New Disclosures on Benghazi - Part II

[plague311]

On this point, the Select Committee's Report states:



A senior watch officer at the State Department’s diplomatic security command was asked if he saw or heard a protest before the attacks and answered, “zip, nothing, nada.”

Because I'm positive in the heat of the moment they were shouting, "I BET THIS STARTED BECAUSE OF A SPORADIC YOUTUBE VIDEO THAT DEMEANED THEIR PROPHET!"

I can't find a quote in that article where it says that, in their dying moments, they laid out a well formulated plan as to what actually happened.

 

[A'isha]

On this point, the Select Committee's Report states:

I'm not surprised that Greg Hicks didn't hear anything about a video, since he was busy watching TV while "off duty" when the attack happened, despite being left in charge in Tripoli on the anniversary of 9/11 while Stevens was in Benghazi, missing two phone calls from Stevens to him while the attack was going on.

EDIT: He also pushed the false claim that there was a "stand down" order.

 

[The Big Dog]

I'm not surprised that Greg Hicks didn't hear anything about a video, since he was busy watching TV while "off duty" when the attack happened, despite being left in charge in Tripoli on the anniversary of 9/11 while Stevens was in Benghazi, missing two phone calls from Stevens to him while the attack was going on.

THERE is that utterly bizarre Greg Hicks hatred I was waiting for! I intentionally left that in because I thought that you would attack him. Oh man, he was off-duty! BURN HIM!

"EDIT: He also pushed the false claim that there was a "stand down" order." Again, false. It is undisputed “So Lieutenant Colonel Gibson, who is the SOCAFRICA commander, his team, you know, they were on their way to the vehicles to go to the airport to get on the C‑130 when he got a phone call from SOCAFRICA which said, ‘you can’t go now, you don’t have authority to go now,’’ Hicks recalled. “And so they missed the flight.”

Pushed to clarify whether they second rescue missed flight because they were told not to take it, Hicks responded: “They were told not to board the flight, so they missed it.”


Absolutely true.
By the way:

So why are you all for multiple investigations of Clinton, but not for the CIA?

Rule of So! Hot dog!

Why don't you care that the CIA fully believed that the Benghazi attack spontaneously arose out of protests over the video, and stuck with that until the 18th?

lie. The COS didn't now did he?

Why don't you care that the Clinton and the State Department knew that the Benghazi attack did not spontaneously arose out of protests over the video, and lied about it?

 

[Fudbucker]

What does the Republican reports say about that?

I have no idea. I didn't read the report. From the State Department's own report:

"The number of Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS) security staff in Benghazi on the day of the attack and in the months and weeks leading up to it was inadequate, despite repeated requests from Special Mission Benghazi and Embassy Tripoli for additional staffing. Board members found a pervasive realization among personnel who served in Benghazi that the Special Mission was not a high priority for Washington when it came to security-related requests, especially those relating to staffing. The insufficient Special Mission security platform was at variance with the appropriate Overseas Security Policy Board (OSPB) standards with respect to perimeter and interior security. Benghazi was also severely under-resourced with regard to certain needed security equipment, although DS funded and installed in 2012 a number of physical security upgrades.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...er-security-what-this-statistic-really-means/

Benghazi was a total cluster-****, but whether Clinton had anything to do with it, or it was just colossal incompetence, I don't know.

It happened under her watch, and she has to shoulder some of the blame, as does Obama. It doesn't seem like anything criminal happened.

 

[sunmaster14]

<snip>

Benghazi was a total cluster-****, but whether Clinton had anything to do with it, or it was just colossal incompetence, I don't know.

It happened under her watch, and she has to shoulder some of the blame, as does Obama. It doesn't seem like anything criminal happened.

Clinton has said that she accepts "full responsibility" for the *************** that was Benghazi. What does that mean though? Does accepting responsibility for something mean anything more than just saying the words? Are the words magic? Was anybody punished, demoted, forced out, fined, or prosecuted for what was - and this is undisputed - gross negligence?

 

[The Big Dog]

Clinton has said that she accepts "full responsibility" for the *************** that was Benghazi. What does that mean though? Does accepting responsibility for something mean anything more than just saying the words? Are the words magic? Was anybody punished, demoted, forced out, fined, or prosecuted for what was - and this is undisputed - gross negligence?

yup, four mid-managers were punished as a result of that ludicrous accountability review board that Hillary's pal Cheryl Mills screwed up so bad that Kerry had to rescind the punishments.

