No Benghazi Stand Down Order

[Slice The Great]

They were in Benghazi illegally arming terrorists.

 

[Slice The Great]

We know the carrier group

was given the stand down order.

 

[Slice The Great]

 

[XponentialChaos]

I'm sure THIS time, you'll get something from investigating Benghazi.

19872987927th time is the charm.

 

[sakinago]

We know the carrier group View attachment 215809 was given the stand down order.

Again with the appeal to ignorance? No wonder you took the obscure YouTube video, and fog of war narritive hook line and sinker. SMH, can you make real arguments not based entirely on logical fallacies.

Unclassified cables between Benghazi and Obama Administration

Executive Summary Brief - Benghazi | Benghazi | Barack Obama

“Both Ham and Gaouette attempted to launch ready response teams in the region capable of provided the much needed assistance during the seven hour long assault on Benghazi. Both were then relieved of command for their actions, described by the US Military as “allegations of inappropriate leadership judgment.”

General Ham immediately had a rapid response unit ready and communicated to the Pentagon that he had a unit ready to deploy to Benghazi. Then, General Ham received the order to stand down. His response was “screw it,” - he was going to help anyway.

Within minutes after issuing an order to deploy his ready response team, Ham’s second in command apprehended the General and told him that he was now relieved of his command. Ham knows who issued the order to STAND DOWN as well as the order to relieve him of his command at AFRICOM.

Adm. Gaouette had also received the startling requests for support as the attack unfolded in Benghazi. Like Ham, he readied a response from Carrier Strike Group Three (CSG-3). Gaouette was also ordered to STAND DOWN and like Ham, he decided to refuse those orders. Gaouette readied vital intelligence and communications operations for an extraction effort to be launched by Ham.“

General Ham Admiral Gaouette Relieved Of Duty

CNN confirms WND reporting on gun-running in Benghazi - WND

So Obama just happened to can the 2 generals in question out of the blue...right. Okay so the administration lied about the whole YouTube video, but they wouldn’t lie about anything else that happened that night, right? The administration was just destroying weapons for the libiyan people...they can’t speak for the CIA though, I mean president or not, who knows what’s going on over there amiright. It’s not like Obama wanted to oust Assad or anything, so what reason would they be running guns?

 

[sakinago]

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

 

[Slice The Great]

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

Can you post a link to evidence the administration told a bold face lie about what sparked an attack? Thanks.

 

[Slice The Great]

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

Can you post links to evidence the survivors were waiting for air cover and that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain? Thanks.

 

[sakinago]

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

Can you post a link to evidence the administration told a bold face lie about what sparked an attack? Thanks.

I already did, it’s from the horses own mouth (all the cable wire transcripts and executive summation). Please tell me you don’t still believe in the YouTube video thing. You aren’t that dumb...I hope. That one was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Do you have anything to offer besides an appeal to ignorance?

 

[Slice The Great]

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

Can you post a link to evidence the administration told a bold face lie about what sparked an attack? Thanks.

I already did, it’s from the horses own mouth (all the cable wire transcripts and executive summation). Please tell me you don’t still believe in the YouTube video thing. You aren’t that dumb...I hope. That one was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Do you have anything to offer besides an appeal to ignorance?

Post a photo of the of the cable saying the administration told a bold face lie about what sparked an attack. Thanks

 

[depotoo]

Link?

There are only two possible reasons for the lack of response during the 13 hour Benghazi attack. The most likely reason is a stand down order given how close in proximity CIA forces were. The other possibility is that the CIA personnel were too scared to get their asses over their and fight. Your 5 million dollar bet is a joke because you know it is impossible to prove or disprove a verbal order.

There was a massive response the attack on the diplomatic mission in Benghazi.

Feb 17 arrived at the diplomatic mission minutes after the the attack started.

The CIA Annex sent a six man rescue team to the diplomatic mission.

The CIA in Tripoli sent a seven man team to Benghazi.

The Libyan Shield sent 50 machine gun trucks to the CIA annex.

The Libyan Air Force sent a C-130 to transport the Americans from Benghazi to Tripoli.

The U. S. Air Force sent a C-17 to transport the Americans from Tripoli to Germany.

