U.S. says CIA responded within 25 minutes to Benghazi attack (NO Stand Down!)

reply to post by paxnatus


Pax thanks for addy link but i'm trying to stay out of the msm circle jerk ... why input it now ??
i'm sure the msm, Obama, CIA, Panetta, Dempsey and all the rest are in a mode of cover thine arse, however, i'm still trying to lock on to witness accounts who weren't watching it on a big screen.

that's the only way we're (anyone) is going to get to the truth.

to the posters who are screaming Stevens was a terrorist ... i'm not disputing that, especially since it wasn't a bonafide, registered consulate anyway ... however, that doesn't explain nor justify his death or of those who were with him on the "mission".
(fyi, just because it was a mission of the USGov, doesn't mean i automatically support it)

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by GrantedBail
reply to post by shaneslaughta

 

American soil? What are you talking about?

Any American embassy or consulate in any country is considered American soil by International law.

while what you said is completely true ... please, if you can, prove it applies to this outpost.
the only known embassy/consulate in the entire country is in Tripoli (and it had been evacuated earlier)

reply to post by newcovenant

and how is your description of possibilities any different than the behavior BHO has shown since the early days of the Beer Summit ??

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

And what about all the Americans that were rescued? Is everyone so much more concerned with projecting outrage and swallowing lies because those lies justify an irrational hatred that they would rather these men be remembered as victims instead of heroes?

This is why I keep saying no one really cares about Benghazi.

The Right is using the dead bodies as political props and driving their base into a frenzy with lies and rumors, but no one really cares about what happened.

Not to be petty....but the "US" doesn't say anything here. Those morons in DC are trying to keep grasping at new stories, but I don't think they have really spoken for the US in a long time.

They sure as hell don't speak on my behalf.

Originally posted by Taiyed

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by Taiyed

 

since you have to ask such a silly question repeatedly, i guess it deserves an answer.

What did Obama lie about that caused someone to die?

he lied about a video being provocative enough to stimulate such a deadly reaction (4 dead)
[remember Cairo ??]

Wrong and wrong.

He gave out the latest intelligence that the video played a role in provoking the attack. Subsequent intelligence that has come out has confirmed that fact. You guys want to ignore that later intelligence, but I'm sorry, it is fact.

And let's play your fantasy world game and accept that Obama "lied" about it. No one died from that, they were dead already.

I'm not surprised that another person in this thread doesn't have their information straight.

haven't you got ANY links to back up your BS ??
still waiting for ANYTHING from you except ... you're wrong.

guess what ?? i can type that too ... you're wrong, you're wrong, you're wrong, you're wrong ... now, go read over the multitude of links provided and come back with something near solid, please ??

hmmmm, Obama didn't lie about Cairo ?? you sure about that ??
might want to read this ... www.nytimes.com...

Apparently unaware of the timing of the first embassy statement, the Republican presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, put out a statement just before midnight Tuesday saying, “It’s disgraceful that the Obama administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.” Mr. Romney also said he was “outraged” at the attacks on the embassy and consulate.

which, btw, goes right back to ... WHO knew what WHEN.

Tuesday before midnight here = early AM Wednesday there = attack in progress, there.

or this ...

worldnews.nbcnews.com...
Updated at 5:22 a.m. ET: A State Department officer was killed after armed protesters stormed the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, furious about an amateur video that has been viewed as insulting to the Prophet Muhammad.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton confirmed the American's death in a statement on Tuesday evening.

"Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet," Clinton said in the statement. "The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others."

The attack left much of the consulate burned, witnesses said, and came hours after demonstrators in Egypt climbed the walls of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo to protest the video.

now, we are not making this stuff up ... and if you care to join the conversation, please contribute something other than "you're wrong".

oh yeah, almost forgot to add ... on Pakistani tv to boot ...

www.salon.com...
after a week of protests, the U.S. aired advertisements on Pakistani television denouncing the amateur anti-Islam film “The Innocence of Muslims."
- snip -
The film trailer has caused waves of protests at U.S. embassies around the Muslim world, including all over Pakistan, and has cost the life of the American ambassador to Libya, J. Christopher Stevens.

notice, they are referencing the film trailer.

continued from same link ...

