DescentBB

http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/01 ... zi-attack/

Sources now tell CNN dozens of people working for the CIA were on the ground that night, and that the agency is going to great lengths to make sure whatever it was doing, remains a secret.

CNN has learned the CIA is involved in what one source calls an unprecedented attempt to keep the spy agency's Benghazi secrets from ever leaking out.

But hey. "What difference does it make"? Its just a "phoney scandal"

What I really hate about our fellow citizens is this is probably being brought out now, by the left, as a calculated damage control manuver so it will have faded from the attention span of voters by the time Hillary is closing on the election.

geezus, Will......really? Let's review a wee bit: The report CUDA cites(which, by the way, confirms my publicly stated suspicions) is that the Bengazi post was a good-sized CIA outpost, not a diplomatic office. Then, you somehow link discussing it now with covering for Hilary Clinton, who was Secretary of State. State has little control beyond providing cover for CIA operations. Clinton was not in charge of the CIA, nor did she have any say over CIA activity in Libya. Therefore, this is hardly a State Dept scandal. Further, I find it odd that after months of you folks whining about 'getting to the bottom' of what happened in Bengazi, now that comprehensive investigations have started wrapping up(these things take some time, as I tried to point out), you want them held back for release so further politics can be played with them? Thanks for clarifying your true concerns.........yeesh.

Slick, you didn't listen to the video. The consulate was indeed state department. The CIA outpost was a few blocks away. And the investigation is FAR from wrapping up. Congress has been asking for access to the rumored injured survivors since the investigation started, while the Whitehouse has continually said what survivors.

CUDA wrote:Slick, you didn't listen to the video. The consulate was indeed state department.

and which do you think was a cover for which? Come on, CUDA, you're a grown man. Do you really think we were running a true consulate there?

Congress has been asking for access to the rumored injured survivors since the investigation started, while the Whitehouse has continually said what survivors.

I'll agree with this part. My point above, which is why I directed it to Will, was that complaining about reports coming out now as being released early to provide a cushion for Hillary Clinton, was ludicrous

I wont disagree with you on the Hillary part.

That being said I wouldn't discount it either.

State Department is the group that decided to furnish the surface to air missiles to the radical Islamic types who were helping overthrow Syria.
The CIA was tasked with retrieving the missiles that State put in the wrong hands...
Hence the Hillary connection because....it actually does matter....at election time anyway.

Will-

What frustrates me is the weakness of the republicans. They retreat, they 'compromise,' they cave. They let the democrats set the agenda and the tone. When the democrats were in the minority, they yelled kicked and screamed. It didn't hurt them because guess who's in power now?

It's OK to be the party of "NO" when you stand by your principles. People respect that- even your adversaries.

If you're weak, they mock you and dismiss you WITH GOOD REASON. You're done. Game over.

I hear talk of third parties- fine...but how long would it take a third party to grow enough to challenge the dominant party? How long would we live under a one-party tyranny that would only write law and regulation that would entrench them permanently? It would take nothing short of a new revolution to kick them out of power by then.

The leftists on this board would celebrate a one party system; though they would only find out later on that they just voted themselves into an oppressive police state that answers to no one.

Who wants a one-party state? I'd prefer multiple (more than two) quality parties, but when one of the two main choices right now is largely batshit insane...it's not a hard choice.

There are lots of ways to tweak the system to force the politicians to do more than they do, to be more honest and responsible etc. but almost all those changes require them to vote on it...
So really the voters have to revolt. It doesn't really matter if your third party is going to actually capture the majority if it looks like the building of that party over a few election cycles will wipe out a critical number of the constituency of one or both of the big-two and you will see the one/two work hard and fast to adopt the rebels platform in an attempt to keep the votes coming in.

I mean face it, none of them are really there on good intentions, they are players enjoying a starting position on the field playing in the most powerful sport in the history of the world. Tell the player he's cut next season and he will ask 'What can I do to get back on the team coach?!?'

Will Robinson wrote:State Department is the group that decided to furnish the surface to air missiles to the radical Islamic types who were helping overthrow Syria.

got any backup for that assertion, because State usually plays completely NO ROLE in furnishing arms?

The CIA was tasked with retrieving the missiles that State put in the wrong hands...
Hence the Hillary connection because....it actually does matter....at election time anyway.

