory, Obama reduced the security in Benghazi, to make it easier for al Qaeda to kill Americans there,

because if al Qaeda killed Americans in Benghazi it would prove that Obama had defeated al Qaeda.

W. T. F??

 

[Wyatt earp]

Op it was just because Obama wanted to win, nothing more, he declared the Iraq war over, he declared Alquadi was losing. So he had rice go on television saying it was just about a stupid video

Its that simple

 

[HenryBHough]

Nice thought but I do not believe He can think far enough ahead. But, hey, Hillary was still "on the team" back then.....

 

[Care4all]

The bottom line is that Obama NEVER EVER SAID
THAT WE DEFEATED ALQAEDA....so why would he have to hide giving Benghazi help? YOU and right winger media, MADE THAT UP....

Thus this 'argument' falls flat, does it not?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Liberals seem reluctant to address this matter.

Not hard to guess why.

Because the notion is asinine

 

[Care4all]

And, Ambassador Stevens TURNED DOWN the extra security offered him for that day in Benghazi.

 

[Little-Acorn]

So according to this conspiracy theory, Obama reduced the security in Benghazi, to make it easier for al Qaeda to kill Americans there, because if al Qaeda killed Americans in Benghazi it would prove that Obama had defeated al Qaeda.

As usual, when the desperate leftist fanatics can't refute what a conservative said, they pretend he "said" something else instead.

Why do you say Obama reduced security "to make it easier for al Qaeda to kill Americans"?

Nobody else in the thread has told such a silly fib. Only you. Don't you ever wonder why the only way you can make your agenda look good, is to lie?

 

[Misty]

The terror groups didn't even know about the video until Hillary and Obama and the rest of them, started blaming the video. Which in turn caused more violence and death.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Liberals seem reluctant to address this matter.
Not hard to guess why.

Because the notion is asinine

That sound you just heard was yet another liberal running away from the issue as fast as he can, with his tail tucked firmly between his hind legs.

Back to the subject:
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.

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.

 

[konradv]

The terror groups didn't even know about the video until Hillary and Obama and the rest of them, started blaming the video. Which in turn caused more violence and death.

You have no way of knowing that. It's just some made up BS to justify continuing an argument that doesn't really mean anything. So what if they say was the exact cause was in error? It hardly justifies investigations with no aim beyond scoring political points.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Liberals seem reluctant to address this matter.
Not hard to guess why.

Because the notion is asinine

That sound you just heard was yet another liberal running away from the issue as fast as he can, with his tail tucked firmly between his hind legs.

Back to the subject:
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.

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.

 

[Care4all]

The terror groups didn't even know about the video until Hillary and Obama and the rest of them, started blaming the video. Which in turn caused more violence and death.

That's simply not true. ALL reports and investigations on Benghazi that the Republicans have put forth show that the movement began when their local news showed the protests going on throughout the world on that evening's news for the area.

 

[Little-Acorn]

The leftist fanatics have been driven from the argument, and are reduced to posting silly pictures, lying about what conservatives said, and drawing clown faces.