The United States also issued a travel warning for visitors to Pakistan, warning them about the volatile situation created by the video, GlobalPost reported.

travel warning to Pakistan ??? whatever for when the initial protests were in Egypt and Libya and, let's not forget ... that Pakistani tv spot (30 seconds worth) cost $70,000

continued

reply to post by Taiyed

need more ?? try this one ... Obama quoted ...

www.deadline.com...
[color=amber] “I know there are some who ask why we don’t just ban such a video. The answer is enshrined in our laws: our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech. Here in the United States, countless publications provoke offense. Like me, the majority of Americans are Christian, and yet we do not ban blasphemy against our most sacred beliefs. Moreover, as President of our country, and Commander-in-Chief of our military, I accept that people are going to call me awful things every day, and I will always defend their right to do so. Americans have fought and died around the globe to protect the right of all people to express their views – even views that we disagree with…

“I know that not all countries in this body share this understanding of the protection of free speech. Yet in 2012, at a time when anyone with a cell phone can spread offensive views around the world with the click of a button, the notion that we can control the flow of information is obsolete. The question, then, is how we respond. And on this we must agree: there is no speech that justifies mindless violence.

“There are no words that excuse the killing of innocents. There is no video that justifies an attack on an Embassy. There is no slander that provides an excuse for people to burn a restaurant in Lebanon, or destroy a school in Tunis, or cause death and destruction in Pakistan.”

anyone else find it odd that there is -0- mention of Libya or the consulate/outpost ??

reply to post by Honor93


You provide 1 source to which you assume is the end all be all? Like really? Everything I type is a summary of what multiple sources were/are reporting. Do you think I'm just making this up? Either way, we are not privy to the truth, we are privy to lies & disinformation. The fact is these men did not receive help during their battle with terrorists.

Originally posted by Taiyed
reply to post by paxnatus

 

You've got it all wrong! The CIA did not give the order to stand down, It was the White House that gave the order!!

You have zero proof of a "stand down" order or who it went to.

But you now have proof of a timeline that blows that rumor out of the water, and you refuse to accept it.

Am I wrong to assume you are a Birther as well?

with this, i'll join the consensus ... troll
there has been audio posted (clearly you didn't bother listening) ... regarding the tasing of a target and no fire received. guess what that means ??
someone, somewhere gave an order to abort/stand down or the lased target would have been engaged.

I'm reading down this thread and I am confused on something here. First, this WAS a United States *DIPLOMATIC MISSION* Owned, paid for and run by the U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT. It was not run by the Central Intelligence Agency. That compound existed about a mile to the Southeast as I am reading the maps.

Status on this place seems to be a question but it's not a question as to what AGENCY is paying a lease for the property...or that head of mission is a U.S. AMBASSADOR...but a CIA Officer. Head of station for Benghazi would have been at that CIA Annex compound. The status question..as State Dept's OWN cables show...is whether it's a Consulate in official terms or something less...a Mission... However, STATE DEPARTMENT Outpost has never, once been at dispute.

So what if this had been CIA though??? Are we suddenly suggesting it's OKAY to murder Americans serving the Gov't if their Gov't ID card says CIA instead of State?? These were still people inside a U.S. facility under attack, asking for U.S. help and not GETTING it. Nothing much changes that.

The hatred some people have for anything related to CIA is pathetic and disgusting. One even says Stevens was a terrorist. Well..I wonder about folks so full of hate, they say such a thing about a man who spent his efforts as a Diplomat, not a soldier or Intelligence professional. They really are different jobs...some people need to learn that. Period.

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by Honor93

 

You provide 1 source to which you assume is the end all be all? Like really? Everything I type is a summary of what multiple sources were/are reporting. Do you think I'm just making this up? Either way, we are not privy to the truth, we are privy to lies & disinformation. The fact is these men did not receive help during their battle wih terrorist.

i point out 2 errors in your commentary and this is how you respond ??
fyi, i've provided about 10 different sources in this thread alone. where's yours ?
the fact is, these men received multiple groups of assistance ... coordinated an airstrike, yet were killed by precision mortar fire in a supposedly undisclosed location.
these are some of the facts, regardless how many ways you choose to distort them.

reply to post by Honor93


Yes that's how I respond. What sources? Oh great so now I have to go through your post history and piece together your side of the story? No thanks. And like I said, I wrote a summary from the news that I've read about this attack since it came out. I made that clear in my post. Tell me exactly what it is you have a problem with? Was that Stevens wasn't kidnapped & killed or that they got no assistance during the battle? The Libyan guards were overwhelmed and some ran off. The local Libya forces never arrived & US forces never arrived, so what help do you speak of?

