bjorn14
Topic Author
Posts: 3552
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:11 pm

CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:04 pm

The two CIA operatives who came to help with the fight at the Benghazi consulate where told to stand down 3 times ignoring the order the 3rd time and went to the fight. Also reports of two drones and a A130U gunship watching the whole attack live.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...uring-benghazi-attack-sources-say/

So who and why would give the order to stand down and let the ambassador get killed?
"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19821
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:05 pm

Quoting bjorn14 (Thread starter):
The two CIA operatives who came to help with the fight at the Benghazi consulate where told to stand down 3 times ignoring the order the 3rd time and went to the fight. Also reports of two drones and a A130U gunship watching the whole attack live.

Do you have a source other than Fox?
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
Venus6971
Posts: 1415
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 1:55 pm

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:12 pm

Risk adversion, it has been going on for awhile now, Commanders afraid to release weapons that could boomerang on from the militaries JAG corp on bringing them up on charges. Also the State dept is full of non risk taking careerists who never stick their own neck out for the fear of it getting chopped off.
I would help you but it is not in the contract
 
bjorn14
Topic Author
Posts: 3552
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:11 pm

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:15 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
Do you have a source other than Fox?

Why is it every time a Fox News story appears people want another source? I don't see people asking for the obviously leftwing biased MSM for additional sources. The MSM probably won't cover this because it exposes the guy in the White House as incompetent or a traitor. So much for Leon Panetta's claim they had no intelligence.

[Edited 2012-10-26 13:16:50]
"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 5393
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:17 pm

Quoting bjorn14 (Thread starter):
So who and why would give the order to stand down and let the ambassador get killed?

Not sure what you are trying to imply here, but at that point, it would be the CIA chain of command.

Quoting Venus6971 (Reply 2):
Risk adversion, it has been going on for awhile now, Commanders afraid to release weapons that could boomerang on from the militaries JAG corp on bringing them up on charges. Also the State dept is full of non risk taking careerists who never stick their own neck out for the fear of it getting chopped off.

Problem here was that it was not an active war zone, and the Libyan Government was supposed to be providing security. There are a lot of ramifications for violating a countries soveriegnty. Especially if you don't know what was going on.

Hindsight and monday morning quarterbacking make this look like a fiasco, but at the time , no one knew what was going on.
Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19821
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:17 pm

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 3):
Why is it every time a Fox News story appears people want another source?

Because Fox is neither unbalanced nor is it trustworthy. Would you accept an article that is only published in the HuffPo without question? I sure hope you wouldn't, because I wouldn't.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 5393
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:18 pm

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 3):
The MSM probably won't cover this because it exposes the guy in the White House as incompetent or a traitor. So much for Leon Panetta's claim they had no intelligence

This is why we need somehting other than fox news. it turns people into irrational fools.
Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
 
BMI727
Posts: 11123
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:22 pm

Quoting bjorn14 (Thread starter):
So who and why would give the order to stand down and let the ambassador get killed?

Because going around shooting if you aren't sure who to shoot is a poor idea? Or that two CIA agents maybe aren't the best option for fighting off a mob and may be more useful waiting and watching.

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 3):
Why is it every time a Fox News story appears people want another source?

Because they have a bad habit of reporting things that aren't really true.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
bjorn14
Topic Author
Posts: 3552
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:11 pm

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:35 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 5):
Because Fox is neither unbalanced nor is it trustworthy.

...and ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, WaPo, NYT are such fine journalistic organs.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 4):
There are a lot of ramifications for violating a countries soveriegnty

But they had no problem violating Libyan airspace when the Colonel was in power.
"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19821
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:38 pm

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 8):
...and ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, WaPo, NYT are such fine journalistic organs.

When you believe that only Fox is trustworthy and that ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN are all part of the same conspiracy, then I can't reason with you or argue with you, so I won't.

[Edited 2012-10-26 13:38:54]
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
windy95
Posts: 2658
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:11 pm

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:41 pm

Quoting casinterest (Reply 4):
Quoting bjorn14 (Thread starter):So who and why would give the order to stand down and let the ambassador get killed?
Not sure what you are trying to imply here, but at that point, it would be the CIA chain of command.

