BENGHAZI

To me the whole bengazi debacle was the administrations intent to make Obama's Lybia versus Bush's Iraq seem like a wild sucess. They wanted it to appear to be a very stable country. If Stevens died in a general protest to a film it was not their fault, however if Stevens died at the the hands of radical muslims that had been supported by american airpower was contrary to a reelection theme. Assets could have gotten there.

Spot on. I concur. So much nonsense going on here that the big picture is lost. Hillary and friends wanted to pretend that the Libya "liberation" was a great, resounding success. Libya was now a wonderful, Democratic, land of the free, with rainbows and unicorns dancing in the streets. No need for security in wonderland. And of course Embassies and consulates must be there because it's so safe and free that Hillary should get a Nobel Peace prize.

They didn't want to send in military help during the assassination attack, because that would be an admission that all was not well.

The truth was that Hillary and Obama's political theater outweighed the safety of personnel on the ground. That's the story.

IMHO, if an area is not safe, we should have no presence at all. Our people should not be put in harms way for political posturing. And all of this talk about more money for more security is nonsense. If a place is inherently not safe, extra security personnel will not help.

We can spend a billion dollars on a fortress in Baghdad, yet it still isn't secure. It's a waste of money and potentially lives.
 
I think Chaffetz exposing the report as a fraud will get some airplay tonight on cable tv and the fact that he was crying.

That was probably the most interesting thing from the hearing and he did it quite well.

He was determined to nail the bitch Clinton and was jabbing away all afternoon and built up to that like a crescendo
 
Hilary Clinton is so fucked come 2016 -- I am more confident then ever that we have a shot at the presidency if we can beat Jeb and Rubio for the GOP nomination. Oh, and who is this Trey Gowdy guy? He's a badass, hahahah.
 
Last edited:
That was pretty weak for a "whistleblower hearing". I guess nobody has the balls to officially come forward with the real story on record of what's going on with the CIA's arms trafficking to AQ to overthrow middle eastern governments. I have thought that the recent ramp up against Syria (Israeli bombing, heightened rhetoric) is a direct result of these Benghazi hearings since the CIA and State are running the same operation in Syria as they did in Libya. Would be rather inconvenient to the current Syria operations for it to be admitted that the "rebels" are nothing but hired AQ, paid for by American taxpayers....
 
Last edited:
What we also learned, beside the regular poster's threads finding the horrors still continuing in Libya, (Kidnapping of politicians, bombings of the French Libyan embassy, etc)

Libya, even to this date, needs tons of US security, both State Department and DOD.

Libyan Militias used by the US/NATO group to overthrow Qaddafi, are resisting the "Canned Libyan Politicians" desired by NATO/US.

US .Gov Whistle-blowers are still persecuted by the Obama/Hillary/Holder governments

Money was funneled from Iraq to Libya

Democrats blamed it on budget cuts, when there weren't any cuts, when the requests for Benghazi security funds came, to Department of State's FY2012 or FY2013 budgets. BTW, they had plenty of money to throw parties and balls around the planet @ embassies and consulates, but not to protect a CIA/DoS forward operating base in a hostile country they just overthrew? lol

We have two crime families still controlling the US government and still lying.

CIA operations/communications room in Benghazi stayed intact/sealed and not compromised... (that would of been disastrous, U.S. VERY LUCKY) U.S could of been caught funneling/transporting weapons/terrorists/etc into Syria

Epilogue: Nothing will happen to Hillary or the others... Politicians are above the laws
 
Last edited:
Spot on. I concur. So much nonsense going on here that the big picture is lost. Hillary and friends wanted to pretend that the Libya "liberation" was a great, resounding success. Libya was now a wonderful, Democratic, land of the free, with rainbows and unicorns dancing in the streets. No need for security in wonderland. And of course Embassies and consulates must be there because it's so safe and free that Hillary should get a Nobel Peace prize.

They didn't want to send in military help during the assassination attack, because that would be an admission that all was not well.

The truth was that Hillary and Obama's political theater outweighed the safety of personnel on the ground. That's the story.

IMHO, if an area is not safe, we should have no presence at all. Our people should not be put in harms way for political posturing. And all of this talk about more money for more security is nonsense. If a place is inherently not safe, extra security personnel will not help.

We can spend a billion dollars on a fortress in Baghdad, yet it still isn't secure. It's a waste of money and potentially lives.

Wow. Gregory Hicks is admitting this right now.

"We needed to stay there (Benghazi) as a symbolic gesture to the people we saved from Gaddafi during the revolution...as a symbolic gesture to support the dream of the people of Benghazi to have a democracy...he (Stevens) also understood from the Secretary herself that Benghazi was important and that we needed to make it a permanent post."

If Diplomats want to commit suicide, is it anyone's responsibility to stop them?
 
I really hope they pin this on Hillary and end her political career. Biden will be easy pickings.
 
That was pretty weak for a "whistleblower hearing". I guess nobody has the balls to officially come forward with the real story on record of what's going on with the CIA's arms trafficking to AQ to overthrow middle eastern governments. I have thought that the recent ramp up against Syria (Israeli bombing, heightened rhetoric) is a direct result of these Benghazi hearings since the CIA and State are running the same operation in Syria as they did in Libya. Would be rather inconvenient to the current Syria operations for it to be admitted that the "rebels" are nothing but hired AQ, paid for by American taxpayers....