I suspect the CIA was both there well beforehand, in force, and likely was responsible for missle distribution in the first place.

ThunderBunny wrote: The leftists on this board would celebrate a one party system; though they would only find out later on that they just voted themselves into an oppressive police state that answers to no one.

get real. No one, at least that I've read on this board, wants a one-party system. At the outset of my participation, I noted that much of my criticism of the GOP is based on the fact that they could self-destruct and LEAVE US WITH a one-party system, at least for a while. And, your disdain of compromise, noted before the quoted bit, is part of WHY the GOP finds itself in that position. Our entire system of government is based upon sensible compromise.

callmeslick wrote:geezus, Will......really? Let's review a wee bit: The report CUDA cites(which, by the way, confirms my publicly stated suspicions) is that the Bengazi post was a good-sized CIA outpost, not a diplomatic office. Then, you somehow link discussing it now with covering for Hilary Clinton, who was Secretary of State. State has little control beyond providing cover for CIA operations. Clinton was not in charge of the CIA, nor did she have any say over CIA activity in Libya. Therefore, this is hardly a State Dept scandal. Further, I find it odd that after months of you folks whining about 'getting to the bottom' of what happened in Bengazi, now that comprehensive investigations have started wrapping up(these things take some time, as I tried to point out), you want them held back for release so further politics can be played with them? Thanks for clarifying your true concerns.........yeesh.

One problem. State IS responsible for the security of it's consulate and there's been enough testimony that under Hillary's leadership the security for the Benghazi consulate was stripped away to the bare bones. And to add insulate to injury when the 3:00 am call came in Hillary and Obama both hit the off button and went back to sleep. I mean heck, Obama needed his beauty rest for all those fundraisers he had to go to. Who cares our Ambassador is being murdered, it is vitally important that Obama keeps the coffers filled. But I digress.

So as Hillary is fond of saying, "What difference does it make?". Well some intelligence experts are saying, due to the success of the Benghazi attack, we now have 22 embassy's closing down. Perhaps instead of cowering in the closet, hoping the bad man goes away, perhaps instead of chortling and spiking the bin Laden football, exclaiming to the whole world how we have Al qaeda on the run, maybe...just maybe we should have been arming the embassies properly. Yes I know how Obama wants to lead from behind so he can erotically poke those in front of him, but such a style of leadership only pisses people off. The weakness this administration has shown in the face of increased threats from terrorist is appalling.
What ever happened to hunting down the perpetrators of Benghazi? You know, the ones that give interviews to reporters and laugh at how they have to hide in sidewalk cafes and wave to their fellow terrorists as they stroll by.

The State Department runs a program called The MANPAD program—Man-Portable-Air-Defense Systems. They buy back surface to air rockets that end up in th hands of bad people. Good idea.

Hillary had 40 million dollars set aside for buying weapons in Libya as The rebels took over.
The State Department operation in Bengahzi was Diplomatic cover for CIA operations.
Weapons Hillary paid for are showing up in the hands of rebels in Syria, bad guys.

State Department initially denied there was a buy back program, then when pressed said they prefer to not use the term 'buy back' for operations where they....well...buy back weapons. It has a bad connotation because the US didn't sell the weapons in the first place. They said 'they prefer to say they are assisting the new government secure loose weapons'.

Well that is all fine except the crux of the inquiry wasn't to assign blame to who ever initially sold the weapons into the hands of bad people in Libya....it was to determine if State Department is in Bengahzi buying up weapons. And they are! They set up a diplomatic outpost as cover for the CIA to operate out of and the weapons State Department has paid for have been found in Syria in the hands of bad people.

If your State Department is working through the Libyan government to buy back weapons you don't need CIA under cover of US Diplomatic positions to go sneaking around...

It is just more of the Obama administrations typical 'I didn't do it' strategy.

But in interviews with TWS this week, several more skeptical U.S. officials pointed to an exchange between Senator Rand Paul and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as a possible explanation for the CIA sensitivity about the mission. Paul asked Clinton about the possibility that the U.S. was involved in sending weapons from Libya to Syria.

“What I’d like to know is – the annex that was close by – were they involved with procuring, buying or selling, obtaining weapons, and were any of these weapons being transferred to other countries, any countries – Turkey included,” Paul said, referring to the “annex” operated by the CIA in Benghazi.