And the CIA reports to who? When an attack is going on do youu think the CIA just sits on it and does nothing. There was flash traffic worldwide when this happened. The Pentagon, State and the White house new what was happening. This did not happen in a CIA vacuum.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 6):

Because going around shooting if you aren't sure who to shoot is a poor idea? Or that two CIA agents maybe aren't the best option for fighting off a mob and may be more useful waiting and watching

Sorry but CIA had special forces on the ground near the compound. They heard the fighting and could not wait any longer and went to the sound of gunfire and died while Obama went to bed. This is turning ointo one of the most disgusting disasters that I have seen in my lifetime.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 6):
This is why we need somehting other than fox news. it turns people into irrational fools.
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 5):
Because Fox is neither unbalanced nor is it trustworthy.

This what they say when they have no answer. Blame the source

Quoting casinterest (Reply 4):
Problem here was that it was not an active war zone, and the Libyan Government was supposed to be providing security. There are a lot of ramifications for violating a countries soveriegnty.

You have to be kidding right? Not a war zone? Violating a countries soverignty? Makes me want to puke to hear this coming out of the left's mouth today.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 5393
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:42 pm

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 8):
But they had no problem violating Libyan airspace when the Colonel was in power.

You act as if a 2-4 hour attack is the same as a weeks and months long process of diplomatic movements for much larger issues .

But please keep up with faux outrage from the fake news channel over irrational conparisons.
Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 5393
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:45 pm

.

Quoting windy95 (Reply 10):
You have to be kidding right? Not a war zone? Violating a countries soverignty? Makes me want to puke to hear this coming out of the left's mouth today

Explain it then? What would you call it if China came in and blasted DC to protect their consolate ?
You have no clue what soveriegnty and diplomacy is.
Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:51 pm

I'm sure if we showed more force there'd be multiple incidents where we blast away civilians. No one in the US wanted these 4 Americans killed, but we know nothing about this story. Were they trying to engage a few people that were obviously trying to kill the ambassador or were they looking at permission to fire away at a crowd killing innocent people? (Sure some in the crowd were guilty, but you can't assume everyone at that protest was out for blood.)

This Libya thing is out of control, absolutely. I usually jump on people that accuse one side (blanketing a whole group of people rather that a few individuals) but there are so many on the right shooting at the hip, taking every tiny detail in this incident and automatically sending out a mob for the President's head. It's getting ridiculous.

The President isn't Jesus and he is not going to chose the 100% right course of action 100% of the time. Yes there are many factors that could have been handled better, but yall are jumping on him like so many jump off a police officer when he has to use force... there are so many things going on, so many unknowns, you have to escalate force just enough or you kill innocent people and are screwed, and if you don't react quickly enough people will die as well.

Throw any other person in the President's place and I bet you 90% would have handled it the same way... maybe they wouldn't have a whole group that is looking to crucify them at every wrong move.

/rant
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
D L X
Posts: 11663
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 9:08 pm

So, IS there a source other than foxnews on this?
 
mham001
Posts: 4287
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 9:09 pm

Quoting casinterest (Reply 12):
Explain it then? What would you call it if China came in and blasted DC to protect their consolate ?
You have no clue what soveriegnty and diplomacy is.

The problem with that is that there was no central government control of Benghazi. It doesn't get much news but much of Libya is not under central government control.
 
Ken777
Posts: 9061
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 9:12 pm

Quoting bjorn14 (Thread starter):
So who and why would give the order to stand down and let the ambassador get killed?

If we are talking about the CIA then we need to look to the Director of the CIA: David H. Petraeus

(https://www.cia.gov/about-cia/leadership/david-h.-petraeus.html)

This guy is no slouch, but he is Director.

Like the State Department, I can see the CIA reviewing the issues (and actions) very carefully and delivering a solid report to the President.

Personally I am ready to give Petraeus the benefit of the doubt until we see something very solid to change my opinion.
 
User avatar
pu
Posts: 1359
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 1:08 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 9:23 pm

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 3):
Why is it every time a Fox News story appears people want another source?

Because Fox has become in the weeks leading up to the election nothing more than a mouthpiece of the Republican Party. Zero balance whatsoever, all neutral or pro-Obama news stories are not covered. In fact most non-political stories are ignored unless they can make the Obama administration look bad.

Todays big GDP news is not even mentioned on Foxnews.com! (hmmmm, can't imagine why....)

