The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-04-2014, 12:16 PM   #651
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 22,347

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacepipe View Post
I'm not wrong. If there was something there,it would've been found by now. Rethugs have taken something that was tragic and have turned into a smear campaign.
the whitehouse has been obstructing the investigation, it's called a "cover up".
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 12:17 PM   #652
The Lone Bolt
Ring of Famer
 
The Lone Bolt's Avatar
 
GO CHARGERS!!!!

Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Boredom Capital of the Universe (Everett, WA)
Posts: 3,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ View Post
dude, many of those deaths were the attackers themselves, so please, just stop.

Point is, the Benghazi attack is much different. The CIA warns of an eminent attack (unlike with W*GS post), state department ignores this intelligence, does nothing because of a secrete Whitehouse agenda or operation. 4 US personell die, including the Ambassador, the highest ranking US official in that country.

Anyone who defends this crap, or says that congress is fishing for something that just isn't there, you are wrong. Period.
The CIA did not warn of an imminent attack on the Benghazi compound. They had no actionable intelligence. And what secret WH agenda /operation are you referring to?
The Lone Bolt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 12:18 PM   #653
The Lone Bolt
Ring of Famer
 
The Lone Bolt's Avatar
 
GO CHARGERS!!!!

Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Boredom Capital of the Universe (Everett, WA)
Posts: 3,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ View Post
the whitehouse has been obstructing the investigation, it's called a "cover up".
That's also debatable.
The Lone Bolt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 12:22 PM   #654
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 22,347

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Please, watch this again, it's extremely important that the State Department was warned over and over about the problems in Benghazi, so much so that the British pulled their own ambassador out.

Why didn't the US pull our ambassador out too?:

Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 12:25 PM   #655
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 22,347

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt View Post
That's also debatable.
No, it's not.
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 12:26 PM   #656
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 22,347

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt View Post
The CIA did not warn of an imminent attack on the Benghazi compound. They had no actionable intelligence. And what secret WH agenda /operation are you referring to?


You are blind.
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 12:29 PM   #657
The Lone Bolt
Ring of Famer
 
The Lone Bolt's Avatar
 
GO CHARGERS!!!!

Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Boredom Capital of the Universe (Everett, WA)
Posts: 3,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ View Post
Please, watch this again, it's extremely important that the State Department was warned over and over about the problems in Benghazi, so much so that the British pulled their own ambassador out.

Why didn't the US pull our ambassador out too?:

I don't need to watch it again. Nobody is debating that the State Dept should have beefed up security around all US interests in Libya given the unstable environment there. They miscalculated. We know that. What's your point?
The Lone Bolt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 12:29 PM   #658
The Lone Bolt
Ring of Famer
 
The Lone Bolt's Avatar
 
GO CHARGERS!!!!

Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Boredom Capital of the Universe (Everett, WA)
Posts: 3,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ View Post


You are blind.
And you didn't answer my question.
The Lone Bolt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 12:31 PM   #659
The Lone Bolt
Ring of Famer
 
The Lone Bolt's Avatar
 
GO CHARGERS!!!!

Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Boredom Capital of the Universe (Everett, WA)
Posts: 3,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ View Post
No, it's not.
Oh really? Then prove the "cover up." The fact that an e-mail was not handed over in a timely fashion proves nothing. Prove that it was deliberately withheld to cover something up.
The Lone Bolt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 12:32 PM   #660
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 22,347

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt View Post
I don't need to watch it again. Nobody is debating that the State Dept should have beefed up security around all US interests in Libya given the unstable environment there. They miscalculated. We know that. What's your point?
They miscalculated?

They flat out ignored the problem, the question is WHY? After the attacks the state department then gets their talking points FROM THE WHITEHOUSE. WHY?
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 12:34 PM   #661
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 22,347

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt View Post
And you didn't answer my question.
Then watch the video again. The CIA ramped up their own security. Everyone either got out of Benghazi (the Brits) or ramped up their security (the CIA). Everyone except the US Consolate.

