• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

New Disclosures on Benghazi

Status
Not open for further replies.
JoeTheJuggler said:
I agree. I see no political/policy discussion coming out of this. It's only CT type of discussion (who knew what; who said what; what is the evidence of whatever is being alleged; etc.).
Click to expand...

Ha! Good one!

It is hard to imagine someone wanting to consign a discussion about a Congressional Hearing tomorrow to CT. Ridiculous.
 
you are correct, the President order them to stand down thinking it would be great PR if Americans died.
 
16.5 said:
To answer your question, it appears that Hicks wanted that group to go to Benghazi because the security presence had already been stripped to the bare minimum there.
Click to expand...

No, he doesn't specify at all where "there" is. The transcript indicates that part has been deliberately elided out.

And you didn't answer my question. How would the events of that night been different had those four Special Forces soldiers been allowed to board the C-130 which left Tripoli at 6:30 AM?

Why are you second guessing the person who was in charge on the ground?
Click to expand...

Because, after his nonsense insinuations regarding fighters being sent to Benghazi, I don't trust him.
 
16.5 said:
Ha! Good one!

It is hard to imagine someone wanting to consign a discussion about a Congressional Hearing tomorrow to CT. Ridiculous.
Click to expand...

republicans pushing a conspiracy theory does not make it any less of a CT.
 
16.5 said:
Ha! Good one!

It is hard to imagine someone wanting to consign a discussion about a Congressional Hearing tomorrow to CT. Ridiculous.
Click to expand...

You seem to be laboring under a commonly held misconception that putting a thread in the CT forum means the CT being alleged must be false.

My point stands. This thread is not generating discussion of policy or politics. It's only CT discussion.
 
ANTPogo said:
No, he doesn't specify at all where "there" is. The transcript indicates that part has been deliberately elided out.

And you didn't answer my question. How would the events of that night been different had those four Special Forces soldiers been allowed to board the C-130 which left Tripoli at 6:30 AM?

Because, after his nonsense insinuations regarding fighters being sent to Benghazi, I don't trust him.
Click to expand...

"We fully intended for those guys to go," on the plane that was leaving for Benghazi, and you claim you didn't know where they were going. Oh dear.

This is skeptical site, AntPogo, I can't speculate how something that did not happen would have changed things, anymore than your claim that because nothing happened it is irrelevant. Hicks wanted those guys to go to Benghazi for security on the 6:00 am flight. They didn't go.

But you don't trust him. OK. Good luck with that.
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
You seem to be laboring under a commonly held misconception that putting a thread in the CT forum means the CT being alleged must be false.

My point stands. This thread is not generating discussion of policy or politics. It's only CT discussion.
Click to expand...

Oh Christ. You were serious about that? "who knew what; who said what; what is the evidence of whatever is being alleged" is a CT Discussion?

Wow. Well, I respectfully disagree.

Thanks for posting.
 
16.5 said:
Oh Christ. You were serious about that? "who knew what; who said what; what is the evidence of whatever is being alleged" is a CT Discussion?

Wow. Well, I respectfully disagree.

Thanks for posting.
Click to expand...
you are wrong in your disagreement. the questions are loaded to imply that there is a conspiracy.
 
Last edited:
Benghazi
. Now say it loudly 20 or 30 times. Then repeat. Do it long enough and something will appear.
 
16.5 said:
"We fully intended for those guys to go," on the plane that was leaving for Benghazi, and you claim you didn't know where they were going. Oh dear.
Click to expand...

:confused:

Where have I said I didn't know where they were going?

This is skeptical site, AntPogo, I can't speculate how something that did not happen would have changed things,
Click to expand...

Then what, exactly, is the issue with SOCAFRICA denying authorization for the four Special Forces soldiers in Tripoli to go on the 6:30 AM flight? Be specific.

Hicks wanted those guys to go to Benghazi for security on the 6:00 am flight. They didn't go.
Click to expand...

And at the time they were supposed to go, Benghazi was being evacuated.

But you don't trust him. OK. Good luck with that.
Click to expand...

Why do you think he kept talking about the fighters and why did he not correct the questioner when the questioner talked about "if the military had allowed a jet to fly over" when he was very specifically told why no fighter was available for a Benghazi mission?
 
16.5 said:
Thank you for your note.

I will certainly take note that discussions regarding Congressional Hearings and the evidence therein are considered Conspiracy Theories.

/wow.
Click to expand...

They are when those "hearings" are Darryl Issa's Traveling Benghazi Circus.
 
ANTPogo said:
They are when those "hearings" are Darryl Issa's Traveling Benghazi Circus.
Click to expand...

Well you certainly would not want to find out why the Administration never talked to him before they sent Rice to do the morning talk shows with an obviously false story.

It is a Conspiracy! lolz

/protip: the Democrats have also been asked to participate! That is how Congress usually works.
 
Last edited:
ANTPogo said:
What's he going to say that he didn't say back in early April? And why didn't he say it then?
Click to expand...

False Dichotomy. Assumes facts

I'm fairly certain that you don't understand the process here.

Of course, you call a Congressional Hearing a Traveling Benghazi Circus.

So... yeah....
 
16.5 said:
I'm fairly certain that you don't understand the process here.
Click to expand...

Why can't you answer my questions?

What, exactly, is the issue with SOCAFRICA denying authorization for the four Special Forces soldiers in Tripoli to go on the 6:30 AM flight? Be specific.

Why do you think he kept talking about the lack of fighters and why did he not correct the questioner when the questioner talked about "if the military had allowed a jet to fly over" when he was very specifically told why no fighter was available for a Benghazi mission?

Of course, you call a Congressional Hearing a Traveling Benghazi Circus.
Click to expand...

I call Issa's hearing a Traveling Benghazi Circus.
 
Last edited:
http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_new...allowed-to-fly-to-benghazi-during-attack?lite

U.S. military officials confirmed late Monday that a four-man Special Operations Forces team was denied permission to leave the US Embassy in Tripoli following reports that the consulate in Benghazi had been attacked.

The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the team was reviewing security at U.S. embassies throughout the Middle East and was not prepared for a combat assault mission, being armed with only 9mm sidearms.

They also noted that the situation at Benghazi remained unclear and there were concerns the Embassy in Tripoli also could become a target.
Click to expand...
 
ANTPogo said:
Why can't you answer my questions?
Click to expand...

Because they are bull ****. Lets take a look:

"What's he going to say that he didn't say back in early April?" What the hell does this mean? He was talking to a Congressional Investigator in April. Tomorrow he is testifying under oath before a Congressional Committee.

There is no basis to assume that he is going to say anything different.

Except you don't trust him. We get that.

You've attacked his credibility since your first post, it appears that you are doing so based on your preconceived political beliefs.

Is Hicks the bad guy here? Be specific.
 
16.5 said:
Because they are bull ****. Lets take a look:
Click to expand...

I repeated my questions in the post you replied to. You not only still won't answer them, you pasted in a completely different question.

Is Hicks the bad guy here? Be specific.
Click to expand...

No, the bad guys here would be the hack lawyers and and Issa who are using him for purely partisan purposes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom