No Marines in Benghazi a decision made by the SoS / State Department; Threats IGNORED

easyt65

Diamond Member
Aug 4, 2015
90,307
61,235
2,645
The State Department was FULLY Aware of the Middle East-wide threat of attack on the anniversary of 9/11/01 promised / forewarned for 9/11/12. Only an idiot would NOT have embassies ands their security details on the highest alert conditions that day, completely ready to fend off any attack and save / protect American lives.

So how in the hell did the State Department not only have denied hundreds of pleas for more security in Benghazi AND also have removed 14 members of Ambassador Stevens' security detail - despite his opposition to doing so - AFTER 2 terrorist attacks in the weeks leading up to 9/11/12 YET had no Marines guarding Stevens / Stevens' compound?

Colonel: Hillary Made Decision Not to Post Marines at Benghazi - Breitbart


The State Department was not only aware of the Middle East-wide threat of attack against US Embassies on 9/11/12, they were also aware of the call for Stevens assassination by an Al Qaeida leader in retaliation for the death of an Al Qaeida leader from Benghazi by drone strike several months earlier.


"In June 2012, nearly one thousand Islamist militants swarmed the square at the downtown courthouse in Benghazi, Libya, in what State Department personnel described as ―an unprecedented show of force.‖1 The militants arrived in 150-200 heavily armed vehicles and waived the black flags long associated with Islamist extremism.2 The two-day rally was hosted by Ansar al-Sharia, an extremist group which was designated a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the State Department earlier this year."

In the months leading up to 9/11/12 - the date the threat warnings warned of Middle East-wide attacks would happen nearly 1,000 terrorists in 150-200 heavily armed vehicles show up...and Hillary and the State department did NOTHING to protect Ambassador Stevens.
- They did not pull him out, as every other nation did with their people.
- They did not send in additional security / Marines -
- They didn't even put a military Quick Response Team on alert in case something went wrong


"Also in June 2012, militants used an improvised explosive device to blow a hole in the wall surrounding U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi – the second such attack against the compound that year. Elsewhere in Benghazi, the U.K. – America‘s closest ally and intelligence partner – shuttered its office and withdrew its staff after a rocket-propelled grenade attack on the British Ambassador‘s convoy injured two security officers."

Hillary left Stevens in Benghazi, refusing to make the call to pull him out because it would reflect negatively n Obama's false re-election claim that the 'War on Terror' was over and 'Al Qaeida was on the run'.

"U.S. intelligence agencies provided extensive warning of the deteriorating security environment in eastern Libya, including al-Qaeda‘s expanding operations and the mounting risk to U.S. personnel and facilities.4 These threats were well-understood by even the most senior officials in Washington; then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has testified that she ―was certainly aware‖ of this reporting, as well as the fact that extremists claiming to be affiliated with al-Qaeda were active in the area.5"

http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/sit...es/HFAC Majority Staff Report on Benghazi.pdf
 
"A recently released bipartisan report by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence reveals the depth and breadth of what U.S. intelligence agencies knew. This report found that the agencies ―produced hundreds of analytic reports…providing strategic warning that militias and terrorist and affiliated groups had the capability and intent to strike U.S. and Western facilities and personnel in Libya.‖


Both before and after the attacks in Benghazi, President Obama promoted a flawed and deeply misleading public narrative in which he claimed that al-Qaeda was ―'decimated',‖ ―'on the run',‖ and ―'on the path to defeat'.‖ Yet those on the ground in Libya faced a surge in violence and increasing evidence of terrorist activity; they appealed to Washington for added security."

HUNDREDS or pleas for additional security were denied. The State Department made the decision NOT to use Marines to protect Stevens. 14 Members of Stevens INADEQUATE security force were even taken away prior to the final attack and his death on 9/11/12.

 
If they hadn't ignored the warnings and had done as the Brits and the Red Cross did there would have been no Benghazi.

To bad people, Hitlery for one, can't be arrested for incompetence. She would have landed in jail back in 2012.

Imagine. That incompetent bitch wants to be POTUS. Good Lord.
 
"Lieutenant Colonel Andrew Wood, who led a U.S. military team that, among other things, supplemented diplomatic security in Libya, recommended that the State Department consider pulling out of Benghazi altogether. After seeing the U.K., United Nations, and International Committee of the Red Cross exit Benghazi, Lieutenant Colonel Wood remarked that ―it was apparent to me that we were the last [Western] flag flying in Benghazi. We were the last thing on their target list to remove from Benghazi.‖8 Tragically, his warnings went unheeded.

Despite the growing danger in Libya, State Department officials in Washington denied the requests for increased security from U.S. personnel on the ground. Instead, the Department insisted on aggressively reducing security support in Libya, disregarding numerous indications that this assistance was still necessary. There is widespread agreement that these actions led to a wholly inadequate security posture in Benghazi, with deadly consequences.9 On September 11, 2012, terrorists, including those affiliated with al-Qaeda, attacked U.S. facilities in Benghazi, killing U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, and U.S. officials Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods, and Glen Doherty.10 This was a tragic loss of life, and it served to embolden America‘s enemies."