Every day for the last couple weeks foxnews.com has run a big-scary-headline and an unflattering Obama picture as their main headline, and has instigated a permanent feature on covering not the news, but other news services, which they label "Bias Alert".

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 8):
CNN, MSNBC, WaPo, NYT are such fine journalistic organs.

Do you ever read them?

I goto Fox, CNN, the BBC wlmost every day. CNN makes a conscious effort to print an equal number of good and bad stories on both candidates, and even more revealing covers stories like the hurricane, the Italian PM who is going to jail, and recent positive US economic news (GDP revised up to 2% growth from 1.3%). Meanwhile, a murder in Libya weeks ago is held by Fox to be the most important story for more than a month!

Pu
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 9:46 pm

Quoting Pu (Reply 17):
Meanwhile, a murder in Libya weeks ago is held by Fox to be the most important story for more than a month!

And we must appluad their bravery since everyone else knows this issue is being blown up due to politics lacks journalistic integrity and is corrupt  
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
bjorn14
Topic Author
Posts: 3552
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:11 pm

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 10:32 pm

Quoting casinterest (Reply 11):
You act as if a 2-4 hour attack is the same as a weeks and months long process of diplomatic movements for much larger issues .

I'll remember that when you're being assaulted because I don't want to be accused of tresspassing.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 16):
This guy is no slouch, but he is Director.

...and the silence is deafening from him.

Quoting Pu (Reply 17):
Meanwhile, a murder in Libya weeks ago is held by Fox to be the most important story for more than a month!

So I suppose you don't care if someone lies about how you died or worse did nothing to stop it. BTW, if Fox is so BS why do you even waste your time going there?

Maybe this will help.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...a-security-Libya-hours-killed.html

"Defense department officials considered sending troops in to rescue the ambassador and staff, according to CBS News, but ultimately decided not to "
"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
 
User avatar
pu
Posts: 1359
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 1:08 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 10:47 pm

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 19):
BTW, if Fox is so BS why do you even waste your time going there?

To understand people

....who only goto Fox
and
....who get emotional satisfaction from being made angry

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 19):
So I suppose you don't care if someone lies about how you died or worse did nothing to stop it
Priorities, bjorn.

I don't care much about a murder in an emerging pro-American democracy that is nevertheless not in total control of fringe anti-American elements. 1000s of Americans die of unnatural causes overseas every year, some by foul play. Regrettable, but not high on the list of America's problems.

Nearly 2000 Americans have died on the streets of America at the hands of other Americans since the Benghazi matter that is so important to the Right: to many of us America's problems are primarily at home and NOT the fault of the Muslim world...but, we get it, the "foreign threat," especially Islamic, is a big deal to Republicans. Less so for others.

Pu
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5272
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 10:48 pm

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 19):
So I suppose you don't care if someone lies about how you died or worse did nothing to stop it.

Where was all the outrage from conservatives when Bush sent thousands of troops into Iraq to die without proper training or equipment to deal with insurgent forces...a war based on intelligence that everyone knew was faulty.

I'm not saying the handling of Benghazi was done well, but conservative outrage over it is a joke.
 
D L X
Posts: 11663
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 11:16 pm

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 19):
Maybe this will help.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti....html

And if you said he would pick the Daily Mail as his "alternative" news source, you win the prize!

"The Daily Mail is a conservative, British daily middle-market tabloid newspaper"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_daily_mail

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 21):
conservative outrage over it is a joke.

  
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 7699
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Fri Oct 26, 2012 11:58 pm

Are CIA operatives rambo (or rather Jason Bourne) ? What good would have they done ? And what about a freakin' gunship ! A great way to turn the ambassador in a red splash.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
Newark727
Posts: 1425
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:42 pm

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 12:12 am

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 19):
...and the silence is deafening from him.

Ahahaha, how quickly fortunes change in the world of political diehards!

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 3):
Why is it every time a Fox News story appears people want another source?

Because the people who post stories from it have a reputation, earned or not, for following it up with stuff like this:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 3):
I don't see people asking for the obviously leftwing biased MSM for additional sources. The MSM probably won't cover this because it exposes the guy in the White House as incompetent or a traitor. So much for Leon Panetta's claim they had no intelligence.

