jump to last post 1-9 of 9 discussions (37 posts)

Secretary Clinton's answers to what happened in Benghazi

  1. ZipperConstantine profile image81
    ZipperConstantineposted 4 years ago

    She didn't know about requests for increased security.  She had no answers for any of the questions other than what they are doing now to make it more safe.  The Democrats praised her and the Republicans asked serious questions.  What is wrong with this?   I retired from public service  from DOD and I know how the government works.   She knows exactly what was going on and knew it as it was happening.  Decisions were made to let the Ambassador and his team fend for themselves.  Something else was going on there; may be the government was smuggling guns through the consulate.  Something important was going on there for the Ambassador to go Benghazi on the anniversary of 9-11 when he knew the extreme security risks. 

    I solicit your ideas on the Benghazi mascara.

    1. profile image0
      JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Nobody knew about the requests for increased security. How many of them were there? 4 documented? One of them reported over a dozen recent attacks...

      I think Benghazi is going to go down as one of the unsolved mysteries, it's unfortunate.

      1. ZipperConstantine profile image81
        ZipperConstantineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        You may be right.  As always the government will keep there little secrets.

  2. WillStarr profile image87
    WillStarrposted 4 years ago

    I saw the Watergate cover-up, and now I'm seeing the Benghazi cover-up, and Benghazi is far worse. No one died in Watergate.

    1. Uninvited Writer profile image82
      Uninvited Writerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Yes, the Republican's won't accept their own guilt in what happened. Just because you don't hear what you want to hear does not make it a cover up.

      And she is right, what is important now is to make sure it never happens again. They don't want as many deaths in embassies under their watch as happened under Reagan and Bush.

      Haven't heard about Benghazi mascara...

      1. profile image61
        whoisitposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        What exactly is the republicans culpability in your estimation?

      2. ZipperConstantine profile image81
        ZipperConstantineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I feel Benghazi was a massacre because the consulate was being wiped out. There is no blame to be had here by democrats or republicans.  This is about our Ambassador and warriors  who died after pleading for help over and over.  I can see our warriors on top of those building shooting and waiting for help.  They mattered and what happened to them matters.  I feel for their families knowing that America left them behind the people they loved so dearly.  They deserve to know the truth.  Our warriors were waiting for help because we do not leave our men behind and they knew that.  But this time we did and people want to know why?  That is why I respected those republicans who asked the questions and disappointed that the democrats who didn't ask one related question?  How is that possible? it scares me that not one of the democrats cared enough about the loss of the Ambassador or the 4 warriors who where killed.  They could of asked one question, why not?  It was more of "how great thou art" meeting than an inquisition on their part.  I am really worried about Americans and the separation of classed and parties.  We need to come together again as one great people.  One Nation under God with Liberty and Justice for All!  Oh yes and the freedom not to believe in God if you so choose but to respect the rights of those who do as they respect your right not to.

        1. profile image61
          whoisitposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I think its an attempt at humor, Mascara?? I agree it wasn't very good.

        2. tammybarnette profile image61
          tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Very well said!

      3. TommieG43 profile image60
        TommieG43posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Republicans, Democrats, Why does it always come down to parties? Clinton KNEW what was going on. I could care less what side of the politcal fence she stands on...She knew what waas happening and did NOTHING to stop it. To me that is treason and needs to be treated as such.

  3. tammybarnette profile image61
    tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago

    http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/20 … icans?lite

    "Last month a report issued by the Accountability Review Board (ARB) appointed by Clinton, blamed State Department officials for “systemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies” that led to protection for the Benghazi facility that was “grossly inadequate to deal with the attack that took place.”

    "In her response to McCain, Clinton said, as she did to other senators on the panel, that some additional information on the causes and circumstances of the attack is in the classified portions of the report issued by the ARB. Senators and Senate staff can read the classified portions of the ARB report, but the public cannot.
    And she blamed members of Congress for holding up additional aid to Libya that might make the country more secure and less chaotic. "


    "Clinton replied that all four State Department officials criticized in the ARB report for their roles on the Benghazi events had been removed from their jobs and placed on administrative leave. “The ARB (report) made very clear that the level of responsibility for the failures that they outlined was set at the assistant secretary level and below.”

    "Clinton also said she could not confirm reports that some of the terrorists involved in last week’s Algeria hostage taking were also involved in the Benghazi attack but called it a "new thread" to follow."

    She did say that there is no doubt that Algerian terrorists have weapons they obtained from depots in Libya that were opened up and “liberated” after the dictator Moammar Gadhafi was toppled, with U.S. and NATO help, in 2011."
    "Clinton said she had accepted the ARBs recommendations for improvements in security procedures and had asked her subordinates “to ensure that all 29 of them are implemented quickly and completely.” She said these changes are designed to “reduce the chances of another Benghazi happening again.”

    1. ZipperConstantine profile image81
      ZipperConstantineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Isn't it amazing how the assistant secretary got all the blame.  Like I said, I retired from the Department of Defense and I know how government works.  Secretary Clinton knew what was going on.  You can believe what you want but I know better.

      1. tammybarnette profile image61
        tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I question everything...

  4. WillStarr profile image87
    WillStarrposted 4 years ago

    "Just because you don't hear what you want to hear does not make it a cover up."

    They knew they were lying when they claimed it was due to a video.

    It was a cover-up.

    1. tammybarnette profile image61
      tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Will.Just curious, what do you think of the actual 9/11 "conspiracy theories"?.Did you watch the Michael Moore video back then?

      1. profile image61
        whoisitposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Michael Moore is a complete buffoon, his video was crap and he lacks any credibility at all.