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

no offense intended Wrabbit, but, if Stevens was performing the tasks of which he has been accused, then his actions define the word "terrorist".

yes, an American all the same, but let's not be placing him on some imaginary pedestal, ok ?
do i need to remind anyone that Al-awlaki was an American also ??
being an American doesn't absolve the bad behaviors of which humans choose to engage.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

I'm reading down this thread and I am confused on something here. First, this WAS a United States *DIPLOMATIC MISSION* Owned, paid for and run by the U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT. It was not run by the Central Intelligence Agency. That compound existed about a mile to the Southeast as I am reading the maps.

Thank you!

I have pointed out before on other threads that we shouldn't forget that the Secretary of State took the fall for what was a sad excuse for security before the attack. She runs the State Dept. Why would she accept responsibility for it if it wasn't a diplomatic post?

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

no offense intended Wrabbit, but, if Stevens was performing the tasks of which he has been accused, then his actions define the word "terrorist".

yes, an American all the same, but let's not be placing him on some imaginary pedestal, ok ?
do i need to remind anyone that Al-awlaki was an American also ??
being an American doesn't absolve the bad behaviors of which humans choose to engage.

I appreciate your point and I've been following your posts. I'll never suggest you're anything but determined and intelligent in your approach...

Having said that..I think you're getting married to your theories and sources a bit too much on a story where stories are changing almost daily. Depends on what agency has a spokesman talking as to who is either taking blame or claiming they had none ...and that role even changes at times.

What you're suggesting Stevens was doing may be true...and then it may have absolutely nothing to do with events we've seen happen. I don't know that...and no one who isn't carrying security clearance and need to know right now does know.

That's the problem and why I've personally just come to call for Investigations and not stand on any one theory for what happened..............outside of what clear and accepted Government cables and evidence generated before the cover-up kicked in the next morning. There isn't much of that, so we definitely don't know much for sure.

reply to post by Swills

Heya Swills... I just wanted to raise one point, but it's a BIG one and one the media has never once mentioned that I've heard....

In the security reports the Benghazi mission generated and sent to Washington is the summary report of the IED blast that blew out part of the exterior wall in an event well before it this night when they overran and destroyed the Mission.

In that report, they clearly describe the guards as watching the bomber get dropped off, walk over to the wall, plant the IED, arm it, walk away (as they trigger the facility general alarm) and get into another vehicle to casually drive away. It's a few minutes later it blows. So..... Given that report and it's helpful picture of the "guards" we were using at the Benghazi compound, I am curious to know if the guards even TRIED to defend the compound that night.

How many of those "guards" were Jihadi's in different clothing when not taking a paycheck from the USG to stand around and play like they were trying to help us stay safe?? I'm really not generous about the Feb 17th Martyrs Bridage.

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by Honor93

 

Yes that's how I respond. What sources? Oh great so now I have to go through your post history and piece together your side of the story? No thanks. And like I said, I wrote a summary from the news that I've read about this attack since it came out. I made that clear in my post. Tell me exactly what it is you have a problem with? Was that Stevens wasn't kidnapped & killed or that they got no assistance during the battle? The Libyan guards were overwhelmed and some ran off. The local Libya forces never arrived & US forces never arrived, so what help do you speak of?

edit on 3-11-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)

NO, i asked for YOUR sources ... of which you have offered a total of -0- ... so, back to the question, where's yours ?
ahhhh, that's right, you produced a summary of the msm BS .... gotcha

forget the eyewitness, participants side of the story ... that's just nonsense, right ?
from that "end all" link that you clearly didn't read ...

About 45 minutes into the fighting, a quick reaction team composed of six Americans from what was called the “annex,” an unofficial, low-key “safe house” for U.S. security forces approximately two kilometers away. They came barreling down to the mission in a BMW sedan and a Mercedes Benz SUV. There they encountered Wisam and about 40 other February 17th members, some of whom helped escort the Americans into the compound. “We jogged alongside the cars,” Wisam said. “There were 12 of us. We didn’t know what to expect inside.”
- snip -

At about 3:20 a.m., Faruq called the Joint Operations Room at the February 17th Brigade that coordinates the activities of several military and security organizations. Within 15 minutes, more than a hundred security officials arrived at the annex to help secure the area.

**** notice, 45 minutes into the fighting, the WH was already aware of the situation and the first drone was onsight, providing video relay.
(5:11 EST drone arrived)

also, according to the msm/WH releases, they were still taking a battery of fire by 4/430 am (Libyan time) which also means reinforcements had been onsite and returning fire for more than an hour.

now, i am not saying or implying they received sufficient support ... however, i will not discount the efforts of those who most likely saved the lives that were spared that day.
how rude of anyone to do so.

