No, those are the words some underlings claim were used, two years after it happened, around the same time a book is coming out about it.
So? I never served, but even I know if a fool rushes into a battle unprepared, then said fool becomes a dead fool.
And I believe there has been countless investigations and countless documents handed over to Congressional investigations and if the biggest feather Benghazi conspiracy theorists have in their cap is a local CIA commander told them to his underlings to wait before heading out because he was trying to coordinate and get more information, then the desperation is incredibly thick.
Is the right-wing still griping about Benghazi? I thought that was old news by now.
You thought wrong. Do you have something constructive to contribute?
I think it's funny how a supposed "hold just a minute until I get better information before we go" has been turned into a "stand down". The desperation is thick.
This was the only reason given in the link.In a statement to Fox News, a senior intelligence official did allow that the security team was delayed from responding while the CIA’s top officer in Benghazi tried to rally local support.
You don't need to concern yourself about what I contribute. Read my posting and if you don't think what I say is important, don't respond.
I have already highlighted what was meant.....now you were the one that said this was nothing new.
So JB produce the link that shows this is old news. That this didn't get released yesterday? Do you have that Link JB?
Where is the link showing this is OLD NEWS. Either you can run to the Benghazi threads and shows us. Or you can google it up.
Now do you or don't you have this link?
So then no.
OK, then respond with gibberish or whatever floats your boat.
So was "Bob". Has "Bob" said he used those words? And are Benghazi conspiracy theorists REALLY hanging their hat on what phrase Bob used, despite the fact we know we DID send assistance to the consulate?The underlings are the ones who were there.
...so he wasn't looking for information regarding whether or not Libyan support would take care of it?Which NO ONE in the article said.
This was the only reason given in the link.
The whole story linking the attack to a video was a lie from the start. I don't thnk anybody honestly doubts this. But I don't really think the scandal runs any deeper than that. This administration is incompetent not corrupt.That the narrative that the White House has been putting forth is, at best, missing context. At worse, intentionally deceptive.
Right, she... was dishonest.
It's 3 AM and the phone rings......sorry the loser in charge needs his sleep call back in the morning
You do know that it was NOT Al Qaeda that attacked the compound in Benghazi right?
i never said it was not something new
i asked what does it add to what we already knew about the benghazi incident
nothing that i have read, and nothing that you have been able/willing to share (after numerous requests to tell us how this 'new' information shapes the understanding of benghazi in any way)
that you have been unable to offer such insights allows me to conclude this is as beneficial to our understanding as to learn 'new' information that one of the participants was wearing khakis instead of blue jeans
OK, then respond with gibberish or whatever floats your boat.
So was "Bob". Has "Bob" said he used those words? And are Benghazi conspiracy theorists REALLY hanging their hat on what phrase Bob used, despite the fact we know we DID send assistance to the consulate?
Like I said...desperation.
...so he wasn't looking for information regarding whether or not Libyan support would take care of it?
The desperation is thick.
He's making the same claim, and the released latest benghazi hearings also back up this fact.
Moderator's Warning: |
Threads merged |
The whole story linking the attack to a video was a lie from the start. I don't thnk anybody honestly doubts this. But I don't really think the scandal runs any deeper than that. This administration is incompetent not corrupt.
Why does it matter? We know what happened and we know why. Is it really necessary to find out if "Bob" said "hold up just a second while I get more information" or if he said "stand down" when we know the intent was the same? Are we really wasting time about specific words?Valid questions. WHy dont we have answers?
When you say "Democrats" what you really mean is "multiple Congressional investigations led by Republicans". Right?Democrats have been saying there was no stand down order.
With the amount of propaganda you like to spew you'd think you'd at least have the courtesy to read what other people post.
What this story is asserting: That the security team at the CIA Annex, which was a few miles away, were told to "stand down" by the lead individual at the annex when they were requesting to aid the embassy. Eventually they disobeyed the order 30 minutes after the initial order to stand down was placed.
What the politifact article is asserting: That a 4 person in Tripoli, an hour flight away, and were told to "stand down" because the individuals in Benghazi were already dead when the decision whether or not to send the team was made.
These are two entirely different issues.
No, she was playing a little game, and taking a chance. She was trying to whitewash the entire hearing away by making that statement. It was a bit of political showmanship, and it backfired on her.
She was hoping to look like the bigger, caring person (Yeah, Hillary cares, LOL) and try to make the republicans look like the ones doing wrong. "Oh, please, just let them rest in peace. Why must we dwell on this terrible attack anymore, you bad people?" That's what she was trying to present. Didn't quite work out that way, she came off more as Cruella de Vil than a Florence Nightingale.
I'll add to the above by saying the OP article does NOT say there was an official stand-down order given from officials at the White House, the State Department, CIA HQ or DoD. From the article, that order came directly from "Bob", their on-scene commander/supervisor. When asked where the alleged "stand-down order" came from, Paronto, one of the CIA operatives questioned, answered by saying, “It happened on the ground-- all I can talk about is what happened on that ground that night."
So, what you have here is the 3 CIA operatives asked to engage the enemy but NO RESPONSE was ever given from U.S. officials state-side. As such, they acted on their own WITHOUT ANY OFFICIAL ORDERS FROM CIA HQ or anyone else way or another except from their immediate superior on the ground.
Today Fox News just showed a teaser for what will be aired tomorrow night (Friday 10: PM eastern time)
So far the two CIA security ops say they were ordered to stand down after the top CIA officer got off the phone speaking to ???
Both of these CIA individuals said if they weren't ordered to stand down that they believe all four Americans who were killed that night would still be alive today.
And that it had nothing to do with a video on You Tube.