We’ll never know the whole story because there’s too little integrity these days but there are some things that have affected me.
Democrats continue to say this is a Republican witch hunt and it’s a lie. I’m sure part of it is political but we owe it to the four people killed and future operations involving our service men and women in the field. I feel like every time they make derogatory remarks about us letting the matter go, they are throwing mud in the faces of the families of the victims. They were at the hearing and have consistently asked Republicans to pursue answers. Then there’s the whistle blowers who came forward they weren’t recruited by Republicans. So this whole issue really makes me mad; let’s find out as much of the truth as we can and let the chips fall where they may.
I strongly believe the Obama Administration failed before, during, and after the attack. Some of what happened is understandable because things like this have very few controllable variables and improv kicks in. But that being said, there were some things that could have easily been done that weren’t.
Beginning in April of 2012 things began heating up in Libya due to pockets of attacks. It was working its way towards Benghazi so knowing 9/11 was down the road Stevens and his head of security asked via snail mail and cable to have military assets moved closer to Benghazi in case there was an attack. Stevens had a great relationship with the Prime Minister of Libya so more than likely he would have given them a temporary location to work from. They also wanted to swap out local security with Marine guards. Our government would’ve saved money because the Marines were already on our payroll. Although there were numerous requests for help in these areas, it was turned down.
Part of the problem they were up against was a policy Obama had given the State Department that he wanted to limit military exposure in the middle-east especially in consulates. The intent might not have been a bad idea with how some of these middle-eastern countries are but in this case you give your people what they need. One, they would’ve thought our Federal government cared about them and two, they’re the only ones who really know what’s going on; the people in Washington don’t have a clue they’re just pushing papers. We can never know for sure but I believe these four men wouldn’t have died if they fulfilled Steven’s requests.
Then there’s what happened during the attack. Some Democrats are saying it would’ve taken help to arrive in 9 to 12 hours whereas military personnel on the ground in Libya said 2 to 3 hours; I wonder who’s correct? Enter factiousness. The bottom line is troops were ready and willing to go. They were told to stand down and were livid they couldn’t help their own people. I feel like once Washington found out Stevens died that it was over but they neglected to think about all the people on the ground who still had around five more hours to worry about their lives.
Knowing the State Department held back soldiers who wanted to go in, is all I need to know about their lack of intelligence in handling this situation. I almost forgot, some Democrats have said the team wasn’t prepared to go on a counter-insurgency assignment because it wasn’t planned out. They don’t have a clue about the military. In most cases you’re given the mission, Intel if available, and the weapons necessary to complete the mission. Almost the entire mission is done on the fly; fortunately it is more effective now because of good communication between the team. So nice try, but this desired mission is an exact fit to their capabilities. Could you imagine how these military personnel felt about Washington’s decision? I doubt if they’d feel real good about the government having their backs should they be in a dangerous situation…not good for morale.
What really disgusts me is how the attack was presented to us by the Obama Administration. We weren’t made aware until this last hearing that Clinton was on a 2:00 a.m. conference call where she found out it was a terrorists attack; nothing was mentioned about a protest or a video tape. The CIA report on 9/12 read that it was a terrorists attack possibly tied to Al Quida. They didn’t mention anything about a protest or a video tape.
The CIA’s report had the State Department scared they would be in trouble. They asked the CIA to reevaluate their report and they wouldn’t. The State Department contacted the White House (I don’t know who), and the White House emailed back (this was a mistake on their part), that the State Department’s concerns should be addressed. The CIA still wouldn’t revise their report so the State Department decided to make changes and scrubbed any mention of “terrorists” from the report. This along with word of mouth about an anti-Muslim video tape that caused a protest in Cairo helped the Obama Administration put together their biased talking points.
I don’t know whether you noticed it or not but Obama went on a publicity tour on various talk shows for three weeks and every time he was asked about Benghazi and whether it was a terrorists attack, he said they don’t know and that it was under investigation. What makes me mad is that many Democrats point to Obama’s speech in the Rose Garden and say he did call it a terrorists attack but what he said is that it was an “Act of Terror” these are two different things. The words: “Terror” or “Terrorists” didn’t come out of his mouth after that day in the Garden. Obama even blamed the video in a United Nations meeting. Hillary mentioned the video several times even telling one of the families who lost a love one that they won’t stop until they found the man who created the video. Think about this, she knew it was a terrorists attack possibly tied to Al Quida yet she’s lying to these parents; this disgust me! Then there was Rice hitting the talk show circuit with the talking points (I don’t know if she knew they were wrong or not).
Just speculation on my part but with what I’ve seen and read so far, I believe there will be some serious fallout from Benghazi. I think Clinton, Holder, Panetta, and possibly Obama will be in huge trouble for the cover up. Clinton, Holder, and Panetta all testified so they’re the ones who could face perjury charges.
The Obama Administration has most of the media on their side so no telling what will actually stick. Many newspapers today like the LA Times, New York Times, and San Francisco Chronicle, said the hearing was a waste of time as nothing new came out. This helps when Republicans push for more hearings and their readers get mad because they don’t know the truth about what’s coming out. They say nothing new…how about Hillary being on a 2:00 a.m. conference call where she learned it was a terrorists attack then said something totally different after that? Just when I think these liberal media can’t get any lower they prove me wrong.
