Yes, all relevant parties were interviewed before the review board and further, the members of the review board, were not allowed to testify publicly before congress because Issa knew that their testimony would mean the end of his fantastic fallacy. Sorry friend, as tragic as the situation was, it isn't a cover up and please stop buying into the right wing propaganda. you say you don't take your news from those sources yet your posts almost match, verbatim, the right wing conspiracy theorists. go figure.... All special forces, coupled with drones, have been used more extensively since Obama has become President because it's a smarter and more efficient way to wage war against small groups. We should have learned this lesson from the Roman troubles with the Vandals, Gauls, Visigoths and Vikings sacking Rome: you cannot fight small tactical groups with large standing armies. It's not like their use has only recently been documented. Again, get off the right wing conspiracy sights and take a breather pal.....there's plenty of REAL troubles to worry about.
All relevant parties were interviewed? I don't know whether to laugh or cry. For starters, this was an Accountability Review Board, not an investigation. HUGE difference. It was put in place to find out who screwed up, not why it happened in the first place. They analyzed processes and procedures, not root causes and underlying events. So, let's discuss the lack of relevant parties. #1 Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Counterterrorism Mark Thompson, a Benghazi whistleblower and “primary player” at the State Department was not interviewed by their Accountability Review Board (ARB) regarding the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attack #2 Eric Nordstrom, State Department's Diplomatic Security Officer..."Nordstrom, who was interviewed by the ARB, said the panel “stopped short of interviewing people that I personally know were involved in key decisions that led to how those events unfolded.” #3 Hillary Clinton-Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was also not interviewed for her own department’s review. #4 General Carter Ham-Commander of US African Command, in charge of military command in Libya. He was replaced in October, just one month after Benghazi by an inexperienced General. He has never testified. So, the Accountability Review Board (a whopping 2 people) found that, "Systemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department (the "Department") resulted in a Special Mission security posture that was inadequate for Benghazi and grossly inadequate to deal with the attack that took place." And also, " The Board found that certain senior State Department officials within two bureaus demonstrated a lack of proactive leadership and management ability in their responses to security concerns posed by Special Mission Benghazi, given the deteriorating threat environment and the lack of reliable host government protection." At the end of the day the ARB found problems within senior levels of the State Department but never interviewed the person who ran the State Department.....Hillary Clinton. They also found that nobody was accountable.......that's right....NOBODY. Yes, they said, terrorists were the ones responsible, but nobody within the US Government. Damnit. Americans were tortured and died over there. It DOES matter, contrary to what Clinton said. This wasn't an issue of procedural miscues. The ARB was not a full scale investigation. Not even close. The American public should know what "Ambassador" Stevens was doing. They need to know about the events that led up to the attack. There were warnings (honor among terrorists), and there were people willing to step up who were stonewalled. What I have said doesn't come from the news. My eyes were opened by someone who knows better.
I find it convenient that you cannot cite one single credible source to support all of this bull shit, yet at the end you insinuate that you are on the inside track to information that the rest of us poor bastards aren't. The fact is that everything you've listed above are almost verbatim on every Benghazi conspiracy web site out there. I can't help it that the facts do not support this narrative that some massive cover up has ensued. This also shows your naive perspective on how government functions. The government is much too big and inefficient to conduct massive cover ups, contrary to what you might believe. This isn't partisan for me....I said the same thing when my friends from the left were hell bent and convinced that GWB and Cheney had something to do with 9/11. Further, do you understand that there were 11 embassy and consulate attacks during the GWB administration, some of which were attacked more than once which were never investigated. Not one eyebrow raised. Want to know why? Because this shit just happens sometimes and it is part of the deal of being an ambassador to a place like Libya. Republicans have tried, to no ends, to make this into something it isn't and will never be. You want so badly to pin something....anything to this President that you are willing to continue grasping at straws like this story and the IRS story too. If the facts change and you or Darrell Issa come up with something credible, please get back to me but until then your argument is falling on deaf ears. Oh, and by the way, not everyone who tells you they are in the know are necessarily in the "know."