Obama sent two special forces units, a Marine Fast Platoon and naval assets.

 

[sakinago]

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

Can you post links to evidence the survivors were waiting for air cover and that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain? Thanks.

Ok so you still believe it was just a random protest, that they happened to bring artillery too...Dude I’ve given you the freaking memos and transcripts. You have been lied too, that whole narrative has been proven false long ago...but your still going to stick with the story from a guy who claimed to be asleep at 530 pm during the whole incedent vs the people who were actually there and saw their friends die...because they wanted to

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

Can you post a link to evidence the administration told a bold face lie about what sparked an attack? Thanks.

dear god, you sound just like the women who meets up her friends for brunch and is reluctant to take off her sunglasses until they insist, to reveal a black eye, and she immediately starts saying “silly me I just fell down the stairs, again. But he really didn’t mean it, and promised to never do it again, and I was kind of out of line, plus I love him so.”

Dude, I just gave you the freaking transcripts from the horses mouth. Literally all the memos back and forth from the year before until 2 or so weeks after 9/11 2012. It’s been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the whole YouTube video and fog of war narrative was a flat out lie. Even CNN and MSNBC reported it, for the whole 2 mins they did to cover their own asses. Like we have the email directives saying “let’s blame this on this one video.” An executive summary isn’t good enough for you??? What more proof do you need?

And after all this, you’re still going with the guys story, who claims he fell asleep at 530 PM, and slept through the whole thing...over the guys who were actually there fighting for their lives and watched their friends die. The same story that Obama doesn’t even attempt to push anymore. The same story that’s been proven so false even CNN had to say “ok, that wasn’t true, but that’s old news.” So the guy and his administration who actually lied, is telling the truth over the guys on the ground who got zero support during a 7 hour firefight, while the whitehouse had a direct drone feed of what was happening.

But yea, the guys who were actually there are the liars, because they just wanted to make money. It’s not like Obama, during a presidential election with not even 2 months to go, had zero motivation to lie about it...even though he did, and it came out. Surprise, an obscure YouTube video with 1000 views did not spark an attack that was planned at least 10 days before among people who didn’t even have access to the internet.

Jesus Christ, even when they admit to the shit they did, like the IRS, y’all still claim it never happend. I’m at a loss of how much more evidence you need. I gave you the fuhreaking transcripts. Fuck all the other mountains of inexcusable evidence. That’s from the administration itself. Yet you’re still denying it. Ridiculous.

 

[Slice The Great]

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

Can you post links to evidence the administration lied both about the cause of the attack, and about it being a coordinated attack? Thanks.

 

[Slice The Great]

Link?
View attachment 215860 View attachment 215861 View attachment 215862

There are only two possible reasons for the lack of response during the 13 hour Benghazi attack. The most likely reason is a stand down order given how close in proximity CIA forces were. The other possibility is that the CIA personnel were too scared to get their asses over their and fight. Your 5 million dollar bet is a joke because you know it is impossible to prove or disprove a verbal order.

There was a massive response the attack on the diplomatic mission in Benghazi.

Feb 17 arrived at the diplomatic mission minutes after the the attack started.

The CIA Annex sent a six man rescue team to the diplomatic mission.

The CIA in Tripoli sent a seven man team to Benghazi.

The Libyan Shield sent 50 machine gun trucks to the CIA annex.

The Libyan Air Force sent a C-130 to transport the Americans from Benghazi to Tripoli.

The U. S. Air Force sent a C-17 to transport the Americans from Tripoli to Germany.

Obama sent two special forces units, a Marine Fast Platoon and naval assets.

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

What does the reason Ambassador Stevens wanted a diplomatic mission in Benghazi, have to do with whether or not there was a stand down order?

 

[Slice The Great]

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

What does the reason extra security wasn't given to Stevens have to do with whether or not there was a stand down order?

 

[Slice The Great]

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

What makes you think the contractors on the ground expected air cover? We know the CIA Chief never requested any air cover. What sort of air cover where they expecting? Links please?