Democrats continue to say this is a Republican witch hunt and it’s a lie. I’m sure part of it is political but we owe it to the four people killed and future operations involving our service men and women in the field. I feel like every time they make derogatory remarks about us letting the matter go, they are throwing mud in the faces of the families of the victims. They were at the hearing and have consistently asked Republicans to pursue answers. Then there’s the whistle blowers who came forward they weren’t recruited by Republicans. So this whole issue really makes me mad; let’s find out as much of the truth as we can and let the chips fall where they may.
I strongly believe the Obama Administration failed before, during, and after the attack. Some of what happened is understandable because things like this have very few controllable variables and improv kicks in. But that being said, there were some things that could have easily been done that weren’t.
Beginning in April of 2012 things began heating up in Libya due to pockets of attacks. It was working its way towards Benghazi so knowing 9/11 was down the road Stevens and his head of security asked via snail mail and cable to have military assets moved closer to Benghazi in case there was an attack. Stevens had a great relationship with the Prime Minister of Libya so more than likely he would have given them a temporary location to work from. They also wanted to swap out local security with Marine guards. Our government would’ve saved money because the Marines were already on our payroll. Although there were numerous requests for help in these areas, it was turned down.
Part of the problem they were up against was a policy Obama had given the State Department that he wanted to limit military exposure in the middle-east especially in consulates. The intent might not have been a bad idea with how some of these middle-eastern countries are but in this case you give your people what they need. One, they would’ve thought our Federal government cared about them and two, they’re the only ones who really know what’s going on; the people in Washington don’t have a clue they’re just pushing papers. We can never know for sure but I believe these four men wouldn’t have died if they fulfilled Steven’s requests.
Then there’s what happened during the attack. Some Democrats are saying it would’ve taken help to arrive in 9 to 12 hours whereas military personnel on the ground in Libya said 2 to 3 hours; I wonder who’s correct? Enter factiousness. The bottom line is troops were ready and willing to go. They were told to stand down and were livid they couldn’t help their own people. I feel like once Washington found out Stevens died that it was over but they neglected to think about all the people on the ground who still had around five more hours to worry about their lives.
Knowing the State Department held back soldiers who wanted to go in, is all I need to know about their lack of intelligence in handling this situation. I almost forgot, some Democrats have said the team wasn’t prepared to go on a counter-insurgency assignment because it wasn’t planned out. They don’t have a clue about the military. In most cases you’re given the mission, Intel if available, and the weapons necessary to complete the mission. Almost the entire mission is done on the fly; fortunately it is more effective now because of good communication between the team. So nice try, but this desired mission is an exact fit to their capabilities. Could you imagine how these military personnel felt about Washington’s decision? I doubt if they’d feel real good about the government having their backs should they be in a dangerous situation…not good for morale.
What really disgusts me is how the attack was presented to us by the Obama Administration. We weren’t made aware until this last hearing that Clinton was on a 2:00 a.m. conference call where she found out it was a terrorists attack; nothing was mentioned about a protest or a video tape. The CIA report on 9/12 read that it was a terrorists attack possibly tied to Al Quida. They didn’t mention anything about a protest or a video tape.
The CIA’s report had the State Department scared they would be in trouble. They asked the CIA to reevaluate their report and they wouldn’t. The State Department contacted the White House (I don’t know who), and the White House emailed back (this was a mistake on their part), that the State Department’s concerns should be addressed. The CIA still wouldn’t revise their report so the State Department decided to make changes and scrubbed any mention of “terrorists” from the report. This along with word of mouth about an anti-Muslim video tape that caused a protest in Cairo helped the Obama Administration put together their biased talking points.
I don’t know whether you noticed it or not but Obama went on a publicity tour on various talk shows for three weeks and every time he was asked about Benghazi and whether it was a terrorists attack, he said they don’t know and that it was under investigation. What makes me mad is that many Democrats point to Obama’s speech in the Rose Garden and say he did call it a terrorists attack but what he said is that it was an “Act of Terror” these are two different things. The words: “Terror” or “Terrorists” didn’t come out of his mouth after that day in the Garden. Obama even blamed the video in a United Nations meeting. Hillary mentioned the video several times even telling one of the families who lost a love one that they won’t stop until they found the man who created the video. Think about this, she knew it was a terrorists attack possibly tied to Al Quida yet she’s lying to these parents; this disgust me! Then there was Rice hitting the talk show circuit with the talking points (I don’t know if she knew they were wrong or not).
Just speculation on my part but with what I’ve seen and read so far, I believe there will be some serious fallout from Benghazi. I think Clinton, Holder, Panetta, and possibly Obama will be in huge trouble for the cover up. Clinton, Holder, and Panetta all testified so they’re the ones who could face perjury charges.
The Obama Administration has most of the media on their side so no telling what will actually stick. Many newspapers today like the LA Times, New York Times, and San Francisco Chronicle, said the hearing was a waste of time as nothing new came out. This helps when Republicans push for more hearings and their readers get mad because they don’t know the truth about what’s coming out. They say nothing new…how about Hillary being on a 2:00 a.m. conference call where she learned it was a terrorists attack then said something totally different after that? Just when I think these liberal media can’t get any lower they prove me wrong.
RSS Feed