Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Nope.......Obama and Hillary are a couple of liberal morons who have their heads in the clouds, feel they're the smartest person in the room, and are literally tyrants.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 The gate guards and patrols had been replaced by Libyans...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.
An al Qaeda like group attacked them.Wow, that is some real FICTIONAL story writing little acorn....!That takes care of the obligatory "Let's try to change the subject to Republicans" non-response.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.
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.
Did Alqaeda attack Benghazi? Yes or No?
After months of the Obama administration reducing security at the compound before a major election, even as attacks increased.An al Qaeda like group attacked them.
Like the liberals on this board, her sole concern then and now, is to deflect people from looking onto the question of WHY.Why? Hillary doesn't seem to know or care.
After months of the Obama administration reducing security at the compound before a major election, even as attacks increased.An al Qaeda like group attacked them.
Notice how the liberals are avoiding this thread like the plague.Like the liberals on this board, her sole concern then and now, is to deflect people from looking onto the question of WHY.Why? Hillary doesn't seem to know or care.
As usual, when the desperate leftist fanatics can't refute what a conservative said, they pretend he "said" something else instead.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.
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?
You have a REPUBLICAN saying that the Administration ignore the June 6th attack. Facts say otherwise. Ambassador Stevens believed that the Libyans would protect him because he was considered a friend of the Libyan people, and he declined extra security that day.
All American Middle Eastern embassies and outposts were put on high alert for the 10th anniversary of 9-11, and yet you clowns continue to try to find some evidence of conspiracy. The more information that comes out about Benghazi, the more desperate and partisan you appear. Even the Republican lead investigations can find no evidence of a coverup, lies or failure on the part of the administration to act.
Talk about beating a dead horse.
Why have the explanations and excuses by the administration changed so many times?
You think they were?
As usual, when the desperate leftist fanatics can't refute what a conservative said, they pretend he "said" something else instead.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.
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?
You have a REPUBLICAN saying that the Administration ignore the June 6th attack. Facts say otherwise. Ambassador Stevens believed that the Libyans would protect him because he was considered a friend of the Libyan people, and he declined extra security that day.
All American Middle Eastern embassies and outposts were put on high alert for the 10th anniversary of 9-11, and yet you clowns continue to try to find some evidence of conspiracy. The more information that comes out about Benghazi, the more desperate and partisan you appear. Even the Republican lead investigations can find no evidence of a coverup, lies or failure on the part of the administration to act.
Talk about beating a dead horse.
Why have the explanations and excuses by the administration changed so many times?
They haven't. You lost. Get over it.
None of that is true. And Stevens himself turned down more security, twice.So, why was the security at the Benghazi compound progressively reduced month after month, even as attacks became worse and more frequent, and they sent message after message asking for MORE security and guards?
BS, utter...Report: Officials say Stevens turned down extra Benghazi securityStevens asked for security in 600 separate emails. All ignored.
LINK....on the 600 requests....Stevens asked for security in 600 separate emails. All ignored.
over how many years were these supposed 600 requests, and by how many people? maybe C-span has the video of it?