Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There was no doubt that it was a terrorist attack, there was no dubt in the Intelligence community that it was a terrorist attack, there was no doubt in the WH that is was a terrorist attack, there was no doubt in the State Dept that it was a terrorist attack. What was, and still seems to be, the case... is who?
Then why on Friday after the attack is the CIA producing talking points calling it a spontaneous attack inspired by events in Cairo and that people in Benghazi represent a mixed group of Libyan society, but also did include members of Al-Qaeda?
That is right. A lie is a lie is a lie. No matter who is doing it.
If the left truly believes that Obama and Hillary did the right thing before, during then I don't get why the left is all bent out of shape. Why are they fighting this, it does not make sense. They should want the facts to come out.
Agreed
It is amazing that the libs just don't want to know what happened. They would simply prefer that the hearings simply pack up, close, and forget about the whole thing. Why? They FEAR the truth and the damage it could potentially bring to Obama and Hillary.
Libs say they KNOW what happened, therefore there is no reason for an inquiry. Really? How many libs here were-
on the ground in Libya
in the White House when the information was coming in
a part of Africom and heard the responses to requests for help
with Clinton or Obama that evening
Currently, WE DON'T KNOW these things. However, after yesterday, we know a hell of a lot more than we did the day before. It sure smells bad for Hillary and Obama, particularly when Hicks stated that Hillary agreed the consulate should be evacuated. If she agreed, who over ruled her? Who is Hillary's boss? Who ordered the available troops to "stand down"? Who delayed the FBI evaluation of the crime scene for 18 days?
If they did nothing wrong then they have nothing to hide..right ?
The left should welcome these hearings to prove the Repubs are on a witch hunt..right ?
Exactly Tex, if they believe that Obama and Hillary did no wrong then why are they so outraged. Instead they should be more interested in knowing exactly what happened, exactly where the breakdown happened so they can change it to prevent it from happening again.
If Obama and Hillary did no wrong then wouldn't hearings prove it?
It is amazing that the libs just don't want to know what happened. They would simply prefer that the hearings simply pack up, close, and forget about the whole thing. Why? They FEAR the truth and the damage it could potentially bring to Obama and Hillary.
Libs say they KNOW what happened, therefore there is no reason for an inquiry. Really? How many libs here were-
on the ground in Libya
in the White House when the information was coming in
a part of Africom and heard the responses to requests for help
with Clinton or Obama that evening
Currently, WE DON'T KNOW these things. However, after yesterday, we know a hell of a lot more than we did the day before. It sure smells bad for Hillary and Obama, particularly when Hicks stated that Hillary agreed the consulate should be evacuated. If she agreed, who over ruled her? Who is Hillary's boss? Who ordered the available troops to "stand down"? Who delayed the FBI evaluation of the crime scene for 18 days?
They were fighting this from the beginning. Obviously we should have just believed it was because of the video.
We need to know where and why there was a break down to prevent it from happening in the future. Democrats should not be afraid of the answers if they think Obama and Hillary did not do anything wrong.
"Death is part of life," said Democrat Elijah Cummings, ranking Democrat.
None of the Democrats at the hearings will admit to the plain truth that everyone has know since early on in the investigation into the terrorist attack on our Embassy in Benghazi, that there was a "stand down" order given by the administration, that help was refused, and Americans allowed to die. Help was available, and ready to respond. They were ordered not to go in.
Further, there has been an intentional cover-up of the truth, with the White House treating it as a non-event, something that happened "a long time ago."
Yet the testimony reveals the truth.
Democrats are uninterested, which seems strange since, where other investigations initiated by Democrats have been concerned, they have always insisted, "It's the seriousness of the charge."
Apparently that only applies if it is a Republican under investigation.
All the people had died by the time the 2nd unit, that was told not to go, was ready to go to Benghazi. The help that was available was sent. In fact Doherty, who died, was part of a response team that was sent.
All the people had died by the time the 2nd unit, that was told not to go, was ready to go to Benghazi. The help that was available was sent. In fact Doherty, who died, was part of a response team that was sent.
How do they know when the attacks would stop? From what I am hearing Doherty was not a part of the response team, they were there for other purposes, they were on security detail. When they got the stand down order they went anyway.
Exactly Tex, if they believe that Obama and Hillary did no wrong then why are they so outraged. Instead they should be more interested in knowing exactly what happened, exactly where the breakdown happened so they can change it to prevent it from happening again.
If Obama and Hillary did no wrong then wouldn't hearings prove it?
You would think, as you stated, that if nothing questionable was done (or not done...), the current administration would welcome the hearings as a chance to clear the air, and put this thing to rest. The problem is, Democrats do not have the best track record of owning up to mistakes/failures. One of my favorite leadership quotes from my Army career was "If you are in charge, be in charge", meaning if you hold a leadership position, you also have the responsibility. You can delegate authority, but you cannot delegate responsibility. Part of what makes it lonely at the top. If you are the leader, you are ultimately responsible for everything your administration does or fails to do.
Another favorite was "Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way" but I will leave that one for later....
Exactly Democrats should not so uptight about the hearings they should welcome them. If I was accused of something that was not true you better damn well believe I would insist on "all" the facts coming out.
Hicks testified that our support among many Libyans is quite strong.
Hicks also testified that the terrorists, if they followed the usual pattern would have fled when they heard the first U.S. aircraft in the area. So, we couldn't even send a fighter or two? C'mon really?
What really floored me was hearing that the security forces for the diplomats consisted of a group of people with known terrorist ties and/or sympathies. Fox guarding the hen house?
Last edited by jimj; 05-09-2013 at 07:53 AM..
Reason: further thought
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
