Author Topic: The Benghazi Testamonies  (Read 11462 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39698
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #175 on: May 21, 2013, 02:40:27 AM »
Ex-Diplomats Report New Benghazi Whistleblowers with Info Devastating to Clinton and Obama
PJ Media ^ | May 21st, 2013 | Roger L Simon
Posted on May 21, 2013 4:01:08 AM EDT by Pharmboy

More whistleblowers will emerge shortly in the escalating Benghazi scandal, according to two former U.S. diplomats who spoke with PJ Media Monday afternoon.

These whistleblowers, colleagues of the former diplomats, are currently securing legal counsel because they work in areas not fully protected by the Whistleblower law.

According to the diplomats, what these whistleblowers will say will be at least as explosive as what we have already learned about the scandal, including details about what really transpired in Benghazi that are potentially devastating to both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

snip...

Stevens’ mission in Benghazi, they will say, was to buy back Stinger missiles from al-Qaeda groups issued to them by the State Department, not by the CIA. Such a mission would usually be a CIA effort, but the intelligence agency had opposed the idea because of the high risk involved in arming “insurgents” with powerful weapons that endanger civilian aircraft.

Hillary Clinton still wanted to proceed because, in part, as one of the diplomats said, she wanted “to overthrow Gaddafi on the cheap.”

This left Stevens in the position of having to clean up the scandalous enterprise when it became clear that the “insurgents” actually were al-Qaeda – indeed, in the view of one of the diplomats, the same group that attacked the consulate and ended up killing Stevens.

snip... likened it to the Mike Nichols film Charlie Wilson’s War about a clueless congressman who supplies Stingers to the Afghan guerrillas. “It’s as if Hillary and the others just watched that movie and said ‘Hey, let’s do that!’” the diplomat said.

He added that he and his colleagues think the leaking of General David Petraeus’ affair with his biographer Paula Broadwell was timed to silence the former CIA chief on these matters.

(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39698
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #176 on: May 21, 2013, 06:29:30 AM »


In January Senator Rand Paul accused the Obama Administration of a cover-up for running guns to terrorist groups in Libya and the region.
 Via Hannity:
 
Hillary Clinton admitted in testimony that terrorists used weapons from Libya in the attack gas plant attack in Algeria.
 
Now, more Benghazi whistle-blowers are reportedly ready to testify on Obama’s missiles to Al-Qaeda program.
 PJ Media reported:
 

More whistleblowers will emerge shortly in the escalating Benghazi scandal, according to two former U.S. diplomats who spoke with PJ Media Monday afternoon.
 
These whistleblowers, colleagues of the former diplomats, are currently securing legal counsel because they work in areas not fully protected by the Whistleblower law.
 
According to the diplomats, what these whistleblowers will say will be at least as explosive as what we have already learned about the scandal, including details about what really transpired in Benghazi that are potentially devastating to both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
 
The former diplomats inform PJM the new revelations concentrate in two areas — what Ambassador Chris Stevens was actually doing in Benghazi and the pressure put on General Carter Ham, then in command of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) and therefore responsible for Libya, not to act to protect jeopardized U.S. personnel.
 
Stevens’ mission in Benghazi, they will say, was to buy back Stinger missiles from al-Qaeda groups issued to them by the State Department, not by the CIA. Such a mission would usually be a CIA effort, but the intelligence agency had opposed the idea because of the high risk involved in arming “insurgents” with powerful weapons that endanger civilian aircraft.
 
Hillary Clinton still wanted to proceed because, in part, as one of the diplomats said, she wanted “to overthrow Gaddafi on the cheap.”
 
This left Stevens in the position of having to clean up the scandalous enterprise when it became clear that the “insurgents” actually were al-Qaeda – indeed, in the view of one of the diplomats, the same group that attacked the consulate and ended up killing Stevens.
 
The former diplomat who spoke with PJ Media regarded the whole enterprise as totally amateurish and likened it to the Mike Nichols film Charlie Wilson’s War about a clueless congressman who supplies Stingers to the Afghan guerrillas. “It’s as if Hillary and the others just watched that movie and said ‘Hey, let’s do that!’” the diplomat said.
 