Clinton told Paul that his question would be better directed to “the agency that ran the annex.”

“You are saying you don’t know,” Paul said.

Said Clinton: “I don’t know.”

News flash for all Obama team members; if your CIA is using your State Department as cover and State Department funding to transfer shoulder fired surface to air missiles from bad guys in Libya to bad guys in Syria then YOU DID DO IT!
And the fact that a genuine Libyan in a fishing boat did the actual 'moving' doesn't give you cover for your role in it!
Well, actually, considering the partisan nature of our mainstream media, maybe it will.
After all, "What does it matter?!?"

Four ★■◆●ing people died. Who the ★■◆● cares? More will die today from slipping in the shower or choking on the boneless KFC....how the hell can you all STILL be talking about this? Forget what they talk about on Fox News for one friggin day.

CobGobbler wrote:Four **** people died. Who the **** cares? More will die today from slipping in the shower or choking on the boneless KFC....how the hell can you all STILL be talking about this? Forget what they talk about on Fox News for one friggin day.

They are talking about it on CNN so does that mean we can start to think about it again?
If they start talking about it on NBC do the 4 people become more worthy of mention?
If 240 die when a radical islamic jihadi uses a shoulder fired missile from the State Department/CIA's arab spring outreach to take down an airliner loaded with a bunch of tourists from some place you really like will it matter then?

CobGobbler wrote:Four ★■◆●ing people died. Who the ★■◆● cares? More will die today from slipping in the shower or choking on the boneless KFC....how the hell can you all STILL be talking about this? Forget what they talk about on Fox News for one friggin day.

your compassion is overwhelming. Who cares? YOU SHOULD because your government won't come clean about what really happened. Your attitude is part of the problem.

CUDA wrote:YOU SHOULD because your government won't come clean about what really happened. Your attitude is part of the problem.

I love reading this garbage. I seems many of the same people who want the government to come clean are the same people who peg Snowden and Manning as traitors. The stupidity is so thick you can cut it with a knife.

Well...maybe if these “whistle blowers” could be just a little more selective about the info they “leak”.

CobGobbler wrote:Four **** people died. Who the **** cares? More will die today from slipping in the shower or choking on the boneless KFC....how the hell can you all STILL be talking about this? Forget what they talk about on Fox News for one friggin day.

Yeah, and roughly 3000 people in the U.S. DIE every year due to food poisoning from companies that don't give a damn about food safety. Oh wait, the free market does no wrong. I don't see Fox griping about that.

CUDA, I even heard some idiot on Fox News Watch bemoaning the idea that Watergate was nothing compared to Benghazi. WTF! I guess if a Democratic President screws things up and someone dies, it's a crime. If a Republican President screws things up and a LOT of people die, it's nothing to worry about. You're also forgetting about the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and thousands of our troops that have died because a Republican President thought that 2 wars were the solution to all our problems, or his problems at least. I don't see Bush or Cheney going to jail for all those deaths either.

I'm sorry I donr remember anyone dying because of Watergate.


Bush again your hateon is showing TC

Yeah, and no one died in the Clinton Sex scandal either. But to Republicans, it was worth every taxpayer penny spent on investigating him. Where are the priorities with Fox? Bring down a president they hate, which they clearly do, or have some better priorities like pounding on the NSA spying scandal, which I DO think is the worst thing Obama has let go on under his tenure. No one paid for the thousands of deaths and torture victims in Bush's 2 wars and no one will pay for these 4 who sadly died on Obama's watch.

Why are you talking about FOX? The article was written by CNN, is the truth too much for you to digest?

Why always back to Bush? why do you always try and change the subject?
cant you handle the fact that your party in mired In corruption with these "phony scandals"
Cant you handle that our president and former SOS lied to you to cover up something bigger then the ambassador and 3 other Americans getting killed.

you folks are aware, are you not, that the State Dept has been covering for the CIA since we developed a CIA, right?

And, while I'd avoid comparisons to Watergate(breaking and entering and coverup, all in one) a Compare and Contrast to Iran-Contra is fair. On that measure, this thing is small potatoes......REALLY,REALLY small potatoes.

vision wrote:

CUDA wrote:YOU SHOULD because your government won't come clean about what really happened. Your attitude is part of the problem.