That leaves just one bad guy: Greg Hicks.

 

[marplots]

On this point, the Select Committee's Report states:



A senior watch officer at the State Department’s diplomatic security command was asked if he saw or heard a protest before the attacks and answered, “zip, nothing, nada.”

Point of order on that quote. Where it says, "Greg Hicks—one of the last people to talk to Chris Stevens before he died—said there was virtually no discussion about the video in Libya leading up to the attacks."

"Virtually no discussion" means, "some discussion," right?

 

[A'isha]

THERE is that utterly bizarre Greg Hicks hatred I was waiting for! I intentionally left that in because I thought that you would attack him. Oh man, he was off-duty! BURN HIM!

Yes, he was off-duty and watching TV at home. A member of staff had to come get him and tell him that an attack in Benghazi was happening. So he would have had no idea what was happening before the attack.

"EDIT: He also pushed the false claim that there was a "stand down" order." Again, false

As you yourself posted three years ago, Gibson testified that there was no stand-down order, and his testimony contradicted Hicks'.

So why are you all for multiple investigations of Clinton, but not for the CIA?

Rule of So! Hot dog!

I am unsurprised that you're dodging my question.

Why don't you care that the CIA fully believed that the Benghazi attack spontaneously arose out of protests over the video, and stuck with that until the 18th?

lie. The COS didn't now did he?

The COS?

Why don't you care that the Clinton and the State Department knew that the Benghazi attack did not spontaneously arose out of protests over the video, and lied about it?

Because they didn't, because the CIA was telling them otherwise at the time.

 

[The Big Dog]

As you yourself posted three years ago, Gibson testified that there was no stand-down order, and his testimony contradicted Hicks'.

Face palm. I just posted Hick's testimony, just posted it. You see where it says that they were not given authority to go? There is absolutely no dispute at all anywhere about that.

Oh well, just more frivolous attacks on Hicks. Seems like 2012 all over again!

COS. Chief of Station. he was the one who said it was "not/not" an escalation, but don't worry about that, the dopes who wrote the talking points did not.

 

[A'isha]

Face palm. I just posted Hick's testimony, just posted it. You see where it says that they were not given authority to go? There is absolutely no dispute at all anywhere about that.

Yes, that's what Hicks claimed.

Too bad for him that, as Gibson himself stated (and one of the many, many Congressional investigations confirmed), there was no stand-down order.

EDIT: Lawmakers: No ‘stand down’ order given in Benghazi attack

Reports of a military stand-down order have circulated almost since the night of the attacks, which unfolded in two stages over several hours at two locations — the U.S. diplomatic post and a nearby CIA building, where survivors of the first assault took shelter.

Such reports increased earlier this year after congressional testimony from Stevens’ deputy, Greg Hicks, who said that a site security team at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli had been ordered to stand down — that is, not to go to Benghazi and battle terrorists or rescue U.S. personnel. Mr. Hicks noted that the site security team leader, Army Lt. Col. S.E. Gibson, expressed frustration over being ordered to stand down.

But Col. Gibson said Wednesday that no stand-down order was given, according to the House Armed Services subcommittee on oversight and investigations. The subcommittee held a classified briefing with Col. Gibson; retired Army Gen. Carter F. Ham, former commander of U.S. Africa Command; and Navy Rear Adm. Brian L. Losey, former commander of U.S. Special Operations Command Africa.

“Contrary to news reports, Gibson was not ordered to ‘stand down’ by higher command authorities in response to his understandable desire to lead a group of three other Special Forces soldiers to Benghazi,” the subcommittee said in a rare statement about a closed-door briefing.

COS. Chief of Station. he was the one who said it was "not/not" an escalation, but don't worry about that, the dopes who wrote the talking points did not.

And yet, your vitriol is aimed not at the CIA which didn't change it's assessment in response to the September 15th email (and didn't change it until the 18th), but at Clinton.

Because none of this Benghazi ******** is about finding out what actually happened, but solely about attacking Clinton.

EDIT: Oh, and the video from the Benghazi compound that showed the attackers wasn't recovered until a month after the memo was assembled.