In April Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren told Chris Wallace on FOX News Sunday that the US armed Libyan rebels with missiles that showed up in Israel’s backyard.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39698
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #177 on: May 21, 2013, 06:44:15 AM »

Exclusive: CIA Honored Benghazi Chief in Secret Ceremony
by Eli LakeMay 21, 2013 4:45 AM EDT



Part of why the State Department has taken the brunt of the political blame for the Benghazi attack, writes Eli Lake, is that clandestine services by definition have very little public oversight.

 


At a secret February ceremony at CIA headquarters in Langley, Va., the chief of the CIA’s base in Benghazi the night of the 9/11 anniversary attacks there was awarded one of the agency’s highest intelligence medals, according to U.S. military and intelligence officials.
 
The interior of the burnt US consulate building in the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi. (Gianluigi Guercia/AFP/Getty Images)
 

The honor given behind closed doors to “Bob,” the officer who was in charge of the Benghazi intelligence annex and CIA base that was attacked in the early morning of September 12, 2012 and then abandoned for nearly three weeks, illustrates the murky lines of command that preceded the attack, and helped make it a politically volatile issue. While the State Department was responsible for elements of the security for the diplomatic mission at Benghazi, the mission itself was used primarily for intelligence activities and most the U.S. officials there and at the nearby annex were CIA officers who used State Department cover.
 

That purposeful ambiguity between diplomatic and intelligence efforts abroad has meant that at home, the State Department has taken almost all of the public blame for an error that was in part the fault of the CIA. And while CIA contractors performed heroically on the evening of the Benghazi attacks, Bob was also responsible in part for one major failure the night of the Benghazi attack: his officers were responsible for vetting the February 17 Martyr’s Brigade, the militia that was supposed to be the first responder on the night of the attack, but melted away when the diplomatic mission was attacked.
 

To be sure, the CIA has reviewed what went wrong in the Benghazi attacks in its own internal report. The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has conducted three classified hearings with CIA officials regarding Benghazi. CIA deputy director Michael Morell is scheduled to testify in closed session before the committee on Wednesday regarding Benghazi.
 

But those hearings have been closed to the public as opposed to the grueling public hearings of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Earlier this month that committee held a hearing that featured YouTube–friendly moments from witnesses hostile to the administration like former deputy chief of mission Gregory Hicks, who described what was likely the last phone call of Ambassador Chris Stevens, one of four Americans who were killed that evening.
 

What’s more, the CIA’s own internal review was not led by outside figures like the State Department’s Accountability Review Board (ARB) headed by a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, and a former U.S. ambassador, Thomas Pickering. Nor was the CIA review made public.
 
Former Acting CIA Director Michael Morell arrives at the Capitol to attend closed-door meetings about ongoing intelligence activities related to the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi (Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
 

If you are talking about a clandestine service, it’s very difficult to conduct that oversight in a public way.
 

Jason Chaffetz, the Republican chairman of the House committee’s panel on national security and the first lawmaker to contact Hicks after the Benghazi attacks, said there are special challenges in performing oversight of the CIA. Even though the CIA’s role at the Benghazi mission and nearby annex has been widely reported in the U.S. and international press, its role in Benghazi remains a classified secret.
 

“If you are talking about a clandestine service, it’s very difficult to conduct that oversight in a public way,” Chaffetz said. “You are talking about people’s lives. We have to be ultra-cautious in talking about something that may cost lives. When you start getting into sources and methods you just can’t go there in a public setting.”
 

Chaffetz has some experience in the matter himself. In a Benghazi hearing in October, he abruptly interrupted the hearing when State Department officials testifying referenced an aerial photograph of the Benghazi mission that disclosed the CIA annex more than a mile away.
 

A U.S. official familiar with the Libyan security situation explained that the agency did not have many good options for working with a militia in Benghazi.
 

“The host country is responsible for perimeter security, but no one can provide guarantees,” this official said. “Typically with unstable and dangerous places the security elements are unreliable. No matter how many relationships are developed and precautions taken, you can’t make an insecure environment completely safe. That night some Libyan militia members bravely and immediately answered the call for help, some didn’t, and others took time to coordinate their eventual support to the evacuation.”
 