Again, you are blind.

Last edited by Tombstone RJ; 05-04-2014 at 12:41 PM..
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 12:36 PM   #662
The Lone Bolt
Ring of Famer
 
The Lone Bolt's Avatar
 
GO CHARGERS!!!!

Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Boredom Capital of the Universe (Everett, WA)
Posts: 3,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ View Post
They miscalculated?

They flat out ignored the problem, the question is WHY?
Good question. I certainly would like to know the answer to this.

Quote:
After the attacks the state department then gets their talking points FROM THE WHITEHOUSE. WHY?
Umm... because the CIA told them hours earlier their best guess was the attacks were a spontaneous reaction to the infamous video? Duh.
The Lone Bolt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 12:37 PM   #663
The Lone Bolt
Ring of Famer
 
The Lone Bolt's Avatar
 
GO CHARGERS!!!!

Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Boredom Capital of the Universe (Everett, WA)
Posts: 3,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ View Post
Then watch the video again. The CIA ramped up their own security. Everyone either got out of Benghazi (the Brits) or ramped up their security (the CIA). Everyone except the US Embassy.

Again, you are blind.
So you are suggesting that the WH wanted the embassy to be defenseless?
The Lone Bolt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 12:48 PM   #664
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 22,347

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt View Post
Good question. I certainly would like to know the answer to this.



Umm... because the CIA told them hours earlier their best guess was the attacks were a spontaneous reaction to the infamous video? Duh.
First of all the CIA ramped up their own security in Benghazi, so that tells me right there they were anticipating something. The Brits pulled out of Benghazi after an attack on their own ambassador.

And the CIA did NOT credit the attacks to the video, go to around 2:30-2:50 of this video:

Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 12:58 PM   #665
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 22,347

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt View Post
So you are suggesting that the WH wanted the embassy to be defenseless?
I'm saying (and there are other posts here to support this) that this wasn't simply a gaff buy the State Department. If it was just a bad call by the state department then everyone in the state department should be not only fired, but possibly prosecuted to the full extent of the law for gross negligence. The State Department is under guidance and control from the Whitehouse:

The Executive Branch and the U.S. Congress have constitutional responsibilities for U.S. foreign policy. Within the Executive Branch, the Department of State is the lead U.S. foreign affairs agency, and its head, the Secretary of State, is the President's principal foreign policy advisor, though other officials or individuals may have more influence on their foreign policy decisions. The Department advances U.S. objectives and interests in the world through its primary role in developing and implementing the President's foreign policy.

I'm saying there's a direct link between the State Departments gross mishandling of Benghazi and the Whitehouse, and it needs to be investigated.
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 01:03 PM   #666
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 56,054

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 01:04 PM   #667
The Lone Bolt
Ring of Famer
 
The Lone Bolt's Avatar
 
GO CHARGERS!!!!

Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Boredom Capital of the Universe (Everett, WA)
Posts: 3,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ View Post
I'm saying (and there are other posts here to support this) that this wasn't simply a gaff buy the State Department. If it was just a bad call by the state department then everyone in the state department should be not only fired, but possibly prosecuted to the full extent of the law for gross negligence. The State Department is under guidance and control from the Whitehouse:

The Executive Branch and the U.S. Congress have constitutional responsibilities for U.S. foreign policy. Within the Executive Branch, the Department of State is the lead U.S. foreign affairs agency, and its head, the Secretary of State, is the President's principal foreign policy advisor, though other officials or individuals may have more influence on their foreign policy decisions. The Department advances U.S. objectives and interests in the world through its primary role in developing and implementing the President's foreign policy.

I'm saying there's a direct link between the State Departments gross mishandling of Benghazi and the Whitehouse, and it needs to be investigated.
Well you scoffed at the idea that the poor handling (in retrospect) of the security situation was a "miscalculation." There is only one other option and that is it was deliberate. Either it was unintentional (a "miscalculation") or it was intentional. There are no other options.