I think that on balance, people who obliquely accuse the President of the United States of conspiracy and treason are more likely to twist established facts and take things out of context, than other people who are not making such accusations. At least, be aware of the company you keep when you're saying such things.

In all seriousness, the Benghazi tragedy has become yet another manufactured-outrage story that sells big when few other things are happening. So maybe there was a confused initial response, so maybe the first few statements released didn't exactly reflect what actually took place. What are we supposed to make of that? Very few catastrophes come with instructions for what to do as and after they occur, and frankly the public has forgiven much larger oversights and failures in the past.
 
seb146
Posts: 14056
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 12:43 am

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 3):
I don't see people asking for the obviously leftwing biased MSM for additional sources.

All the time people ask. No one on the right trusts HufPo, WaPo, MSNBC just like no one on the left trusts FOX or CBS.

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 3):
The MSM probably won't cover this because it exposes the guy in the White House as incompetent or a traitor.

I notice the "balanced" news source FOX didn't do any story at all about Bush Sr. meeting with the bin Laden family the morning of Sept. 11 or intercepters told to stand down when four passenger planes made U-Turns over the East Coast or the only flight allowed to leave was carrying the bin Laden family.

In fact, when 3000+ people died that day, it was the RIGHT WING who started politicizing it. It was the RIGHT WING who started talking war and fear and blaming Clinton.

Now, about this Lybia attack: there is a chain of command. The consulate in Bengazi asked American forces in Tripoli for support. Not Obama. Tripoli sent the request to an undersecretary in Washington. Not Obama. That undersecratary sent the request to Kennedy. Not Obama. It could very well be that there is a rule somewhere that the president deligates such requests for such small outposts to... oh, I don't know... the director of the CIA. That rule may have been put on the books in 1801. But, it would still be Obama's fault.

FOX and the right wing hates Obama so much they will grasp at any straw they possibly can to make him out to be Hitler. The next step FOX will take is asking Obama when he stopped beating Michelle and, when Obama laughs off such a stupid question, FOX will run with "OBAMA BEATS HIS WIFE!!" for months and months and months.
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6672
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 1:15 am

Remember when the National Enquirer was the only one reporting on the John Edward's love child?
Remember when it was only CBS News reporting on Fast and Furious?
Even a blind squirrel can find a nut.
Just because one news outlet is reporting it doesn't make it untrue.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 16):
This guy is no slouch, but he is Director.


From the CIA, presumably with the Director's okie-dokie:
"No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. ”
http://nation.foxnews.com/petraeus/2...under-bus?intcmp=fly#ixzz2ASNNTR77

Why would the CIA issue a statement distancing themselves from an order that was never given?

You really think this is contrived, over-blown and irrelevant?

An ambassador is dead.
The administration lied about the events leading up to that death.
The President stood in front of the UN and mislead that august body as to the trigger for the attacks.
The President's proxies went out and claimed that a video caused the violence that led to the death of an ambassador and 3 US citizens, when he knew it did not.
Oh yeah, and Ambassador Chris Stevens is dead. Killed by terrorists while serving in Libya.

Say whatever you want to say to defend President Obama, but, had this happened under a Republican President, the media would be howling for blood at the highest levels of the administration. If you don't believe that, you are being dishonest with yourself.

[Edited 2012-10-26 18:50:43]
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
Newark727
Posts: 1425
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:42 pm

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 1:33 am

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 26):
Why would the CIA issue a statement distancing themselves from an order that was never given?

Because people are reporting that they actually did give that order?

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 26):
Say whatever you want to say to defend President Obama, but, had this happened under a Republican President, the media would be howling for blood at the highest levels of the administration. If you don't believe that, you are being dishonest with yourself.

And your point is what exactly? It didn't happen under a Republican president; the closest we can come to that is comparing various events that did, and I think it's already clear that that isn't much help. No one gets anything from wars of suppositions.
 
Mir
Posts: 19107
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 1:50 am

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 8):
Quoting casinterest (Reply 4):
There are a lot of ramifications for violating a countries soveriegnty

But they had no problem violating Libyan airspace when the Colonel was in power.

Because they had a UN Security Council resolution asking them to do it. Why is the difference so hard to understand?

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6672
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 1:55 am

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 27):
Because people are reporting that they actually did give that order?


Why didn't the statement read: "No such order was given to our people"?

Why is the statement crafted to remove the CIA from the loop?