Another U.S. intelligence official disputed this view. This official said the failure for the CIA at Benghazi was the mistaken assumption that the Zintan tribe in Benghazi—that provided many of the fighters for the February 17 Martyr’s Brigade—would have the same loyalties as the Zintan tribe in Tripoli, which had protected several senior U.S. officials including Hillary Clinton in her visit last year to Libya. “The CIA failed at mapping the human terrain,” this official said. “They did not understand the politics in Benghazi and we paid the price.”
 

Despite the CIA’s role in vetting the Libyan militia that failed the U.S. mission the night of the attack, the Republican chairman and the Democratic vice chairman of the House intelligence committee have both said publicly they do not believe the CIA committed an intelligence failure in the run-up to the Benghazi attack. 
 

On May 4, appearing on CBS Face the Nation, Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger, the Democratic vice chairman of the House intelligence committee said, “The most important issue though too, from an intelligence perspective… there was not an intelligence failure. We did not have intelligence ahead of time as it related to this incident.”
 

Nonetheless, some U.S. intelligence officials have privately complained that Bob, the Benghazi base chief should not get a medal. Two such officers told the Daily Beast that Bob—who was based in the CIA annex--also gave the initial order on the evening of the attacks to the CIA contractors to gather more information about the attack before rushing off to the diplomatic mission.
 
The State Department’s own Accountability Review Board (ARB) found there was a 23-minute gap between the initial distress call from the diplomatic mission at 9:42 local Benghazi time to the time when the CIA contractors departed the annex at 10:05 pm. The initial delay, according to two intelligence officials, could have made a difference the night of the rescue.

The ARB however disputed this notion. It said, “The departure of the Annex team was not delayed by orders from superiors; the team leader decided on his own to depart the Annex compound once it was apparent, despite a brief delay to permit their continuing efforts, that rapid support from local security elements was not forthcoming.”

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39698
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #178 on: May 21, 2013, 09:45:06 AM »

What did Obama do on 9/11/2012?
 
Exclusive: Jack Cashill asks if BHO pulled a Clinton a la '96 during Benghazi attack
Published: 17 hours ago
Jack CashillAbout | Email | Archive

 
On this past Sunday morning, Chris Wallace of Fox News grilled the administration’s newly anointed flak catcher, White House Senior Adviser Dan Pfeiffer.
 
One critical question was how Obama spent that long night of Sept. 11, 2012, while his charges were busy dying in Benghazi.
 





Ads by Google
 
The Antichrist: Free BookDiscover What the Early Church Knew About Rapture & the Meaning of 666. VoiceOfElijah.org/Antichrist
 Become a PastorEarn Your Religious Degree at Home. Request Free Program Info Today. eLearners.com/Religious_Studies
 

“With all due respect,” asked Wallace, “you didn’t answer my question. What did the president do that night?” This was a good question and one that prompts a careful look at the time line.
 
At 3:40 p.m. Washington time on Sept. 11, 2012, U.S. ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens in Benghazi called his No. 2 man, Greg Hicks, and told him, “We’re under attack.”
 
(All times cited will be EDT, six hours earlier than Libyan time).
 
At 4:05 p.m. the State Department Operations Center issued an alert to all relevant agencies, “U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack.”
 
At 4:25 p.m. a six-member CIA team headed by Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods arrived at Stevens’ compound from the nearby annex.
 
Under heavy fire, Woods’ team recovered the body of Foreign Service IT specialist Sean Smith but could not find Stevens’ body in the burning building.
 
At 5 p.m. President Barack Obama had a pre-scheduled meeting with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who briefed him on the Benghazi situation.
 
At 6 p.m. Woods and his CIA team arrived back at the annex, which they would defend Alamo-style for the next six hours. They would kill an estimated 60 Libyans before the night was through.
 
At 6:07 p.m. the State Department Operations Center shared a report from the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli that Ansar al-Sharia had claimed responsibility for the Benghazi attack. The terror group also called for an attack on the Embassy in Tripoli.
 
At 7:30 p.m. or thereabouts Obama engaged in an hour-long phone call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Obama hoped to mend fences with Netanyahu to help secure the Jewish vote in the upcoming election.
 
After roughly 8:30 p.m., there is no known accounting of Obama’s time or whereabouts.
 
At 11:15 p.m. Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, another former SEAL, were killed in a mortar assault at the annex. Doherty had just arrived as part of a six-man team from Tripoli.
 