        1. tammybarnette profile image61
          tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I question everything, not only when it's the other party in office...you can type in to google and see many stories besides Michaol Moore's, but I guess to you it only matters if it's a dem roll

          1. profile image61
            whoisitposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I doubt very seriously that you question everything, I expect that you are projecting.

            1. tammybarnette profile image61
              tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              You would be wrong about that assumption...

              1. profile image61
                whoisitposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                You were assuming I was answering your assumption.

      2. ZipperConstantine profile image81
        ZipperConstantineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I've not watched the video but I do know about the theories.

        1. tammybarnette profile image61
          tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I had questions then as I do now, I have been trying to follow accounts in other sources from France and a middle east web news article...We can not always rely on our news anymore since the media has been monopoliized by 6 or so people...There is much to question of our wars and military actions considering it has always been to my knowledge we were supposedly spreading democracy and freedom to the world and have yet to see that be successful.

          1. ZipperConstantine profile image81
            ZipperConstantineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I think you are one the right track, this is an important  issue for you and I think you should investigate it with all possible sources. Let me know what you find out.

            1. tammybarnette profile image61
              tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              I will smile I truly want truth for the American people, the blame game has grown old and I am sure there is plenty to go around as corruption has no party affiliation.

  5. profile image61
    whoisitposted 4 years ago

    Clinton said that they were unaware of the requests for more security, as Rand Paul said she and the rest of the administration failed. They will continue to point fingers elsewhere and do what the incompetent do.

    1. ZipperConstantine profile image81
      ZipperConstantineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      With Clinton's background,  do you think every word out of her mouth is the truth?

  6. WillStarr profile image87
    WillStarrposted 4 years ago

    "Will.Just curious, what do you think of the actual 9/11 "conspiracy theories"?.Did you watch the Michael Moore video back then?"

    Conspiracies of that magnitude require the impossible...the absolute secrecy of the participants. As the old saying goes, "Two people can keep a secret as long as one of them is dead."

    Building codes require fire coatings on all load supporting steel structures, because they begin to rapidly lose strength in the heat of a common building fire. The impact of the airliners slamming into the WTC towers tore off most of the fire coatings and started enormous fires. From that moment on, the towers were doomed to collapse.

    No mystery to an old construction super like me.

    1. tammybarnette profile image61
      tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      There is a lot more to the story, you can google if you interested.

    2. ZipperConstantine profile image81
      ZipperConstantineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I was interested in the missing gold from a nearby building and a few other things.  I have not drawn any conclusions because there is not enough proof.  But I am open to new information about it.  I respect people who follow these theories and investigate them, these are the type of people who uncover important information that would not have been exposed.

    3. tammybarnette profile image61
      tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      http://newsone.com/742485/the-11-most-c … -theories/
      Here is a link to few, good reading at the very least.

  7. WillStarr profile image87
    WillStarrposted 4 years ago

    The notion that the Secretary of State was blissfully unaware of the imminent terrorist danger in Libya is so absurd that no one with a lick of common sense would believe it.

    For that matter, after two recent attacks on that same Consulate, it is absurd to believe that the President himself was unaware of imminent danger, but he had campaign-claimed that he had decimated Al Qaeda, so he covered it up.

    This is worse than Watergate.

    1. ZipperConstantine profile image81
      ZipperConstantineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I agree but there is more to it, I feel it in my bones, I truly think we were sending guns through the consulate and the Ambassador was there on 9-11 for something very important.

      1. tammybarnette profile image61
        tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-off … port-libya

        For Immediate Release September 14, 2012
        Letter from the President regarding the War Powers Resolution Report for Libya
        Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)

        On September 12, 2012, in response to an attack on our diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya, that killed four U.S. citizens, including U.S. Ambassador John Christopher Stevens, a security force from the U.S. Africa Command deployed to Libya to support the security of U.S. personnel in Libya. Further, on September 13, an additional security force arrived in Yemen in response to security threats there.

        Although these security forces are equipped for combat, these movements have been undertaken solely for the purpose of protecting American citizens and property. These security forces will remain in Libya and in Yemen until the security situation becomes such that they are no longer needed.

        These actions have been directed consistent with my responsibility to protect U.S. citizens both at home and abroad, and in furtherance of U.S. national security and foreign policy interests, pursuant to my constitutional authority to conduct U.S. foreign relations and as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive.

        I am providing this report as part of my efforts to keep the Congress fully informed, consistent with the War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148). I appreciate the support of the Congress in these actions.

        Sincerely,

        BARACK OBAMA

      2. tammybarnette profile image61
        tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        For Immediate Release September 10, 2012
        Readout of the President’s Meeting with Senior Administration Officials on Our Preparedness and Security Posture on the Eleventh Anniversary of September 11th
        Earlier today the President heard from key national security principals on our preparedness and security posture on the eve of the eleventh anniversary of September 11th. Over the past month, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism John Brennan has convened numerous meetings to review security measures in place. During the briefing today, the President and the Principals discussed specific measures we are taking in the Homeland to prevent 9/11 related attacks as well as the steps taken to protect U.S. persons and facilities abroad, as well as force protection. The President reiterated that Departments and agencies must do everything possible to protect the American people, both at home and abroad.
        http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-off … r-prepared

  8. Mighty Mom profile image90
    Mighty Momposted 4 years ago

    Exactly how many security forces should have been at the Benghazi diplomatic outpost?

    1. ZipperConstantine profile image81
      ZipperConstantineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I would guess at 16 with an airplane standing by as he requested.  But for some reason the government did not want to bring attention to Benghazi and I think that is why they turned down the Ambassadors request for more protection.

  9. WillStarr profile image87
    WillStarrposted 4 years ago

    "Exactly how many security forces should have been at the Benghazi diplomatic outpost?"

    Whatever was necessary to protect our Ambassador and his aides.

    Instead, the security teams were sent home.

 
working