U.S. Drone CAM was watching Benghazi attacks

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes

 

All of Libya is in complete turmoil as a result of the 2011 civil war. People are displaced, the Gov't is corrupt (Muslim Brotherhood) & weak, the police force is weak, the military is spread thin (& doesn't work well with the police), and worst of all terrorists in Libya are abundant. They first arrived in guise of freedom fighters. They freed fellow terrorists from Libyan prisons during the NATO led civil war. The rebel leader was a terrorist and more terrorists are freely coming over the Libyan borders and are met with little to no resistance. Recently the Libya people took justice into their own hands and over ran militant bases (terrorist bases), drove the terrorists out and set the place ablaze.

So with that, that's why there have been so many attacks since 2011 and continue to grow. The Benghazi consulate was attacked at least twice resulting in them requesting actual security from the US. The security provided was courtesy of the weak and corrupt Libyan Gov't. Notice you don't read about any Libyan security guards dying.

Ex-SEALs, online gaming maven among Benghazi dead

A few hours earlier, Smith had posted, "assuming we don't die tonight. We saw one of our 'police' that guard the compound taking pictures," he recounted.

So these militants, aka terrorists, attack the consulate twice in the past, clearly testing it for a future attack but for some reason Washington DC just can't give them the much need security they requested. What makes matters worse is its obvious the attack was coming because of a few factors;

1. Libya is housed with the Muslim Brotherhood but more importantly Al Qaeda.
2. Two attacks were already made in the past.
3. September 11th's ten year anniversary
4. The terrorists posted the attacks were coming on Facebook
5. They had a drone filming the event. Maybe not for the entire attack, but you never know. We are constantly fed half truths and lies.

Add more fuel to the fire,

1. When the attack came on that day the White House and the MSM were all blaming protests over an anti Muslim movie and continued to push that story for weeks.

- Truth was there was no protest at the consulate, the drone and security cameras prove this. More truth, the protests in Egypt were over the release of the Blind Sheik, not the movie. So the Gov't and MSM caught in a lie yet again.

2. When the truth came out that this was a terrorist attack Washington DC lied again when they said they had no money for security for the consulate. There is at least 2 billion ready to go for security. Then Washington began to play the blame game of "he said, she said" between the "two" parties.

3. Washington DC is blaming the intelligence communities failure to see this attack coming but as I've pointed out above, how could you not see this coming so I propose Washington DC is lying and that they and intel agencies were well aware of the on coming attack.

So add all that up and there is no doubt our Gov't let another terrorist attack happen, much like the 9/11/01.

Do you guys pick up what I'm putting down?

edit on 22-10-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)

finally someone who gets the point. It has nothing to do with "grasping for straws". If i were grasping for straws in this situation, I would have a hand full after one swipe.

Originally posted by MrInquisitive

Originally posted by PvtHudson
Hey the MSM and Democrat party say this is a non-story, so lets just forget about it ok?

First, there is no "Democrat" party, you maroon. Second, please cite any claims by the MSM media or spokespeople for the Democratic party that have said this story is a non-issue.

The problem us non-Obama-haters have is that folks like yourself are blowing this incident out of proportion, and making big claims about conspiracies and how the Administration said something early on and then changed its tune, when the fact of the matter is the information the State Dept. and the WH were getting was changing.

Remember the supposed Iraqi WMD's that the Bush II administration claim existed, and used as a pretense/excuse to launch a war against Iraq, killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and killing thousands of US service personnel and wounding and maiming thousands more? Did you complain about this at the time? If not, you have no right to make a big deal out of this incident, which was small (microscopic, actually) potatoes in comparison -- unless you live for political double standards.

edit on 22-10-2012 by MrInquisitive because: (no reason given)

Yeah i remember that, and people like you were using that to get a liberal put in office, so what's the difference? The fact of the matter is, Sadam was taken out, and the amount of innocent people he killed over his reign hardly touches the amount that were killed in removing him. Weren't we there for oil too or did you forget to bring up that non-issue that everyone liberal said we were there for? Oh wait, just like WMD, that didn't pan out as well considering we got how much of that oil? Gas prices were still how much?

What could have the administrations gain be to have the attacks unfolded the way they did, with the casualties that occurred? From what I see its nothing but bad for Obama.

reply to post by Merinda

Well, you raise the 64 trillion dollar question, as I see it. What was the gain, indeed? What are we STILL not being told by anyone who knows??

It was a terrorist attack. Yes. We have established that now beyond any question. Beyond any doubt. We even know WHO did it....and they are bad people. They've captured plenty of Americans and Western prisoners in the past and we know what that ends like in most cases. When capture and killing is the point, the point ends with a head separate from the body of the prisoner....and usually taking several minutes. I'll leave it there..because those who need to know more can find the videos the animals made of it. They are out there..for every one they killed for points.

Here... preplanned terrorist attack against a compound...an AMERICAN compound..when America already has a truly literal world class fighting force in that region and easily shifted with no further hassles, right ONTO THEM for doing it.

What did Obama gain? I don't think he gained anything...I think he lost but hadn't expected to. Gain may have come if NO attack had happened and Libya could have LED last night's debate as a true (Statistical) success story that doesn't even "need much security to maintain". THAT is where Obama was thinking with Clinton. Political....nothing more 'evil' than that, but that's enough,...

What of the ENEMY though??? They didn't even clarify this was a terrorist attack themselves in the first days..and anyone who has read Inspire Magazine knows they have a very capable media wing when Al Qaeda wants a message out. They're every bit as good as anyone else for that.... So... What did THEY gain that Obama, Romney and the whole Al Qaeda structure are STILL quite happy to stay 100% silent about....because nothing done makes sense to what's coming in retaliation. Al Qaeda gained nothing......by appearances....and they NEVER do something for nothing.