I love reading this garbage. I seems many of the same people who want the government to come clean are the same people who peg Snowden and Manning as traitors. The stupidity is so thick you can cut it with a knife.

Snowden is a whistle blower. Manning is a traitor. There is a HUGE difference in the information they let out. Manning took an oath and released information on how we were conduction operations. Snowden revealed how our government was spying on its own citizens. And was under no oath.

Thank God I live in portland and not Seattle I would have been in real trouble for saying citizen otherwise.

callmeslick wrote:you folks are aware, are you not, that the State Dept has been covering for the CIA since we developed a CIA, right?

And, while I'd avoid comparisons to Watergate(breaking and entering and coverup, all in one) a Compare and Contrast to Iran-Contra is fair. On that measure, this thing is small potatoes......REALLY,REALLY small potatoes.

How do you know. We don't know how deep this is yet.

CUDA wrote:Why are you talking about FOX? The article was written by CNN, is the truth too much for you to digest?

Why always back to Bush? why do you always try and change the subject?
cant you handle the fact that your party in mired In corruption with these "phony scandals"
Cant you handle that our president and former SOS lied to you to cover up something bigger then the ambassador and 3 other Americans getting killed.

I only mentioned Fox because I swear, every time I've turned to that channel, they've been rehashing this whole Benghazi affair like it was the scandal to end all scandals. They almost seem to think that if they yell and scream long enough, it'll stick. When they said that Watergate was not as bad, I nearly gagged. What hutzpah in my opinion. Maybe this CIA/State involvement IS another layer of intrigue and coverup. It is something new and interesting. If it's nasty, like a lot of things kept secret, information WILL eventually leak out. Secrets never stay secret if someone, somewhere, has a conscience, or an agenda. And I have read the article, so something definitely stinks in Libya. As for ol' Bushie, the man, his cabinet and his presidency was patently evil and corrupt. He wins in the body count department, the secrecy department, the rendition and torture department............... Stick it to Obama, then stick it to Bush too. Take no prisoners.

CUDA wrote:

callmeslick wrote:you folks are aware, are you not, that the State Dept has been covering for the CIA since we developed a CIA, right?

And, while I'd avoid comparisons to Watergate(breaking and entering and coverup, all in one) a Compare and Contrast to Iran-Contra is fair. On that measure, this thing is small potatoes......REALLY,REALLY small potatoes.

How do you know. We don't know how deep this is yet.

oh, please, CUDA. Is there any indication that we sold materials in violation of an international treaty? Get over it, this is really a lot of nothing. Hell, if arming bad folks inadvertently was a bad thing, where was the outcry over how we essentially provided the muscle for the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan? Geez-O-Pete, this whole nonsense about manufacturing scandal is actually counterproductive. If something serious ever came out of the right-wing talkers mouths, no one would pay attention, a la the Boy that Cried Wolf. And Hillary? She's going to cakewalk at this rate, if all that can be turned up is Benghazi, over and over.......

callmeslick wrote:

CUDA wrote:

callmeslick wrote:you folks are aware, are you not, that the State Dept has been covering for the CIA since we developed a CIA, right?

And, while I'd avoid comparisons to Watergate(breaking and entering and coverup, all in one) a Compare and Contrast to Iran-Contra is fair. On that measure, this thing is small potatoes......REALLY,REALLY small potatoes.

How do you know. We don't know how deep this is yet.

oh, please, CUDA. Is there any indication that we sold materials in violation of an international treaty? Get over it, this is really a lot of nothing. Hell, if arming bad folks inadvertently was a bad thing, where was the outcry over how we essentially provided the muscle for the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan? Geez-O-Pete, this whole nonsense about manufacturing scandal is actually counterproductive. If something serious ever came out of the right-wing talkers mouths, no one would pay attention, a la the Boy that Cried Wolf. And Hillary? She's going to cakewalk at this rate, if all that can be turned up is Benghazi, over and over.......

How do you know?

Once the investigation is over I'll pass judgment. It is presumptuous and diversionary on your part is ASSume that there is nothing to this.

YOU DO NOT KNOW

So stop pretending that you do


"Then, near the end of the CNN story:
Speculation on Capitol Hill has included the possibility the U.S. agencies operating in Benghazi were secretly helping to move surface-to-air missiles out of Libya, through Turkey, and into the hands of Syrian rebels."