So once again do you believe it was deliberate? If not then you must concede that it could have been a "miscalculation." You can't have it both ways.
The Lone Bolt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 01:07 PM   #668
ant1999e
Ring of Famer
 
ant1999e's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: BFE
Posts: 6,375

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Money Ball
Default Security Incidents Prior to the Benghazi Attack

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt View Post
The CIA did not warn of an imminent attack on the Benghazi compound. They had no actionable intelligence. And what secret WH agenda /operation are you referring to?
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/benghazi...tack-unfolded/

December 2011: Terror plot thwarted, but Benghazi emergency plan warns of many Islamic terrorists still operating in area.

March 2012: U.S. Embassy in Tripoli lead security officer, RSO Eric Nordstrom, requests additional security but later testified he received no response.

April 10, 2012: An explosive device is thrown at a convoy carrying U.N. envoy Ian Martin.

May 22, 2012: A rocket-propelled grenade hits the offices of the International Red Cross.

June 6, 2012: An IED explodes outside the Benghazi consulate compound.

June 11, 2012: An RPG hits a convoy carrying the British Ambassador. The U.K. closes its consulate. Col. Wood, military Site Security Team (SST) commander, is in Benghazi, and helps with emergency response.

July 2012: RSO Nordstrom again requests additional security (perhaps via cable signed by Amb. Stevens dated July 9, see below).

July 9, 2012: Amb. Stevens sends a cable requesting continued help from military SST and State Dept. MSD (Mobile Security Deployment team) through mid-Sept. 2012, saying that benchmarks for a drawdown have not been met. The teams are not extended.Early August: State Dept. removes the last of three 6-man State Dept. security teams and a 16-man military SST team from Libya.

August 2, 2012: Ambassador Stevens sends a cable to D.C. requesting "protective detail bodyguard postions" -- saying the added guards "will fill the vaccum of security personnel currently at post... who will be leaving with the next month and will not be replaced." He called "the security condition in Libya ... unpredictable, volatile and violent."

August 8, 2012: A cable from Amb. Stevens to D.C. says "a series of violent incidents has dominated the political landscape" and calls them "targeted and discriminate attacks."

Aug. 27, 2012: The State Department issues a travel warning for Libya citing the threat of assassination and car bombings in Benghazi/Tripoli.

Timeline of 9/11 Consulate Attack As It Unfolds
September 11, 2012: 9:43 a.m. Benghazi time (3:43 ET): Amb. Stevens sent cables to D.C., including a Benghazi weekly report of security incidents reflecting Libyans' "growing frustration with police and security forces who were too weak to keep the country secure."
ant1999e is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 01:08 PM   #669
baja
Headmaster
 
baja's Avatar
 
The Fixer

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the present moment
Posts: 61,388

Adopt-a-Bronco:
C J Anderson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
Ro, the new LABF
baja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 01:09 PM   #670
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 22,347

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt View Post
Well you scoffed at the idea that the poor handling (in retrospect) of the security situation was a "miscalculation." There is only one other option and that is it was deliberate. Either it was unintentional (a "miscalculation") or it was intentional. There are no other options.

So once again do you believe it was deliberate? If not then you must concede that it could have been a "miscalculation." You can't have it both ways.
Let me ask you this, if it was just a simple mistake, what does that tell you about the Obama adminstration? Do you have any confidence in the Whitehouse and its constituants like the Department of State?

You can't defend this gross incompetence, if that's all it was.

I don't think it was gross incompetence, I think the Whitehouse directed everything. But if it was just incompetence, then head should roll.
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 01:11 PM   #671
The Lone Bolt
Ring of Famer
 
The Lone Bolt's Avatar
 
GO CHARGERS!!!!

Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Boredom Capital of the Universe (Everett, WA)
Posts: 3,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ant1999e View Post
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/benghazi...tack-unfolded/

December 2011: Terror plot thwarted, but Benghazi emergency plan warns of many Islamic terrorists still operating in area.

March 2012: U.S. Embassy in Tripoli lead security officer, RSO Eric Nordstrom, requests additional security but later testified he received no response.