 

[Slice The Great]

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

How do you know the administration is destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya? Links please. Thanks

 

[Faun]

I'll wager you $5,000,000, or a lower amount, if you don't have that much, that you can't prove by a preponderance of the credible evidence that the CIA Chief of Base in Benghazi ordered the CIA rescue team not to go assist the diplomatic mission that was under attack.View attachment 215349

Brennan was caught twice Perjuring himself before Congress, caught illegally spying on US citizens, caught illegally spying on the media, caught illegally spying on the US Senate, and spying on USSC Justices.

Brennan was caught illegally running good to terrorists...

Brennan collaborated with the FBI to hide Russian crimes associated with the KGB Bank's efforts to acquire Uranium One until after the sale went through...

Brennan's and the CIA knew about Russian hacking and interference but the Obama administration did nothing about it...

Brennan was caught briefing a fake Russian-authored report to Congress as legitimate Intel in order to deceive Congress to appoint a Special Counsel as part of a conspiracy to overthrow the newly elected President.

And you claim the heroes of Benghazi - who fought the very terrorists Barry helped take over Libya, who were trying to kill the US Ambassador and other Americans - liars?!

Obama, himself, and Hillary both lied about the attack, calling it a 'Protest over a Video' ... much like he once called the Fort Hood Terrorist attack a 'Case of Workplace Violence'.

Obama, Hillary, Brennan...they all have been proven to have lied about the Benghazi attack ... but snowflakes call the heroes of Benghazi the liars.

Obama disappeared when the attack began. No one knows where he was.... Everyone knows where Paronto was - he was fighting to save Americans that never should have been in harm's way on 9/11/12.

They did not lie about the video. You’re the one who is lying.

Fourth, the Committee concludes that after the attacks, the early intelligence assessments and the Administration's initial public narrative on the causes and motivations for the attacks were not fully accurate. There was a stream of contradictory and conflicting intelligence that came in after the attacks. The Committee found intelligence to support CIA's initial assessment that the attacks had evolved out of a protest in Benghazi; but it also found contrary intelligence, which ultimately proved to be the correct intelligence. There was no protest. The CIA only changed its initial assessment about a protest on September 24, 2012, when closed caption television footage became available on September 18, 2012 (two days after Ambassador Susan Rice spoke), and after the FBI began publishing its interviews with U.S. officials on the ground on September 22, 2012.

http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/Benghazi Report.pdf​

 

[Slice The Great]

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

What makes you think the administration passed the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA? Links to evidence? Thanks.

 

[sakinago]

Again, the administration told a bold face lie (a shitty lie that made no sense) about what sparked an attack that was clearly planned to the American people for months. The MM pushed that until it was proven otherwise (like it ever needed to be)...but you’re going to go along with the rest of the administrations story on what happened...and then take it further and call the survivors liars, who were fighting for their lives, waiting for air cover that their buddies died laser designating targets for in vain.

And your not going to take a second and ask some simple questions like:

Why did the administration lie both about the cause of the attack, and lie about it being a coordinated attack at all?

What were we doing in Libiya still when almost all of our allies pulled out long before that?

Why wasn’t the extra security given to Stevens that he requested for over and over for months, and even sent out an urgent message a week before attack saying he needed extra security ASAP?

Why did the contractors on the ground expect air cover that clearly never came, to the point where they were laser designating targets instead of shooting back up until they died?

Why is the administration busying itself with destroying weapons they deemed too old for Libya?

Why did the administration pass the buck on questions of gun running to the CIA?

If the CIA wasn’t involved with gun running, how did they not know about massive shipments of weapons happening within walking distance from them, from a well known arms dealer in their backyard, headed for our NATO ally turkey, and then distributed to “rebels” in Syria?

If the CIA was running guns, and the administration said they didn’t know about that or not...how the hell did the administration not know what their own CIA was doing?

But you totally believe no stand down order was given while a 7 hour battle raged that the whitehouse got prime seats too via 24/7 drone surveillance. They totally sent help from Tripoli, which was totally better than help from a carrier group, because a carrier group couldn’t handle that kind of heat, it was way too dangerous for them. But hey, here’s a better idea, Tripoli is only a little bit over 600 miles from Benghazi, let’s send a couple of SUVs over with some agents to help, that’ll do the trick. It’s a 12 hour drive, but it’s not like helicopters go 300 mph, or jets are supersonic or anything like that...what is this, back to the future part II, come on.