Hrm sound Iran-contra like to me. And it doesn't look good since the rebels appear to have ties to al queda. Arming a group which the president claims to have decimated. Might suck to be him AND Hillary if it proves to be true

CUDA wrote:...

"Then, near the end of the CNN story:
Speculation on Capitol Hill has included the possibility the U.S. agencies operating in Benghazi were secretly helping to move surface-to-air missiles out of Libya, through Turkey, and into the hands of Syrian rebels."

Hrm sound Iran-contra like to me

If this was Bush in office the mainstream media would have Watergate II alternating with Iran Contra II constantly crawling across the top of screen while they dug into every possibility....

And slick and TC know its true, that's why their panties are in such a twist. They own this and have to carry water for the very kind of people they pretend to hate.

My compassion is very limited for four damn people. More people will die in this country before I finish this post. If it's more than 50 people then sure, talk about it. If not, who the hell cares? We have embassies in parts of the world where we are hated more than anything else in the world...this ★■◆● is bound to happen. This isn't some show on tv where a magical team is ready to airdrop in and kill everyone in sight without taking casualties...reality takes time and that's apparently something that none of you really quite understand. You can try to use your limited wit and sarcasm Will but I've seen the same ★■◆● from you for ten years. Before I wanted to fight it, now I just laugh at it. The 25 year old kid that still believes that FEMA is building re-education camps in Arkansas makes better arguments than you and he's batshit crazy. The world sucks. That's what it boils down to.

See the problem with Iran-Contra is…the Congress supported the arming of the rebels, until some in Congress put their fingers in the air, and decided it wasn’t the popular thing anymore, and decided to cut funding.

(yes, I know there are many sides to this story)

This left Reagan with two possibilities…

1. Abandon the contras.
2. Find some other way to continue the support.

Yea, leave the rebels without any support, and let them die, nice thing for a friend to do.

The world sucks. That's what it boils down to.

boy it must really suck in your life huh

No Cuda, I step outside once in awhile. Maybe you should do the same.

CUDA wrote:Manning took an oath and released information on how we were conduction operations.

But isn't this the same information the Benghazi freaks want exposed? What and how the government failed to prevent a terrorist attack? Wouldn't exposing that information make it easier for the enemy to use it against us? Some of you are perfectly happy with the government having secrets when it comes to fighting enemies and terrorism. Why not just say "Well, they are doing their best. It sucks a few people died but overall we are safe and not at war so they must be doing a good job!"

I don't get you guys.

For the record, in keeping with my stance of full transparency, I welcome more investigations if they actually translate into real knowledge and real policy change. Otherwise this is just another political circle-jerk we can do without.

vision wrote:

CUDA wrote:Manning took an oath and released information on how we were conduction operations.

But isn't this the same information the Benghazi freaks want exposed? What and how the government failed to prevent a terrorist attack? Wouldn't exposing that information make it easier for the enemy to use it against us? Some of you are perfectly happy with the government having secrets when it comes to fighting enemies and terrorism. Why not just say "Well, they are doing their best. It sucks a few people died but overall we are safe and not at war so they must be doing a good job!"

not even close to the same information. Manning released information on how we were conduction operations WHILE we were engaged with the enemy. hence the treason.

the Bengahzi issue is an after that fact issue, OBVIOUSLY the enemy already knows where we were weak because they attacked us and succeeded. the problem is coming from the coverup and the lies told by the administration during that coverup and the subsequent stonewalling by them intentionally hindering that investigation. why do they feel they need to lie about the cause of the investigation? why do they feel they need to hide survivors from the investigation?

.....and, Hillary, let's not forget Hillary!! Keep on whistling, Conservatives, because you are about 3 years from the election of a true liberal.

Slick is forgetting the conservatives have Senator Cruz. There...my troll is better than yours.

callmeslick wrote:.....and, Hillary, let's not forget Hillary!! .

OH no one is forgetting "what difference does it make"
and I'm sure we'll forget even less when it comes out that Her state department and the administration were supplying arms to Al-Queda so they could defeat Assad in Syria.

Prediction: Hillary Clinton will not be the first woman president. Given the choice I would have voted for her over Obama in 2008, but I still don't think she will ever be president. I don't see myself voting for her either. She is too "same old, same old." If I voted for her simply because she was a woman that would be sexist.