As time goes on, the truth will come out. It always does.

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 27):
And your point is what exactly?


My point is that the media is providing political cover for this administration. There is enough obfuscation on the part of the administration, that the media should be asking all kinds of questions that they are not.

That's all. That's my point. I wish the media would do its job, even if doing their job sinks their darling candidate.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 4):
There are a lot of ramifications for violating a countries soveriegnty


Yes, there are. Our sovereignty was violated that day also. Executing a rescue mission to our consulate may or may not have been frowned upon by the legitimate government of Libya. They had recognized and accepted our ambassador's credentials, hadn't they?
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
Ken777
Posts: 9061
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 2:03 am

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 19):
...and the silence is deafening from him.

His job is to talk to the President, not journalists.

Quoting D L X (Reply 22):
"The Daily Mail is a conservative, British daily middle-market tabloid newspaper"

And The Sun? At least it has the Page 3 Girls.   

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 26):
Why would the CIA issue a statement distancing themselves from an order that was never given?

Maybe because they were given the green light to comment on that issue.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 26):
Say whatever you want to say to defend President Obama, but, had this happened under a Republican President, the media would be howling for blood at the highest levels of the administration. If you don't believe that, you are being dishonest with yourself.

Maybe I should yell a bit - General Petraeus was given a lot of high level assignments under Bush & Cheney. Probably a Republican. Maybe I should point the blame at him, but I won't.

Reality is that 9/11 happened under President Bush's watch, but we didn't yell that loud at Bush. Looks like it only gets ugly when the black guy is President.
 
JakeOrion
Posts: 1090
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 11:13 pm

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 2:04 am

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 26):
The administration lied about the events leading up to that death.

Say what you want about everything else, but I believe this should be the key point. The fact the administration lied about it and nobody cares.
Every problem has a simple solution; finding the simple solution is the difficult problem.
 
Mir
Posts: 19107
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 2:05 am

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 29):
As time goes on, the truth will come out. It always does.

Indeed. And until it does, perhaps we should refrain from drawing conclusions based on heat-of-the-moment statements, emails, phone calls, etc. which anyone with any experience at all with dealing with crisis situations should know to be frequently unreliable?

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6672
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 2:53 am

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 30):
Reality is that 9/11 happened under President Bush's watch, but we didn't yell that loud at Bush. Looks like it only gets ugly when the black guy is President.


Really. You missed the whole intelligence briefing thing? What did Bush know and when did he know it? Come on. When the media shook off their new found patriotism they went after the administration with gusto.

And, classy of you to bring up race.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 30):
Maybe I should yell a bit - General Petraeus was given a lot of high level assignments under Bush & Cheney. Probably a Republican. Maybe I should point the blame at him, but I won't.


And, like a bunch of your posts, that makes no sense as a response to what I wrote.

Quoting Mir (Reply 32):
Indeed. And until it does, perhaps we should refrain from drawing conclusions based on heat-of-the-moment statements, emails, phone calls, etc. which anyone with any experience at all with dealing with crisis situations should know to be frequently unreliable?


Actually, we are left to draw conclusions because the media refuses to ask the questions that are warranted by the information we have. What's left? Sit down quietly and wait for the election to be over so that we can finally find out what happened? This administration and its willing accomplice the media are stalling for time.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
BMI727
Posts: 11123
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 3:28 am

Basically the complaints of people seem to come down to the fact that apparently we didn't shoot enough Muslims or something like that.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 3:39 am

What is the lie? Being vague and not shooting from the hip? I'm not in politics, but I can definitely see why you need to be vague sometimes. Correct me if I'm wrong, what's the big "lie?" All the ones I hear are pretty weak at best
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 5393
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 3:42 am

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 19):
I'll remember that when you're being assaulted because I don't want to be accused of tresspassing

I wouldn't trust you with a beer run , never mind my own rescue. You'd probably just tell the 130 to open fire without having a clue who is in the building and who is a friendly or not.

Quoting mham001 (Reply 15):
he problem with that is that there was no central government control of Benghazi. It doesn't get much news but much of Libya is not under central government control.

There are forces that the US is working with to establish the Government. You forget why these Americans were there to being with.

