U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens Declined Security In Benghazi

[Philbert]

click on image...

 

[Philbert]

You're face is a bitch. Who did you vote for?

:crybaby: :rofl2::rofl2:

 

[CptHa]

While this may be true, the question remains why is this information only being disclosed now that the heat has been turned up considerably. Seems like that is something that would have been talked about during the debates and when the incident first occurred.

Could be that they didn't want those responsible to go to ground. Believe it or not, the US media is a good source of intel for a terrorist network (I know most of us think they are totally incompetent). The idea being that you have the folks responsible think they are safe when you find out where they are hiding (see: Abbottabad).

 

[xfire]

:cry :rof rofl2:

That's the best you've got, bitch face? Why are you scared of disclosing for whom you voted? Afraid of scrutiny? Of course you are, you have a bitch face.

 

[Philbert]

:crybaby: :rofl2: :rofl2::rofl2: :rofl2::rofl2: :rofl2:
Pleez! You're making it hard to breathe! My sides hurt...!
I know I can never equal your rapier-like wit and sharp comeback skills (bitch face? Really?:yahoo, but if you make it your life's work and continue the Crusade to force me to tell you anything I don't want to, maybe that WILL produce results.
I know it makes You Miserable not knowing; ruins your bedtime reading of Winnie the Pooh, huh?
Don't forget to continue holding your breath...:rofl2: :rofl2:

 

[xfire]

Pleez! You're making it hard to breathe! My sides hurt...! I know I can never equal your rapier-like wit and sharp comeback skills (bitch face? Really?), but if you make it your life's work and continue the Crusade to force me to tell you anything I don't want to, maybe that WILL produce results. I know it makes You Miserable not knowing; ruins your bedtime reading of Winnie the Pooh, huh? Don't forget to continue holding your breath...::

You come to a discussion forum not to discuss issues? You obviously don't want to participate, so why are you here? Keep up with the personal attacks, it makes you look oh so kewl and tuff.

 

[Jack Davenport]

Could be that they didn't want those responsible to go to ground. Believe it or not, the US media is a good source of intel for a terrorist network (I know most of us think they are totally incompetent). The idea being that you have the folks responsible think they are safe when you find out where they are hiding (see: Abbottabad).

Not sure we are following each other. I do not see how discussing the fact that Ambassador Stevens declined security after the place was attacked and cleared out would in any way be a national security concern or disclosure of intelligence. I think communicating this to the American people would have gone a long way in understanding the circumstances and why the State Department didn't react.

 

[Mayhem]

Benghazi Report By House Democrats Finds No 'Stand-Down' Order During Attack

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/19/benghazi-report_n_3954302.html?ref=topbar

House Democrats concluded Thursday the U.S. military wasn't ordered to "stand down" during last year's attack on a diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya, rejecting Republican claims the Obama administration held back military assets while Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed.

The 80-page report ordered by Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland, senior Democrat on the House oversight committee, also defended a Benghazi review led by former U.N. Ambassador Thomas Pickering and Adm. Mike Mullen, the former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman. Both are veterans of Democratic and Republican administrations.

Questions about the independence of the review have become a recent focus of congressional investigations, which are continuing more than a year after the Sept. 11 attack. GOP lawmakers have lambasted the duo for not questioning former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham; the Democratic report said Clinton's conduct was reviewed, but that she had no role in Benghazi security decisions.

However, echoing the review by Pickering and Mullen, Democrats did find significant fault with the State Department for establishing Benghazi as a "temporary post" without the full security of an embassy or consulate. That could provide ammunition for criticism of Clinton as she gears up for a potential presidential run in 2016, given that she would have been involved in approving a U.S. mission in the largely lawless city after Libya's 2011 civil war.

The oversight committee was scheduled to hear from Pickering and Mullen at a hearing Thursday. The chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and fellow Republicans released their own highly critical report earlier this week.

Democrats called accusations of a stand-down order during the attack "unfounded."

Gen. Martin Dempsey, Mullen's successor as top U.S. general, stated as much at a Senate hearing in June. The Republican-led House Armed Services Committee endorsed the military's position after a classified hearing with other senior officials in July.

Still, several Republicans reiterated the claim at a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing Wednesday.

"Who gave the stand-down order?" asked Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla.

"There was no stand-down order," Patrick Kennedy, the State Department's undersecretary for management, answered.

 

[HehehehehehehehehehahaHyena]

Why not, ashamed? Your butthurt is shining through.

People have a right to keep their voting habbits secret. It's in the interest of a healthy Democracy.