So the administration decided it was too dangerous for the carrier group to intervene, but before that they ignored all requests from Stevens begging for more security. So an ambassador could handle the heat, not a carrier group? Instead, we sent guys all the way from Tripoli, and that was somehow a better option? That’s the story you’re going with. Occams Razor?

What does the reason extra security wasn't given to Stevens have to do with whether or not there was a stand down order?

No no no, mo more moving goalposts for your silly delusion.

I want to hear you say that you 100% believe the YouTube narrative. I want to hear you say you believe the fog of war narrative.

Then I want you to prove to me, beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Obama’s administration didn’t lie about that (good luck, this is how you attempt to argue).

I’m not entertaining your appeals to ignorance anymore. Since you need it, I’ll show you how stupid your arguments have been. Hopefully you’ll take a step back and realize what I’ve been dealing with and how terrible your points have been. Honestly, at this point, I’m clearly the idiot for casting this many pearls before swine. Here’s one more freaking pearl for you. Maybe you’ll learn, because apparently from the horses mouth isn’t good enough.

“The appeal to ignorance is a fallacy based on the assumption that a statement must be true if it cannot be proven false—or false if it cannot be proven true. Also known as argumentum ad ignorantiam and the argument from ignorance.

The term argumentum ad ignorantiam was introduced by John Locke in his "Essay Concerning Human Understanding" in 1690.

Examples
Appeal to ignorance fallacy examples can include abstractions, the physically impossible to prove, and the supernatural.

For example, someone says that there's life in the universe because it hasn't been proven to not exist outside of our solar system or that UFOs have visited Earth. Perhaps a person postulates that every action human beings take is fated because no one has proven that people have free will. Or maybe someone says that ghosts exist because you can't prove that they don't; all of these are appeals to ignorance fallacies.

"One interesting aspect of the appeal to ignorance is that the same appeal can be used to support two conclusions that are diametrically opposed to each other. This paradox is a telltale clue that appeals to ignorance involve flawed reasoning. It is easy to see what is wrong with appeals to ignorance when the opposite arguments (ghosts exist—ghosts do not exist) are presented together and the lack of evidence on the issue under discussion is obvious. However, when the same fallacy surfaces in more complex debates and the appeal to ignorance is not as blatant, the strategy can be more difficult to recognize." (Wayne Weiten, "Psychology: Themes and Variations, Briefer Version," 9th ed. Wadsworth, Cengage, 2014)

Examples can be more mundane as well, such as the belief that a policy or law is good and working well just because no one has yet objected to it or the belief that every student in a class understands the material fully because no one has raised a hand to ask a question of the professor.

How They're Manipulated
People can use this fallacy to manipulate others because there is often an appeal to people's emotions within the proposed ideas.

The assertion then puts nonbelievers in the fallacy on the defensive, which is irrational, as the person proposing the idea should have the burden of proof, wrote S. Morris Engel, in the third edition of "With Good Reason" (St. Martin's Press, 1986).

Howard Kahane and Nancy Cavender, authors of "Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric," gave the example of Senator Joseph McCarthy, who accused a whole list of people of being communist without proof, severely damaging their reputations just because of the accusations:

"In 1950, when Senator Joseph R. McCarthy (Republican, Wisconsin), was asked about the fortieth name on a list of 81 names of people he claimed were communists working for the United States Department of State, he responded that 'I do not have much information on this except the general statement of the agency that there is nothing in the files to disprove his communist connections.'

"Many of McCarthy's followers took this absence of evidence as proof that the person in question was indeed a communist, a good example of the fallacy of appeal to ignorance. This example also illustrates the importance of not being taken in by this fallacy. No scrap of relevant evidence ever was presented against any of the people charged by Senator McCarthy, yet for several years he enjoyed great popularity and power; his 'witch hunt' ruined many innocent lives." (10th ed. Thomson Wadsworth, 2006)”


So how much more evidence do you want? Do you want and actually expect Obama and Hillary would come out hand-in-hand and hold a press conference to sheepishly say “yea we lied all about that...and we’re actually surprised
so many of y’all still believe all that.”