Big difference between a truck being blown up in front of an embassy and one being attacked for 12 hrs. Benghazi lasted for 12 hrs. GWB didn't have a problem calling a terrorist attack what it was. Barry can't even say it. It's attack of pissed off you tube watchers with RPGs. The whitehouse new it was a terrorist attack in the first 2 hrs. They went as far as arresting an innocent man to avoid using the T word. They were to worried abou poll numbers. Stevens was on official business doing dirty work for the CIA and whitehouse. Running guns and cutting deals. He was a loose end and had to be erased. Attack commenced. Stand down given. People died. Barry goes to Vegas. American people get stuck with mr incompetent for 4 more years.
What bullshit? You asked for proof that the whole story wasn't out. You cited the ARB as proof that it was. What I just gave you as a response is all factual. The people I listed were all key participants in Benghazi. Why were they not included in the ARB report? I gave you direct quotes from the actual ARB and from the Congressional investigation. Benghazi was both a State Department and military incident. Why then, was Hillary not included in the ARB report? She ran the State Department for God's sake. General Ham was the guy in command and would have been part of the defense of the embassy. Not only was he not interviewed, he was promptly replaced. Why? The incident that night in Benghazi was not a single event. Small scale attacks had been going on for quite awhile. Do you really believe that Stevens was just an Ambassador? Really? And you can slow your roll on the partisan crap. I haven't even started on GWB and what I think about the crap that went on under his watch. A little history can go a long way. Lady Bird was a major stockholder in Halliburton. Think Viet Nam. By the time Halliburton merged with KBR the culture of corruption was solidified. No compete contracts in the Middle East. Do you think they are over there planting daisies? Tell me what you think KBR does over there. In your rush to make this partisan you now bring up the IRS. Lol. Red herring. Despite Bill Clinton's insistence that "If you love America, you can't hate the government", I do love America and I hate what our government has become. Republican, Democrat, whatever...this isn't the America I grew up believing in. You mentioned drones...and you think that's the answer? I suppose from the folks on the ground it doesn't matter if a human did the work or a drone did. Dead is dead. As for the drone pilots, PTSD happens from a distance. Here's a source...http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/10/ptsd-drones_n_1954940.html HuffPo....left leaning enough? Oh, and by the way, not everything is as you think....I am not a dude. I think this is a good time for me to comsider the learned advice of Max Ehrmann. Go placidly amid the noise and haste, and remember what peace there may be in silence. As far as possible without surrender be on good terms with all persons. Speak your truth quietly and clearly; and listen to others.
Look, it's obvious that you think you are really "in the know" but I hate to tell you that everything you listed above can be easily debunked. Mark Thompason, Eric Nordstrom and Gregory Hicks all testified before the congressional committee and even testified, under oath, that the ARB was a thorough and good investigation. Further, not one of them testified to wrong doing at any level of the government. Could some things have been handled better? Sure, but nothing intentional or criminal as you continue to suggest. For that matter, Hillary testified before the congressional committee as well. And to top it all off, Gen. Carter Hamm was interviewed by the committee this past friday. The truly telling part of Hamm's testimony is that they did it behind closed doors, which has become a pattern for Issa and his committee: when you think the witness might say something that shoots holes in the story, just conduct it behind closed doors. But when it makes good political sense, like Hillary Clinton, they parade her out for theater. Don't you think that if Gen. Hamm had revealed something so treasonous during his testimony that we would have heard from Issa by now? The problem with this entire "investigation" by Issa and the Republicans is that at each turn, your theories keep getting debunked and proven wrong so the story keeps changing. First, it was that F-16's could have been scrambled and a Special Forces Team was waiting in the wings but ordered to stand down. But when the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs testified that neither accusation was correct, the story changed and it was because certain individuals were never interviewed or, worse, silenced altogether yet each of these individuals have indeed testified. The truth is that this yet another political ploy by Republicans. I guess next you will say that they just haven't talked to the right people yet or that we've only heard the tip of the ice berg or whatever other kind of bull shit you can stir up. Please spare me the patriot speech. If you loved your country as much as you say you do you would have your facts straight, but you don't. You insist that you have offered some support for your argument but, so far, you can not prove one single accusation or insinuation that you've made. So stomp your foot all you like.....male or female.....I really don't give a damn.