At 1:40 a.m., having evacuated the annex, the first group of Americans flew out of Benghazi bound for Tripoli. They saw Stevens’ body at the airport and confirmed his death.
 
Said Pfeiffer to Wallace when asked about Obama’s evening, “He was in constant touch with his national security team and kept up to date with the events as they were happening.”
 
Wallace then listed all the critical people with whom Obama had little or no conversation – the secretary of state, the secretary of defense, the chairman of the joint chiefs.
 



Pfeiffer clarified, “He was talking to his national security staff, his National Security Council – people who would keep him up to date as these things were happening.”
 
“Was he in the situation room?” Wallace asked.
 
“I don’t remember what room he was in that night,” said Pfeiffer. “That’s a largely irrelevant fact.” No, it is not irrelevant at all.
 
I cannot say for sure where Obama was that evening, but if the night of July 17, 1996, set a precedent, Obama was likely in the White House family quarters.
 
For the record, at 8:35 p.m. on that turbulent night in the election year of 1996, President Bill Clinton and wife Hillary left a Washington fundraiser and headed back to the White House by motorcade.
 
At 8:31 p.m., two FAA veterans at the New York Air Route Traffic Control Center observed a target arching and intersecting with Paris-bound TWA Flight 800 as it headed east off Long Island’s south shore.
 
A manager from that center rushed the radar data to the FAA technical center in Atlantic City, and from there it was faxed to FAA headquarters in Washington and rushed “immediately” to the White House situation room.
 
It was in this room, “in the aftermath of the TWA Flight 800 bombing,” as Clinton aide George Stephanopoulos unwittingly told Peter Jennings on Sept. 11, 2001, that all key parties converged.
 
“This looks bad,” said Ron Schleede of the National Transportation Safety Board upon first seeing the data that “suggested something fast made the turn and took the airplane.”
 
Anti-terror czar Richard Clarke got the message too. By 9 p.m., he was driving in to the White House to convene a meeting of his security group, not at all the norm for a plane crash.
 
“I dreaded what I thought was about to happen,” Clarke wrote in his best-seller “Against All Enemies.” Clarke called it “The Eisenhower option,” a retaliatory strike against Iran.
 
When President Clinton met with friendly historian Taylor Branch on Aug. 2, 1996, he also traced the TWA 800 disaster to Iran. “They want war,” Branch quoted Clinton as saying.
 
On the night of July 17, however, the president chose not to join Clarke and the other agency representatives in the situation room.
 
Clinton remained holed up in the family quarters with Hillary. Retired Air Force Lt. Col. Robert “Buzz” Patterson and others have confirmed the president’s location that evening.
 
Patterson was in a position to know. He carried the nuclear football for the president, and he too was in the White House that night, though purposefully kept out of the loop.
 
The one person Patterson has tentatively cited as being in the family quarters with the Clintons is Sandy Berger, the deputy director of the NSA and the Clintons’ political consigliere.
 
As it happened, National Security Adviser Tony Lake, Sandy Berger’ boss, was not invited to the family quarters. Lake was known to excuse himself from meetings when they turned political.
 
That night Berger and the Clintons gathered information from the FAA radar, from the satellite data and from the eyewitness accounts and translated the data into electoral strategy.
 
By 3 a.m. Clinton had apparently gathered enough information to call Lake with the following message: “Dust off the contingency plans.”
 
Dust them off, yes, but let’s not get too serious about them. In late summer 1996, with the election comfortably in the bag, war was the last thing the Clintons wanted or needed.
 
On Sept. 11, 2012, war was the last thing Obama wanted or needed as well. He had already bagged Osama bin Laden, pacified al-Qaida and liberated Libya.
 
Or so he repeated endlessly. Foreign policy was alleged to be his electoral strong suit. Given the political dynamics, Obama likely retreated, just as the Clintons had, to the family quarters.
 
As Pfeiffer said, Obama probably did talk to “people who would keep him up to date as these things were happening.”
 
Obama and certain of these people, the political insiders, would have spent the night translating national security data into electoral strategy.
 
After all, Obama had a big fundraiser the next day in Vegas. That did not allow much time to establish an alibi that would preserve his carefully crafted bin Laden-slayer narrative.
 
It was a close call, but with a little help from the media – a special shout-out to CNN’s Candy Crowley! – the alibi worked just well enough to get the man re-elected.
 