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 19):

"Defense department officials considered sending troops in to rescue the ambassador and staff, according to CBS News, but ultimately decided not to "

Exactly, Because they didn't have enough intel to launch an attack because they didn't know what was going on , and whether they would make it worse or not. Plus the Libyan's were supposed to be defending the consulate. This is where the issue ultimately lies, as the defensive position of this Embassy was compromised. However Fake news runs a story on here say from a couple of janitors instead of asking the heads of the state department and the CIA what happened. Do you know why? Read on for more below.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 26):

Remember when the National Enquirer was the only one reporting on the John Edward's love child?
Remember when it was only CBS News reporting on Fast and Furious?
Even a blind squirrel can find a nut.
Just because one news outlet is reporting it doesn't make it untrue.

When the one outlet is Fake news, you can bet it has a political agenda behind it. And at least when John Edward's love child was involved, there was a love child .

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 26):

Say whatever you want to say to defend President Obama, but, had this happened under a Republican President, the media would be howling for blood at the highest levels of the administration. If you don't believe that, you are being dishonest with yourself.
Quoting fr8mech (Reply 29):

Yes, there are. Our sovereignty was violated that day also. Executing a rescue mission to our consulate may or may not have been frowned upon by the legitimate government of Libya. They had recognized and accepted our ambassador's credentials, hadn't they?

The legitimate Government would not have been appreciative had out troops killed theirs or done excessive damage with very little intel as to what was really going on. And this was the case. The Generals decided not to go in, because unlike the fake news cheerleaders, they valued their men's lives and would not put them at risk in a situation where they could not access the risk.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 29):
That's all. That's my point. I wish the media would do its job, even if doing their job sinks their darling candidate.

That one should go straight to the koch brothers as they continue to stir up animosity and angst amongst thier viewers who can't comprehend complex issues , and would rather settle for anger and angst and reaction instead of figuring out what happened.
Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
 
Mir
Posts: 19107
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 3:53 am

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 33):
What's left? Sit down quietly and wait for the election to be over so that we can finally find out what happened?

Sit down and wait for the investigation to be over, yes. Like the people who actually know how the intelligence game works (like Condi Rice) have suggested.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 1797
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 4:06 am

Quoting windy95 (Reply 10):
This is turning ointo one of the most disgusting disasters that I have seen in my lifetime.

What are you, twelve? If this is the worst thing you've ever seen, all I can ask is in what universe, where?

Quoting windy95 (Reply 10):

You have to be kidding right? Not a war zone? Violating a countries soverignty? Makes me want to puke to hear this coming out of the left's mouth today.

Yeahup, we generally like to respect other people's boundaries. Over the last decade, you might think otherwise is true, given the extreme right wing politics of the time, but it's really not what we want to be doing as a nation, the whole violating our global neighbors for no reason thing, that is.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 16):


Like the State Department, I can see the CIA reviewing the issues (and actions) very carefully and delivering a solid report to the President.

Well, then it seems that's all that really needs to happen. Slow news day I guess.

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 19):

So I suppose you don't care if someone lies about how you died or worse did nothing to stop it.

If I were dead, it's very unlikely I'd care much about anything at all.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 33):
When the media shook off their new found patriotism they went after the administration with gusto.

Well, yeah. If you'll recall we were embarking on a campaign that ended up killing over 100,000 Iraqis. Authorizing something like that, for what turned out to be no reason, we'll recall, should be followed up with "gusto".

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 33):
And, classy of you to bring up race.

If it's an issue, it's an issue. What's with the reactionary denial?
Be A Perfectionst, You're Nothing If You're Just Another; Something Material, This Isn't Personal...
 
User avatar
pu
Posts: 1359
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 1:08 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 4:22 am

Quoting casinterest (Reply 37):
That one should go straight to the koch brothers

They are a force at least as influential on US politics as TV itself.
.
.
.
A lot of this is less of a deliberate bias in the "left wing media," and more just a difference in what the left and right deem as important. The right sees the Muslim Middle East as a big threat to America, while the left doesn't rate the threat as great. The Repulicans get angry at burning the US flag and other insults to America - and yearn to retaliate....while the Democrats have a different standard as to what requires a response and what does not.

Pu
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 13500
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 6:58 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 22):
And if you said he would pick the Daily Mail as his "alternative" news source, you win the prize!

"The Daily Mail is a conservative, British daily middle-market tabloid newspaper"

Perhaps you overlooked the fact that the Daily Mail story cited CBS News as the source.