April 10, 2012: An explosive device is thrown at a convoy carrying U.N. envoy Ian Martin.

May 22, 2012: A rocket-propelled grenade hits the offices of the International Red Cross.

June 6, 2012: An IED explodes outside the Benghazi consulate compound.

June 11, 2012: An RPG hits a convoy carrying the British Ambassador. The U.K. closes its consulate. Col. Wood, military Site Security Team (SST) commander, is in Benghazi, and helps with emergency response.

July 2012: RSO Nordstrom again requests additional security (perhaps via cable signed by Amb. Stevens dated July 9, see below).

July 9, 2012: Amb. Stevens sends a cable requesting continued help from military SST and State Dept. MSD (Mobile Security Deployment team) through mid-Sept. 2012, saying that benchmarks for a drawdown have not been met. The teams are not extended.Early August: State Dept. removes the last of three 6-man State Dept. security teams and a 16-man military SST team from Libya.

August 2, 2012: Ambassador Stevens sends a cable to D.C. requesting "protective detail bodyguard postions" -- saying the added guards "will fill the vaccum of security personnel currently at post... who will be leaving with the next month and will not be replaced." He called "the security condition in Libya ... unpredictable, volatile and violent."

August 8, 2012: A cable from Amb. Stevens to D.C. says "a series of violent incidents has dominated the political landscape" and calls them "targeted and discriminate attacks."

Aug. 27, 2012: The State Department issues a travel warning for Libya citing the threat of assassination and car bombings in Benghazi/Tripoli.

Timeline of 9/11 Consulate Attack As It Unfolds
September 11, 2012: 9:43 a.m. Benghazi time (3:43 ET): Amb. Stevens sent cables to D.C., including a Benghazi weekly report of security incidents reflecting Libyans' "growing frustration with police and security forces who were too weak to keep the country secure."
None of which demonstrates there was actionable intelligence.

We all know in hindsight there should have been better security. What's your point?
The Lone Bolt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 01:11 PM   #672
ant1999e
Ring of Famer
 
ant1999e's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: BFE
Posts: 6,375

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Money Ball
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt View Post
Good question. I certainly would like to know the answer to this.
Really? Could have fooled me. Then start asking questions. Do some research and the come back and tell us what you found.
ant1999e is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 01:12 PM   #673
The Lone Bolt
Ring of Famer
 
The Lone Bolt's Avatar
 
GO CHARGERS!!!!

Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Boredom Capital of the Universe (Everett, WA)
Posts: 3,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ View Post
Let me ask you this, if it was just a simple mistake, what does that tell you about the Obama adminstration? Do you have any confidence in the Whitehouse and its constituants like the Department of State?

You can't defend this gross incompetence, if that's all it was.

I don't think it was gross incompetence, I think the Whitehouse directed everything. But if it was just incompetence, then head should roll.
So you believe that the WH deliberately withheld additional security and deliberately wanted the embassy to be defenseless, is that right?
The Lone Bolt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 01:12 PM   #674
ant1999e
Ring of Famer
 
ant1999e's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: BFE
Posts: 6,375

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Money Ball
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt View Post
None of which demonstrates there was actionable intelligence.

We all know in hindsight there should have been better security. What's your point?
You are either blind or you don't want to see it.
ant1999e is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 01:21 PM   #675
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 22,347

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt View Post
So you believe that the WH deliberately withheld additional security and deliberately wanted the embassy to be defenseless, is that right?
I think it's very possible that the WH was trying to smuggle illegal military assets into Syria which were coming from Libya. There's simply no other "reasonable" explanation as to why the State Department ignored the security problem at the consolate, nor why Stevens was not simply pulled out.

Now, if you want to believe it was all just a mistake, answer my previous question, do you have any confidence in the WH and it's constituants when these types of "mistakes" happen? And if it was all just a mistake, don't you think the WH should be held responsible, along with the Department of State since the Department of State functions under the WH's control?
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:36 AM.


Denver Broncos