It's people like you who hold that "ALL OR NOTHING" mentality that has turned so many Ron Paul supporters away from voting for Rand in 2016... you should be thankful that these three brave men "had the balls" at all to come out against their own government for covering up the stand down orders...
 
I think Hillary is toast.

There is no way the families of the dead will let her get away with what happened and then get that sickening send off where she had all the State Dept staff clap her off into the sunset at the end of January.

They will align with the GOP if she runs for the presidency and gets the nomination and the GOP will spend $100m on ads for BENGHAZI FAMILIES FOR TRUTH ala Swift boat veterans against Kerry endlessly going after her in the swing states.
 
political movie called: Monster Ball


OBAMA-HILLARY-EVAN%20VUCCI-AP_0.jpg



(AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
 
It's people like you who hold that "ALL OR NOTHING" mentality that has turned so many Ron Paul supporters away from voting for Rand in 2016... you should be thankful that these three brave men "had the balls" at all to come out against their own government for covering up the stand down orders...

Blowing a whistle is an all or nothing activity. Beating around the bush with these fake exposes' is a waste of time and (yet more) money. Btw, the stand down order information was widely available prior to this hearing. Maybe you're not understanding me here......listen closely......there were no whistles of any consequence blown during this hearing. Little to no information that wasn't already available through various media outlets to those that chose to pay attention before today.
 
Why the need for a such a presence in Benghazi? A land with absolutely no poppy fields as far as the eye can see! Mind-boggling!
 
Why the need for a such a presence in Benghazi? A land with absolutely no poppy fields as far as the eye can see! Mind-boggling!
Because the Washington DC 'WAR LORDS' need to; recruit, train, loadup, and transport their terrorist fighting proxy to the next hot spot the WAR LORDS need to conquer and pillage.

No secret, Benghazi was a staging area for; weapons, advisers, & rebel terrorists eventually headed to Syria. I wonder how much CIA, Mi5/6, Bahrainian, UAE, Saudi money is flowing into Syria via these proxy countries?

I just never ends, but Benghazi is an idealistic isolated place,as a training and jumping off point to Africa & the Near East.
 
The need for the presence in Libya, from an interventionist's perspective, is to control the resources of another country in Africa, and use it as a forward base for further hegemonic moves in the region. Libya shared its oil profits with the public, it operated from a state-run, but EQUITY-based currency, and was independent from the banksters, Big Oil corporations, and the West.

This could not stand! The first thing the Nato/US backed forces did upon taking control of the government was to install a Ministry of Oil and a Ministry of Banking (to get the oil under control of the West, and to convert the currency to a fiat/debt based system coordinated by the Western banks).
 
Last edited:
Just turned on Mark Levin.

He's not happy with Boehner denying a special committee for Benghazi.
 
Because the Washington DC 'WAR LORDS' need to; recruit, train, loadup, and transport their terrorist fighting proxy to the next hot spot the WAR LORDS need to conquer and pillage.

No secret, Benghazi was a staging area for; weapons, advisers, & rebel terrorists eventually headed to Syria. I wonder how much CIA, Mi5/6, Bahrainian, UAE, Saudi money is flowing into Syria via these proxy countries?

I just never ends, but Benghazi is an idealistic isolated place,as a training and jumping off point to Africa & the Near East.

Bingo. They were trying to set up Libya as a jump off point for the next "frontier", Africa operations, and for the last couple middle east countries to be overthrown.

The need for the presence in Libya, from an interventionist's perspective, is to control the resources of another country in Africa, and use it as a forward base for further hegemonic moves in the region. Libya shared sit oil profits with the public, it operated from a state-run, but EQUITY-based currency, and was independent from the banksters, Big Oil corporations, and the West.

This could not stand! The first thing the Nato/US backed forces did upon taking control of the government was to install a Ministry of Oil and a Ministry of Banking (to get the oil under control of the West, and to convert the currency to a fiat/debt based system coordinated by the Western banks).

+rep

There's also a thread here about the aquifer that Gaddafi built without use of international money. Im sure this aquifer will be nice starting point to divert water into the drier parts of Africa, where the oil and mining companies will enjoy the use of it. Of course it'll be sold as "helping Africans plant better crops"...

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Afri...ossil-water-to-irrigate-desert-farms/(page)/2
 
Last edited:
As this Benghazi thing unfolds the only thing I keep thinking over and over is:

Ron Paul was right.

The whole thing is bunk, we never should have been bombing them, we never should have been in the business of overthrowing their government, we never should have had a CIA base there, we should have just left this shit alone.

If Ron Paul were president all of those people would be alive today, the Americans AND the Libyans.
 
As this Benghazi thing unfolds the only thing I keep thinking over and over is:

Ron Paul was right.

The whole thing is bunk, we never should have been bombing them, we never should have been in the business of overthrowing their government, we never should have had a CIA base there, we should have just left this shit alone.

If Ron Paul were president all of those people would be alive today, the Americans AND the Libyans.

exactly my position when i hear co-workers/friends discussing this topic. this country loves to intervene in other countries affairs and then when it all goes badly-the media loves to politicize and beat it into the ground, at the expense of the victims and cultures it effects. if we hadn't mucked with it-this would be a non-issue today....a great argument for non-intervention that is hard to dispute.
 
Back
Top