 

[The Big Dog]

Yes, that's what Hicks claimed.

Too bad for him that, as Gibson himself stated (and one of the many, many Congressional investigations confirmed), there was no stand-down order.



And yet, your vitriol is aimed not at the CIA which didn't change it's assessment in response to the September 15th email (and didn't change it until the 18th), but at Clinton.

Because none of this Benghazi ******** is about finding out what actually happened, but solely about attacking Clinton.

EDIT: Oh, and the video from the Benghazi compound that showed the attackers wasn't recovered until a month after the memo was assembled.

It is weird, you see, Hicks' didn't use the phrase "stand down" in that testimony:

lets take ANOTHER look:

“So Lieutenant Colonel Gibson, who is the SOCAFRICA commander, his team, you know, they were on their way to the vehicles to go to the airport to get on the C‑130 when he got a phone call from SOCAFRICA which said, ‘you can’t go now, you don’t have authority to go now,’’ Hicks recalled. “And so they missed the flight.” Pushed to clarify whether they second rescue missed flight because they were told not to take it, Hicks responded: “They were told not to board the flight, so they missed it.”
I made it yellow again! Now, did the SF get on the plane? Yes or No.

No they did not get on the plane.

As such you are deliberately misrepresenting his testimony again.

It is odd, it is almost as if A'isha does not realize that the CIA's performance was indeed one of the subjects of the Select Committee's investigation? Deliberately obtuse again? Yep!

Did Hillary lie? Yep! State knew there was no protest. Unless you are suggesting that Hillary lied to the Prime Minister of Egypt, which would be curious, because Hillary's statement to the Prime Minster was actually 100% accurate (and to Chelsea) but the claim that it spontaneously arose out of a non-existant protest was 100% false.

So, when did Hillary lie?

 

[Meadmaker]

Bush was ahead in the polls by 3 points in the days before the DUI story (a story broke by Fox News by the way). Then the election became tied. My employer actually hired Zogby to do seven polls, nationwide and six battleground states the eve of the election, and he found it to be tied, which was a statistically significant difference from what it had been the prior week. Zogby has had a rather stinky record ever since, but he really nailed that election for us. Unfortunately, he nailed it in the sense of calling it a tie.

I will never understand the American electorate. Oh, well. That election is another topic.


So one of the talking points I hear on talk radio is all about telling Marines to change in and out of uniforms four times. That sure sounds stupid to me. I mean really stupid.

So, I guess I'll go off and see if I can find out what actually happened. That requires wading through BS, I'm sure, but that can be interesting at times.

 

[A'isha]

It is weird, you see, Hicks' didn't use the phrase "stand down" in that testimony:

Hicks wasn't just talking about a special forces team being ordered to guard the embassy in Tripoli against a potential attack there (which is what actually happened) instead of getting on a plane for Benghazi. In his testimony, he was asked specifically about a "stand down" order (using those exact words), and later when referred to a Pentagon spokesperson statement that "There was never any kind of stand-down order to anybody", Hicks agreed that it contradicted his statements.

Too bad for him that both Gibson and the investigation agreed with the Pentagon, and not him: there was no stand-down order.

As such you are deliberately misrepresenting his testimony again.

If the misrepresentation is that Hicks was referring to a stand-down order, then he misrepresented himself.

It is odd, it is almost as if A'isha does not realize that the CIA's performance was indeed one of the subjects of the Select Committee's investigation?

And yet you're all for more investigations of Clinton, but perfectly happy with just the one for the CIA, when the CIA bears fall more culpability for disseminating information that later turned out to be false than Clinton was.

 

[The Big Dog]

And yet you're all for more investigations of Clinton, but perfectly happy with just the one for the CIA, when the CIA bears fall more culpability for disseminating information that later turned out to be false than Clinton was.

Curiously, the answer was no, no they did not get on the plane. Instead you typed a bunch of total ********. Oh well...

Speaking of ********, lets take a gander shall we?

And yet you're all for more investigations of Clinton, but perfectly happy with just the one for the CIA, when the CIA bears fall more culpability for disseminating information that later turned out to be false than Clinton was.

Lets play, spot the strawman. Did I say I was "all for more investigations of Clinton." Of course not. Did I say I was "perfectly happy" with the "one" of the CIA. Of course not.