Or is CBS News suddenly a conservative mouthpiece as well?

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 19):
"Defense department officials considered sending troops in to rescue the ambassador and staff, according to CBS News, but ultimately decided not to "
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
seb146
Posts: 14056
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 7:13 am

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 33):
You missed the whole intelligence briefing thing? What did Bush know and when did he know it?

The Democratic chair of the intelligence committee did not launch full-scale investigations into how 9/11 could have been prevented, did he? The Democratic chair of the intelligence commitee did not set out to make Bush II look like he didn't know what he was doing and bring him down, did he? The only reason Issa is doing this is to bring down Obama. TA-DA!! That's it! That is the whole reason for this. They could be balancing the budget or creating jobs or doing something useful, but they decide that taking out Obama is more important.

Before anyone gets on my case about it: Budgets MUST start from the House. Read the Constitution. The President can not spend. Period. Only the House can. And, right now, the House is controlled by which party? Meaning: which party can balance the budget?
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6672
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 8:06 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 42):
Before anyone gets on my case about it: Budgets MUST start from the House. Read the Constitution. The President can not spend. Period. Only the House can. And, right now, the House is controlled by which party? Meaning: which party can balance the budget?


How many budgets have passed out of the House and not been taken up by the Senate? I know of one or two.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 42):
The Democratic chair of the intelligence committee did not launch full-scale investigations into how 9/11 could have been prevented, did he? The Democratic chair of the intelligence committee did not set out to make Bush II look like he didn't know what he was doing and bring him down, did he?


Would have been an empty hole or would have uncovered a lot more than he wanted to uncover. Like how Jamie Gorelick set up a wall to prevent information from passing between intelligence organs and law enforcement agencies. Just speculating here. (Hmmm, looked her up and found she was involved with Fannie Mae.)

Let me remind everyone:

Ambassador Chris Stevens is dead. Killed by terrorists in a a premeditated attack. The Obama Administration had steadfastly denied that it was a terrorist attack and claimed that it was a spontaneous demonstration related to a snippet on YouTube.

You really think this is false outrage? Again, if you think this should just be swept under the rug because its just a political ploy, you're deluding yourself.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
bjorn14
Topic Author
Posts: 3552
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:11 pm

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 9:37 am

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 29):
Our sovereignty was violated that day also. Executing a rescue mission to our consulate may or may not have been frowned upon by the legitimate government of Libya. They had recognized and accepted our ambassador's credentials, hadn't they?

Also the President of Libya warned the US of an imminent attack 2 days before the bloodshed happened so it would be just a big of an embarrasment for him that he's got terrorist gangs running around.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 35):
what's the big "lie?"

Ambassador Chris Stevens is dead. Killed by terrorists in a a premeditated attack. The Obama Administration had steadfastly denied that it was a terrorist attack and claimed that it was a spontaneous demonstration related to a snippet on YouTube.

That's the BIG LIE

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 42):

How many budgets have passed out of the House and not been taken up by the Senate? I know of one or two.

Harry Reid has yet to pass a budget during Obama's pResidency.
"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 1797
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 10:20 am

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 43):
The Obama Administration had steadfastly denied that it was a terrorist attack and claimed that it was a spontaneous demonstration related to a snippet on YouTube.

But that's not actually true. Since the 2nd debate, that's actually been debunked a few times now. They were indeed a bit hesitant to call it a specific action, yes, but it was labeled (FWIW) an "act of terror" the day of. In any case, as has been mentioned above, we really don't want folks (especially the President) shooting from the hip on this one.

And as another point of fact, on 9/11, Bush did call that an "act of terror" as well. Perhaps you would be so kind as to tell us how long it was before that one was resolved?

I don't see how getting stirred up and overreacting is going to solve a matter (especially something as murky as current Lybian politics, no less). This is a situation that may indeed require action at some point, but I'm not seeing how getting all riled up, and potentially taking the fight to the wrong people on this one will solve a damned thing. I'm with Condi on this one.
Be A Perfectionst, You're Nothing If You're Just Another; Something Material, This Isn't Personal...
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 13469
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 11:49 am

Quoting Darksnowynight (Reply 44):
This is a situation that may indeed require action at some point, but I'm not seeing how getting all riled up, and potentially taking the fight to the wrong people on this one will solve a damned thing. I'm with Condi on this one.

