Looks like the Clintons are not going to take the fall for this...
Posted on 10/25/2012 9:17:59 AM PDT by Perseverando
'The regime is barely holding its campaign together'
PALM BEACH, Fla. – New information suggesting the Obama administration was fully aware of the terror attack at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, within two hours of the breakout of violence is being blasted as a cover-up of major proportions, with the help of national media who are ignoring the revelation.
“This dwarfs Watergate, weapons of mass destruction, whatever,” said radio host Rush Limbaugh Wednesday afternoon.
“This dwarfs Iran-Contra, about which the media spent three solid years trying to take out Ronald Reagan. The latest shoe to drop in the Benghazi disaster is the news that the State Department was e-mailing about the attack on the consulate and the terrorists who they thought were behind it within two hours, and the e-mails went to the Situation Room of the White House. Obama knew.”
For weeks after the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, Obama and his surrogates proffered that the violence was merely an improptu response to an anti-Muslim video.
But reports today from several agencies including Reuters and CBS News reveal the administration knew precisely what was going on almost immediately, courtesy of emails.
Sharyl Attkisson at CBS says: “At 4:05 p.m. Eastern time, on September 11, an alert from the State Department Operations Center was issued to a number government and intelligence agencies. Included were the White House Situation Room, the office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the FBI.
“‘US Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack” — “approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well. Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four COM (Chief of Mission/embassy) personnel are in the compound safe haven.’”
And Reuters reports the emails specifically mention the Libyan group called Ansar al-Sharia had asserted responsibility for the attacks.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
I haven’t served in the military; but have read this movie shows things pretty accurately of what the SEALs do.
I was thinking while watching the movie; that 2 brave SEALs and a ambassador were abandoned by someone in DC during the embassy attack.
It just made me angrier and more upset as the movie went on thinking about this.
These people give their lives so I can do all the stuff I do here freely and safely; and then we abandon them to die at the hands of savages.
Someone needs to be held accountable for this. The truth needs to come out.
” I don’t see Willard or anyone else in the GOP offering that kind of “common sense reform”... “
FWIW, here is my take on Romney. He will attempt to fix the economy, but as far as anything else is concerned, he will likely do nothing. He IS a talented financier. All we can do is try to hold his feet to the fire, and hope he causes little other damage. What Obama would do in a second term is too unspeakably depressing to think about.
Zero has had blood on his hands since he won in illinois. This won’t stop the African vote though...
“Powell: I’m still a Republican but will ‘stick with’ Obama in 2012”
While true, the point I was trying to make is that F&F is obviously ("on its face") worse. (In the sense that it's clearer, cleaner; there's nothing in international politics/setup to distract from the event -- therefore more readily perceived, that is more 'obvious'.) There is simply no need for conspiracy theory, at any level, to insinuate wrong-doing -- the operation itself is wrongdoing. (Though it would be stupid to dismiss 'conspiracy' out of hand WRT F&F considering the lack of action/results in prosecuting it indicates a level of corruption that is frightening to contemplate.)
Stevens was gun-running arms for the Muslim Brotherhood, a fact I believe personally, was Obama’s reason for inaction. He let Stevens and the 3 special ops vets die so that no one would testify to questions by Congress about what they were doing there to begin with. This is Fast & Furious on steroids.
And if Congress is so impotent in pursuing the 'weaker' incident, which has stronger evidence and no questions of jurisdiction, then we should consider it no surprise that nothing happens due this "on steroids" incident. Right?
The Muslim Brotherhood being armed by us? You know we’ll at some time in the near future see these arms used against us here in America.
This is actually Par-for-course, the US has a horrible record for arming its future enemies.
Afghanistan is a perfect example, and one of the reasons we have difficulty there now is precisely related to our past handling of that country. (We armed them with the heavy implication, if not outright promise, that we would actually help them revolt against their then communist-occupiers... that help did not actually materialize in any appreciable way. The inhabitants of the region remember this and, understandably if not rightly, have a distrust of our presence and intention.)
Again, this practice of arming [would-be-]enemies goes back far enough that we may as well start calling it an American tradition. It is one of the reasons I think we ought to really consider what our presences and supports abroad are actually doing, and seriously consider simply ending all foreign aid by the government.
“Nobody died at the Watergate. Four Americans died in Bengazi. 0bama has blood on his hands.”
All true. When you think about it, there’ve been probably 100 situations more awful than Watergate since Nixon resigned. For some reason — because it’s easy, I guess — the dems will always use Watergate as the be-all and end-all to wrongdoing.
Watergate was a nothingburger in the whole scheme of things. A few bumbling clowns screwing up a simple office B&E to get a few files. The media, with the rest of the left, blew it up to get Nixon because they despised him so much. Instead of trying to cover it up, Nixson should’ve laughed it off.
Obama calling the deaths of our guys “a bump in the road” is one of the most disgusting things I’ve ever heard. How horrible must their families feel?
Looks like the Clintons are not going to take the fall for this...
I understand, but the point remains that F&F is infinitely easier to prove... and nothing's happened regarding it's "prosecution." It is very likely nothing will, as at this point it would revel levels of corruption that would make most Americans (all but the hardcore "the state can do no wrong" statist-types) question the legitimacy of the government.
How many Christians do you think have died since obama became president?
Your question reveals either an extremely shallow theology, or a politicized worldview using the religious as an mere excuse.
Did not God say:
And for your lifeblood I will require a reckoning: from every beast I will require it and from man. From his fellow man I will require a reckoning for the life of man.That is to say that murder is a capital offense in the sight of God, and therefore commanded to be a capitally punished. (Therefore, religion is irrelevant in the [guilt of the] case of murder, it might be a motive but that is as far as you can go with it.)“Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image.
0bama doesn't just have blood on his hands, it's flowing down his arms, dripping all over him, and staining everything he does.
So was killing Vince Foster.
There is a stench of treason in the air over our country. God grant that we dispel it, and bring to justice any who have helped create it, or tried to cover it up. Wherever that trail may lead.
Was Benghazi an Al Quida Gun Running Operation gone Horribly Worng?
http://www.jeffhead.com/benghazisurprise.htm
Watergate was a popcorn fart...
Bengazi is virtual diarrhea.. from cholera...
The above post directly contradicts itself. We armed them, but we did not actually help them?! "That help did not actually materialize in any appreciable way." But the Soviets were driven from Afghanistan? This is a rewrite of history. It is like saying the Vietnamese were not really aided by Communist China or the Soviet Union.
'Help' as in manpower. While, say, lending tools to someone who is changing their engine could be called 'help' it's far more correct if you were to assist in the operation than just lending the hardware.
But the Soviets were driven from Afghanistan?
Yes; not by the US, but by the natives. (Again w/o much actual help [manpower] from the US.)
This is a rewrite of history. It is like saying the Vietnamese were not really aided by Communist China or the Soviet Union.
No, what I'm saying is that our offers to Afghanistan were [at least perceived by them] more akin to that which you are citing (or better China/Korea): actual manpower and arms. Because our aid to them never was that they were disappointed, that disappointment has 'fermented' into wariness and bitterness, or some combination of the two.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.