September 17, 2008: Heavily armed fighters attack the U.S. Embassy in Yemen. A car bomb is detonated. At least 16 people die, including six attackers. No Americans are reportedly killed. July 9, 2008: The U.S. Consulate in Istanbul, Turkey, is attacked in what the American ambassador to the country calls "an obvious act of terrorism" aimed at the U.S. January 12, 2007: An anti-tank missile tears through the U.S. Embassy in Athens, Greece, but there are no injuries. September 12, 2006: Syrian authorities kill three attackers and apprehend a suspect outside the U.S. Embassy after a car explodes near the walls of the Damascus building. March 2, 2006: A U.S. diplomat and his driver are among at least four people killed in an apparent suicide attack outside the U.S. Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan. December 7, 2004: An attack on the U.S. Consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, kills nine people. A Saudi group linked to al Qaeda claims responsibility for the attack. February 28, 2003: Gunmen open fire outside the U.S. Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan. Two police officers are killed and six others, including one civilian, are injured. October 13, 2002: A series of bomb blasts on the Indonesian tourist island of Bali kills scores of people at nightclubs. At the time of those blasts, another attack occurs near a U.S. consulate. Authorities say they believe the attacks are coordinated. June 13, 2002: A previously unknown militant group called Al-Qanoon claims responsibility for a bombing that kills 10 people at the U.S. Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan. The U.S. State Department says it suspects al Qaeda is responsible. March 20, 2002: A car bomb explodes at a shopping center near the U.S. Embassy in Lima, Peru, killing nine people. January 22 , 2002: Gunmen attack a U.S. government information center in Calcutta, India, near the U.S. Consulate. So here is a list of all the US embassy and consulate attacks that occurred during GWB's administration. Note that the US consulate in Kirachi, Pakistan was attacked twice and a US diplomat was killed in the second attack. You know, maybe you are right....it's not the same.....here is 11 attacks and not one word of outrage by you guys but 1 attack and now you want to claim some righteous indignation? What a joke! So either you are playing politics or you don't possess the intellectual capacity for analyzing simple information and making your own determinations. Since I know you are not a stupid guy, I have to assume you are playing politics by feigning outrage. The very best con men that the Republican party can find have been unable to spin this into the scandal that was promised. When that changes, let me know. Until then....you got nothing because there was nothing.
None of those attacks lasted half a day. None of the commanders were ordered to stand down. Extra Security was never denied and The Bush administration didnt try to convince the public, that they were not terrorist attacks. And the Bush administration didnt try and lay blame on an innocent civilian, let alone go so far as have him incarcerated to cover his ass. Barry and Hillary both were MIA.
You do give a damn or you wouldn't keep at it. I played by your rules. You stated that the entire story was out and used the ARB as your source. I gave you proof that it couldn't be a complete story without the people I listed and it is fact that the ARB did not include their testimony. The ARB was a State Department asset and their report cited gross errors within senior management but Hillary was never questioned as part of the report. Ridiculous. 4 Americans died that night including two former SEALs. But the ARB found zero accountability outside of the terrorists. That doesn't work for me. So if Ham is talking as of two days ago, then your theory about the whole story is inaccurate. Closed doors don't define anything. Or otherwise you would have to concede that some parts of the ARB report remIn classified. Did they benefit Hillary? Who knows. Can you dispute the following? "Lt. Col. Steve "Hoot" Gibson and RADM Brian Losey are also scheduled to testify next Wednesday. Gibson is the Army lieutenant colonel who was in charge of a small group of special operators that, according to Deputy Chief of Mission Greg Hicks, received "stand down" orders after requesting to move from Tripoli to Benghazi on Sept. 12" For me there are way more than enough conflicting stories to determine whether the truth is out. See, I have not questioned your patriotism nor bothered with any party affiliation you might have. People see what they want to see. Look into what KBR does in the ME. That's where I get my point of view.
You listed sources that were supposedly the ones who would "out" this scandal and yet their testimony has come and gone and there is still no scandal here. Furthermore, you didn't even know that these people had already testified before congress, yet you want to act like you are the Grand Poo-Bah of Benghazi knowledge. Now your telling me, "just wait until these other people testify...." It's exactly what I said you would do in my last post. In the face of evidence showing that you are incorrect you come up with your next conspiracy theory, while never having proved your last conspiracy theory. It doesn't matter who testifies next because there is nothing to this story; just a bunch of Republicans who want to create a story that isn't. And by the way I don't care what you say your politics are or are not....if it looks like a duck, quacks like one and waddles like one then it is usually a duck, sister.
