Actually… and I’m sure you realize this… what you just said is pure, 100% spin, straight from the fraud machine that wants you to believe that the President of the United States is Evil and has somehow replaced the entire civil service chain of command right down to the Station Chiefs and Chiefs of Mission with people who don’t care if Americans on their team live or die.
Not only is it disgusting- It’s completely and totally ridiculous.
I’ll calm down as soon as you come down from the lofty perch on which you rest.
I was being a little facetious and overdramatic especially about golfing. It draws you guys out every time. I don’t listen to talk radio and thanks for insulting my intelligence by the way.
I will agree with you on one thing. The truth is stranger than fiction certainly on other controversies. You just cannot make up the ineptness and incompetence of this administration. THAT is what is disgusting and totally ridiculous.
I’d rather this and other political nonsense not be distracting us from the real issues. Either way, RINO and conservatives alike will be demonized by apologists for holding people accountable.
You act as if since some guy wrote an apolitical book about Benghazi then it must be the gospel. The full truth of what happened is out? That’s awesome but what you don’t understand or fail to recognize is that is not Obama’s staff ANSWERING for what they did or mainly didn’t do. And I don’t mean the day Benghazi went down.
Just because some of the events may have been classified at some level does not mean there was not a cover up.
That said, for the record, I do not believe there was a deliberate cover up; I think the administration was trying to politicize the event and could not keep various stories straight. The appearance of impropriety leads one to conclude the administration a) did not know what was going on (events leading to the attack) or b) did not care about what was going on (regarding responding to the attack). In any case, there were many questions out of the event that have not been adequately answered (some of the questions are in the book), and hiding behind “it’s super top secret” does nothing to quell the inquisitive, especially when most of that whole thing is open source and has been for quite a while.
You’re never going to know everything, because that’s just the way it is, but beating your chest and saying “WE WANT ANSWERS!” begs a person to ask “What is your question?”
Not to be a prick, but did you read the book? There were a few questions, maybe more then 5 but less than 15, that were answered with conflicting answers, and never followed up. Maybe they were answered and the answers simple, logical, but if so were answered in such a way as to be clear as mud and as confusing as hell. To answer your question, I do not recall the questions raised in the book, but what the author and source material wanted to know I’d like to know.
Your response of “that’s just the way it is” sounds suspiciously like “what difference does it make?” I am not suggesting a lynch mob because of **** ups, but if **** ups occurred because of poor leadership and management, poorly designed SOPs and TTPs and PACE plans, or intentional damage control instead of managing the problem, then “that’s just the way it is” does not cut it.
I have been in the mil, I know fog of war and all, so I get that there are questions about which the answers may be lacking, but I not talking about that.
Why did the Administration try to cover up the facts of the attack and spin the blame of a youtube video? Did they really believe that or did they try to cover up the fact that the middle east isn’t as quelled as BHO was saying it was in the run up to the election. Either you are inept or a political hack.
“What difference does it make?”- indeed, BHO got re-elected so from a pols point of view, why even still talk about it.
Are you not personally offended with the lies and misdirection that the Administration put out over the attack?
Not to sound like a broken record… but are there any actual questions here?
I don’t think anyone ever said the Middle East was a peaceful place.
I am actually more offended by the lies and misdirection over the Bergdahl affair, but not surprised about either.
I also can see when people like you are being played by political hacks- because I see the situation with clarity, and without political motivation or emotion. (We are both gun owners… can you not see when the Left exploits tragedy and bathes in the blood of the dead after every-single-spree killing?)
If the Ambassador was not in residence at the time and the enemy overran the safehouse/annex/mission, then you never would have heard about it. That’s exactly why you put a contract out to secure it instead of using government assets.
My questions lie at the policy level:
Why, after fighting the GWOT for many years, did we support the overthrow a secular government by Islamic Radicals?
Why would an ambassador-in-a-suit rent a house with a pool in the middle of the number one home town, the number one country, for Foreign Fighters captured in Iraq?
Ironic that you point out there were no questions (when in fact I addressed that) and you raise two great questions.
The book addresses the second question, to a point.
You say you see the issue with clarity; I think you see it nearsighted.