Are they getting riled up because there's an agenda? No, that couldn't possibly be the reason, could it?   
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 1797
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 12:51 pm

Quoting scbriml (Reply 45):

Yup. As many have said, if the show were not on the left foot, things would be very different indeed. Does anyone even remember the Hadditha Massacre?
Be A Perfectionst, You're Nothing If You're Just Another; Something Material, This Isn't Personal...
 
BN747
Posts: 5344
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2002 5:48 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 12:56 pm

I'm guessing no one on this board has been in a 'Embassy under siege' event...so at lot of this 'we shoulda' .. we coulda, he knew this, they knew that..' is a bunch horse hockey.

Seeing Affleck's film Argo, makes that abundantly clear! You never get the whole story no matter what.

What was insightful about the film was the Iranians inside embassy applying for visas when the place was stormed. All these years I've never heard word about that perspective. Now perhaps most were Shah loyalists and had every reason to attempt to get out quickly but still, it was one of many things in a very murky situation. Not to spoil the film for any potential viewers..but the film brought back many feelings I had a young person watching this... this was a making of the Iranians doing.

In other words. the numerous number of frustrated angry young Persians today need only to look at their parents for the state of their nation today. That uprising put 'the power of the people' into their very hands...

..and the parents of today's kids thought a crotchety senile old religious fanatic was the way to go...and made it so. Unfortunately, I'm certain that part is entirely omitted from their history books.

But the film does a GREAT of conveying the abject horror of being caught up in a situation like that and how to proceed when no text book guide exist.

And then again the film blows it when police jeeps and cars outrun a 747 barreling down a runway... huge fail!

BN747
"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
 
User avatar
pu
Posts: 1359
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 1:08 am

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 2:21 pm

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 43):
denied that it was a terrorist attack

That is a big stretch of the definition of terrorism.

You act like the administration is hiding something that, if known (as it is known by specially informed people like yourself), would change the election. It wouldn't. People already know what happened. You assume everyone in the middle and on the left reacts with as much outrage as you and the Right, reacting to Benghazi with: "Its terrorism! America insulted! Savage Muslims! I am scared of terrorists! Send in the drone attack!"...but only the Right reacts this way.

The terrorismterm is not precisely defined, but usually means attacking civilians and with an intention to scare or terrorise the general civilian population. Attacking government installations is automatically more like an act of war than terrorism, especially when defended by armed or miliatary personnel.

The Right wants an expansive definition of terrorism, in part because of a belief in the desirability of aggressive response, in part because they see a bigger threat from Muslims than the left does, in part because Israelis always want to heighten the fear of teerorism in the eyes of Americans, and in part because they suffer bigger ego damage when America is insulted versus the left.

It's not such a conspiracy - its that the left doesn't define terrorism as broadly as you do, and they do not see Muslims and the Middle East as the threat you do.

Pu

[Edited 2012-10-27 07:31:16]

[Edited 2012-10-27 07:32:44]
 
n318ea
Posts: 117
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 7:56 pm

RE: CIA Ops Told To Stand Down In BEN Attack

Sat Oct 27, 2012 2:42 pm

It is ironic that President Obama & Company could tell what underwear the Seal Team 6 members where wearing in real time when Bin Laden was killed. How is it now six weeks after the slaughter of Ambassador Stevens, Sean Smith and former SEALS Glen Doherty and Ty Woods, no one knows anything? It's being investigated??? BULL$HIT!. This is not a left- right or FOX News story. This is a question of whether the POTUS lied to this nation and left those men in a fight for their lives for 7 hours in DID NOTHING. The evidence from the State Department on TV during the House hearings ( I know, Reps. Chaffetz and Issa are right wing liars right?) showed THEY NEW in real time what was happening yet Obama lied for the next 2 weeks about the film instead of an Al Quaeda attack.
No,I don't get my news from FOX, too many fruitcake Liberals on there now. They do seem to be the only ones investigating what happened. Obama ignored the question when someone finally had the cojones to ask him if support was denied yesterday. This needs to be answered before November 6th. The men and women risking their lives for this country deserve better. WE deserve better.
Red Red Red Red Red Neck!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], einsteinboricua, Maverick623 and 24 guests