The State Department - HILLARY'S State Department - ignored the NUMEROUS reports, the overwhelming evidence, the massive threat to life, rejected hundreds of pleas for more security, and even REDUCED the number of security personnel on the ground in Benghazi, failed to put QRF forces on alert, refused to pull Stevens out, and her incompetence, rejection of factual threat reporting, and politically-motivated actions directly resulted in the NEEDLESS deaths of 4 Americans.

ANYONE who wants Hillary Clinton to be the next President of the United States should read this report. She could not even run the State Department and do what was required to keep 4 (FOUR) Americans safe because she places partisan politics ahead of Americans' safety....so there is no way in the hell she should be entrusted her with the lives of EVERY American citizen!


http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/sit...es/HFAC Majority Staff Report on Benghazi.pdf
 
Liberals claim that the ARB's findings exempt the State Department and Hillary Clinton of any wrong-doing; however, it has been proven that political motivations and actions compromised the ARB's make-up and actions, rendering the investigation and final report incomplete, inaccurate, and lacking. It also DID find State Department officials at fault and points out that the State Department, the Secretary of State, nor the President has ever taken action against them:

"Committee Members have demanded that the appropriate State Department officials be held accountable for their ill-advised decisions, so that similar mistakes are not repeated. Yet neither the White House nor the State Department have stepped up to this responsibility. Instead, the Obama Administration has repeatedly pointed to the final report of the Benghazi Accountability Review Board (―ARB‖) as the definitive assessment of accountability.

Unfortunately, the Benghazi ARB‘s work was seriously deficient in several respects, most notably in its failure to review or comment on the actions of the Department‘s most senior officials. While the ARB did cite four Department personnel (including one political appointee) for their underperformance, the Department‘s top officials – including Clinton, her deputies, and the Under Secretary of State for Management – escaped any meaningful scrutiny, as did other senior Department officials involved in security decisions and Libya policy. For example, although Secretary Clinton herself championed the U.S. intervention in Libya in early 2011, and testified to the Committee that she was ―engaged…in the issues relating to the deteriorating threat environment‖ in Libya,11 the ARB never interviewed her or her deputies. Moreover, other senior officials who admitted to their involvement in security-related decisions, such as Under Secretary of State for Management Patrick F. Kennedy, were not reprimanded by the ARB.
Committee investigators believe that these omissions could be related to the fact that Secretary Clinton selected four out of the ARB‘s five members, while other Department officials like Under Secretary Kennedy played some role in developing its initial roster of prospective members.12 While legally permissible, this compromised the report‘s independence and impartiality. To counter the potential for abuse in future ARB investigations, Chairman Royce

has introduced legislation, discussed below, to limit the influence of the Secretary and other Department personnel in this selection process.



While the State Department has repeatedly cited the ARB‘s report to deflect criticism of its senior leadership, it has refused to meaningfully discipline any of the four employees that the ARB did fault.13"
 
The report points to the fact that Secretary of State John Kerry LIED to the committee, claiming that the careers of State Department personnel had been 'ended'; however, findings show none of the personnel were fired. They were transferred, given other jobs, and several were allowed to retire with full benefits.


"To this day, none of the agency‘s personnel have been held accountable in a meaningful way for their flawed decisions about security in Benghazi. The ―talking points‖ episode further revealed a Department leadership more interested in its reputation than an accurate accounting of the facts. Tellingly, the Department went for a historically long period – including the entirety of Secretary Clinton‘s tenure – without a permanent Inspector General, a position central to ensuring a culture of accountability."

The State Department under Hillary Clinton, and Hillary Clinton as demonstrated by herself in ignoring her own policies, laws, etc as seen in regards to her e-mail scandal, worried more about 'reputation' and the complete LACK of accountability more than of protecting American lives and our national security!
 
We must learn to ignore Hillary's numerous skeletons in her palatial closet, and condemn that nasty Donald...you know...like libs do.
 
This issue is dead dude.
This OP is nothing more than.........
giphy.gif
 
Your boys grilled her on national television for 11 hrs and accomplished nothing. You lost the fight that day. It's over.

Hmmmm....YOUR opinion or this fact-filled damning report on the failures of Hillary Clinton and the State Department she ran?! Sorry, HS, but I am going to have to go with the fact-based report.
 
Ambassador Stevens did not reside in Benghazi

Ambassador Stevens REFUSED extra security when making his trip to Benghazi on 9/11

Liberals did NOT say the SOS was not at fault, the REPUBLICAN LEAD house intelligence committee, and 7 other Republican lead investigations said she was not to blame...

They, the committees know more than we do about the full situation, and on why they came to these conclusions...
 
Ignore all the lies and deaths with the Benghazi scandal....cause like like like it was a long time ago...so says the easily duped.
 

Forum List

Back
Top