I do not think that the administration necessarily tried to hide anything; instead I think the administration mishandled it and bungled it and allowed a corporate hubris and pride put them in this mess. That is not to say I think there was not some convenient misplacing of the truth, I just don’t know if it was in the West Wing.
Yea, it was obviously just the YouTube video all along… That certainly was not a bold faced lie or anything. It was made political from the get go by the folks pushing that narrative.
But hey, who knows, we can’t get Hillary’s emails so what difference does it make.
Yes, and isn’t it disrespectful to blame the deaths of these 4 Americans on another American making a YouTube video, rather than on the terrorists who killed them?
Well, no, it partly is a political story, because politicians were involved in creating the circumstances of the events, and in its aftermath.
Exactly this.
If you care to read FromMyColdDeadHand’s post, there was a question, and a good one: (direct quote)
“Why did the Administration try to cover up the facts of the attack and spin the blame of a youtube video? Did they really believe that or did they try to cover up the fact that the middle east isn’t as quelled as BHO was saying it was in the run up to the election.”
Why do you ignore the actual question, and make it seem like this is all a strange witch hunt?
So you can understand why we’d be pissed off by the Admin’s misdirection (nicely put) or lies (correct label) on the attack? That we don’t need to be spun by the talk-radio/conservative politicians to want to know why the Admin thinks that they can use a reverse yellow journalism to hide an actual attack on us.
You can piss on me and tell me it’s rain, just don’t tell me that it’s warm because if global warming- ehr climate change.
If we are lied to that many times a day, does that mean that we aren’t entitled to know anything about anything?
I understand our culture and focus is screwed up. A lion gets poached and the news and twit-o-sphere goes nuts, but falls silent on the Planned Parenthood genocide and parts program, the deaths in a dozen conflicts around the world. But all those things going wrong, being lied about and spun doesn’t mean that we let people off for the blatant ones that people throw at us.
This last point, this is the point that so many are making. The overarching question in this thread it seems is, why? You raised a good question in “why did we enable the bad guys?”, but that does not invalidate the other questions posed. While I don’t know the contractors killed, nor other contractors on the same contract, I do know a couple of others that were there in a separate capacity.
As for getting briefed by professionals, you should understand that there was more than one professional briefer, more than one point of view, more than one agency-related agenda driven by God-knows-what (personal? bad intel? differing analysis?), and the administration’s seeming inability to hone in on a couple working theories at the time painted the picture, not helped by the admin’s handling/mishandling of the getting the info out, led many to question the admin’s motives and speculate as to its agenda.
Okay, you nailed it, the current POTUS is a real straight shooter, very pro America, not a Muslim sympathizer, definitely not racist, staunch Constitutionalist and a genuine pillar of American values.
it’s frustrating enough to watch this administration make every move possible to bring about the demise of the country without having to skim through posts to keep reading about yet another “phony scandal”. Nothing to see here but another Obama (and Clinton) foreign policy success right?
No way of knowing at this point but if RHC is mentioned at any point at all, it will be as a concerned mother figure or someone ‘helplessly’ tied up by red tape.
I really have no faith in big Hollywood on historical adaptations. Profit beats truth. Like the Red Dawn remake. Originally it was an update with Red China taking over the Soviet role. China complained. Presto. North Korea, who can barely keep lights on and are always on the verge of famine, invades the US. Even though a total Red Dawn scenario is circumspect to begin with…Red China and the Russians were more plausible at least.
I feel bad for the good men they left hanging but I don’t trust them to tell the story true. The last two movies I saw in theaters that looked like anyone gave half a crap were BHD and United 93.
Which probably wouldn’t get made today.
Most definitely not with Hussein occupying the White House.
I do expect to see some movies portraying Trayvon and the “Gentle Giant” as the modern day equivalents to MLK.
I thought “American Sniper” was a pretty good movie. That the media went nuts trying to suppress and discredit it makes it even better in my mind.
That said, I don’t expect this Benghazi film to say anything against HRC or any of the current administration officials, except whoever they already picked to be the “fall guy” for this (probably some mid-level bureaucrat, who will be portrayed as calling all the shots). I would bet the political damage control has already been done.
But… I have not read the book, so I am prepared to be proven wrong.