This is a red herring. A fish fry here by the defamers and none of it is true but now they decided if you repeat a lie often enough people start to believe it. It is a plan. We will see how many stupid people America really has on Tuesday. It should be sort of a signal an initial search shows the STAND DOWN story is being carried by FOX News and Right Wing Conservative media and blogs like the Blaze

U.S. officials counter reports on Benghazi attacks

www.usatoday.com...

The intelligence officials told reporters Thursday that when the CIA annex received a call about the assault, about a half dozen members of a CIA security team tried to get heavy weapons and other assistance from the Libyans.
But when the Libyans failed to respond, the security team, which routinely carries small arms, went ahead with the rescue attempt.
At no point was the team told to wait, the officials said. Instead, they said the often outmanned and outgunned team members made all the key decisions on the ground, with no second-guessing from senior officials monitoring the situation from afar.

Benghazi timeline challenges Fox News story

www.washingtonpost.com... html

We can say with confidence that the Agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi. Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. In fact, it is important to remember how many lives were saved by courageous Americans who put their own safety at risk that night — and that some of those selfless Americans gave their lives in the effort to rescue their comrades.

Fox’s Benghazi story punctured on Fox

www.washingtonpost.com...

Geraldo Rivera, in this entertaining and informative clip from “Fox & Friends,” splits Benghazi into three segments: 1) How well the United States prepared for Benghazi; 2) How well the United States responded to the attack on our assets in Benghazi; 3) How well the United States explained the attack to the public after it went down. By Geraldo’s accounting, No. 1 and No. 3 provide legitimate openings for accountability and criticism. But not No. 2: The response to the attack by personnel on the ground, says Geraldo, was strong. In his inimitable, grandstanding fashion, Geraldo noted that he’d spoken with “four-star General Jack Keane, the former vice [chief of staff] of the United States Army, our premier military analyst. I am convinced that the military did whatever it could have done under the circumstances.” The CIA and the State Department both get high marks from Geraldo as well.

Geraldo makes an accurate accusation, and it’s one that matters to this whole Fox-Benghazi saga

In its suddenly very famous Oct. 26 report on the alleged failures of the CIA in responding to the attack on Sept. 11, Fox News’s Jennifer Griffin acknowledges that security assistance did indeed arrive from Tripoli.

Here’s the text: An American Quick Reaction Force sent from Tripoli had arrived at the Benghazi airport at 2 a.m. (four hours after the initial attack on the consulate) and was delayed for 45 minutes at the airport because they could not at first get transportation, allegedly due to confusion among Libyan militias who were supposed to escort them to the annex, according to Benghazi sources.

Perhaps Fox should require its people to read the reporting of Fox journalists.

They are trying to unseat the President, will stop at nothing.
Nothing is beneath them. It is disgusting indeed.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Depends on what agency has a spokesman talking as to who is either taking blame or claiming they had none ...and that role even changes at times

i don't dispute this one iota, however, you and others have to remember, while these events are "new" to you ... to us old farts, this has become "status quo" and we aren't too happy about it, nor are we willing to sit idly by and let the propaganda machine have its way.

State Dept, CIA, MIC, Obama, Romney --> ALL the same machine.

i am not going to fathom a guess as to the motivations of these attackers ... most often, the answer is $$$$.
however, i am not going to blindly discount the accusations of those who did the attacking either.

i haven't finished reviewing all of the cables/intercepts, but from what i've read so far, there is no reason to doubt the accusations.

reply to post by Honor93


I really have no idea what it is your arguing with me about.

And yes, my summary of the events is obviously from MSM sources, same as you, . Where else are we going to be getting information about this? You're latest source is TIME.... seriously, that's the pot calling the kettle black. So tell me exactly what it is you have a problem with in my summary and I will find you the source that I got my information from. But we both know whatever source we pull is probably lacking in any real information. What is it? The fact that Stevens was killed or that no help was given to the consulate at all by the USA during the 7 hour engagement?

As far as your proof of help, the "6" men from the annex building. Well, I've already said the 2 ex USN SEALs who were killed in battle were from that very annex building, although news that there were 4 other men with them is news to me. The 2 ex SEALs were first reported to be apart of Stevens diplomatic mission but now its reported they had nothing to do with Stevens and just happened to be near by. They were the ones who came to the aid and they recieved no aid during their engagement.