In fact the Select Committee investigated both State and the CIA! I already said that. And State bears all of the responsibility for allowing the false talking points to be disseminated, not correcting the false talking points and allowing their employee, Susan Rice to lie and lie and lie.

Because in fact the real talking points were in the Rhodes memo.

Which again, I already explained.

But I commend you for so doggedly pushing Hillary's ridiculous talking point that she relied on the best intelligence available, when we all know that the CIA's wasn't the best and she knew from inside State that it was all a huge lie.

 

[A'isha]

Curiously, the answer was no, no they did not get on the plane.

The actual answer was "Hicks was testifying about an actual 'stand-down' order, and since no such order was ever issued, he's either a liar or really, really confused about what happened that night, making him the worst witness ever."

Lets play, spot the strawman. Did I say I was "all for more investigations of Clinton." Of course not. Did I say I was "perfectly happy" with the "one" of the CIA. Of course not.

This entire thread and its predecessor are nothing but cheerleading for the numerous Congressional investigations of Clinton by you, with nothing about the CIA's culpability in what happened.

In fact the Select Committee investigated both State and the CIA! I already said that. And State bears all of the responsibility for allowing the false talking points to be disseminated, not correcting the false talking points and allowing their employee, Susan Rice to lie and lie and lie.

You give the CIA a complete pass and focus solely on State because only one of those organizations has Clinton involved. And it's not the one mostly known by a three-letter acronym.

 

[The Big Dog]

snip.

Right, the SF did not get on the plane, just like Hicks said.

You give the State a complete pass and focus solely on CIA because only one of those organizations has Clinton involved. And it's not the one mostly known by a three-letter acronym.

 

[A'isha]

Right, the SF did not get on the plane, just like Hicks said.

But not for the reason that Hicks tried to claim they didn't.

You give the State a complete pass and focus solely on CIA because only one of those organizations has Clinton involved. And it's not the one mostly known by a three-letter acronym.

Yes, I blame intelligence failures on the organization that's so dedicated to intelligence that it has "intelligence" in the name, rather than the one that isn't.

How very partisan of me.

 

[The Big Dog]

Yes, I blame intelligence failures on the organization that's so dedicated to intelligence that it has "intelligence" in the name, rather than the one that isn't.

How very partisan of me.

So, Hicks was technically right, which is the best kind of right.

well ****, we finally agree on something! I also totally agree that under Hillary, the State Department sure as hell didn't have much intelligence in it!

By the way? You keep saying CIA. In fact David Petraeus, said if it were up to him he would not release the talking points at all. what you mean is Mike Morrell the knucklehead who wrote the final version while ignoring actual CIA intelligence, no doubt to kiss the ass of Rhodes and the other stooges in the West Wing.

You remember Rhodes right? The schmuck who wrote the Rhodes memo that Susan Rice based all her lies on?

 

[A'isha]

So, Hicks was technically right, which is the best kind of right.]

If I claim that Kennedy was killed because space aliens told Oswald to do it, that doesn't make me right even though it's a true fact that Kennedy was killed.

David Petraeus, said if it were up to him he would not release the talking points at all.

So? He bears his own share of responsibility for what happened.

what you mean is Mike Morrell the knucklehead who wrote the final version while ignoring actual CIA intelligence, no doubt to kiss the ass of Rhodes and the other stooges in the West Wing.

You remember Rhodes right? The schmuck who wrote the Rhodes memo that Susan Rice based all her lies on?

Rhodes didn't write the portion about the attack being the spontaneous result of protests over the video. The CIA did.

 

[The Big Dog]

If I claim that Kennedy was killed because space aliens told Oswald to do it, that doesn't make me right even though it's a true fact that Kennedy was killed.

slow clap.... easily the worst analogy you are going to see this week, folks.

The CIA also wrote that it was by terrorists associated with AQ (true) and there were numerous previous episodes, which State objected to and which were deleted. Hmmm, I thought we were just blaming the CIA.

Oh well, no matter, State didn't fix it, which allowed Rhodes to tell Sate department employee Susan Rice to lie and lie and lie, despite the fact Hillary and State knew it was false.

CIA/Morrell might have been incompetent, but Hillary/State intentionally deceived the American public.

By the way, we all noticed that you dodged the question about Hillary's lie to the Egyptian.