History does repeat itself.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/what-did-obama-do-on-9112012/#WaFgXmu9WFw0agkO.99

chadstallion

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2854
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #179 on: May 21, 2013, 01:48:46 PM »
when is the stupid party going to realize they had no assets in the area,as they said the repubs have a comical view of the military
sooner or later an adult will take the stupid party people aside and whisper...."CIA operation, drop it" and the hearings will stop.
w

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39698
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #180 on: May 21, 2013, 06:57:25 PM »
Hillary Policy of Serving Up Benghazi Scapegoats May Be Backfiring

Posted By Daniel Greenfield On May 21, 2013 @ 12:56 pm In The Point | 7 Comments




It was obvious to everyone that Hillary Clinton only took the Secretary of State post as a consolation prize from which to launch a second bid for the White House. Her career at State consisted of pointless trips and press conferences that accomplished nothing. Some of this could be blamed on Obama, but everyone Hillary was there to polish up her profile for 2016.

Unfortunately for Hillary, the only part of her State Department tenure that attracted any notice, aside from the botched reset button with Russia, was Benghazi.

Hillary Clinton’s response, or that of her close advisers, was to begin serving up scapegoats, intimidating and silencing longtime career State Department people who were in the know, and using others as scapegoats. That policy backfired badly when Gregory Hicks showed up to testify.

Hicks was a natural ally who had been alienated by the political careerism of Hillary Clinton and her people. If not for their abusive behavior, it’s doubtful that he would have come to tell his story. But the attempts to intimidate him, backfired. And he isn’t the only one.

Take Raymond Maxwell, who claims he unfairly got the blame for the lack of security, when that wasn’t even his wheelhouse.


The decision to place Maxwell on administrative leave was made by Clinton’s chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, according to three State Department officials with direct knowledge of the events. On the day after the unclassified version of the ARB’s report was released in December, Mills called Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Beth Jones and directed her to have Maxwell leave his job immediately.

“Cheryl Mills directed me to remove you immediately from the [deputy assistant secretary] position,” Jones told Maxwell, according to Maxwell.

The decision to remove Maxwell and not Jones seems to conflict with the finding of the ARB that responsibility for the security failures leading up to the September 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi should fall on more senior officials.

“We fixed [the responsibility] at the assistant-secretary level, which is in our view the appropriate place to look, where the decision making in fact takes place, where, if you like, the rubber hits the road,” Pickering said when releasing the ARB report.

Mills had also targeted Gregory Hicks. Mills was not operating as a State Department figure, but as part of the Clinton 2016 campaign. And Maxwell seemed like he would make a good scapegoat because he had admitted to not reading the intel and was going to retire shortly.

Cheryl Mills isn’t a career State Department figure. She’s a Clinton loyalist who follows them around and covers up for them. Mills was a Deputy White House Counsel and worked at the presidential campaigns of both Clintons. Essentially, she was Hillary Clinton’s lawyer. And career diplomatic personnel are not too happy when a bigwig’s political lawyer and campaign adviser begins chucking them off a cliff to protect her political godmother.

A similar process may be happening for Obama and the CIA, which resents being used as a scapegoat for administration malfeasance. The CIA tends to be more guarded than State, but reports suggest that the trickle of figures coming forward may become a flood.

Hillary alienated her natural allies at the State Department. The people who wanted her to look good so she could make them look good and sacrificed them to cover up her mismanagement. Instead of taking responsibility, she began looking for people to blame. The resentment it has caused will not subside quickly and raises real questions about her fitness for any elected or unelected office.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article printed from FrontPage Magazine: http://frontpagemag.com

URL to article: http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/hillary-policy-of-serving-up-benghazi-scapegoats-may-be-backfiring/

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39698
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #181 on: May 21, 2013, 07:17:34 PM »
Obama Refuses to Bring Benghazi Killers to Justice Because He Wants to Try Them in Court

Posted By Daniel Greenfield On May 21, 2013 @ 6:07 pm In The Point | 2 Comments




Back in October of last year, Obama said of the Benghazi terrorist attack that “my biggest priority now is bringing those folks to justice and I think the American people have seen that’s a commitment I’ll always keep.”

Some of you might be skeptical about his commitment to investigating Tea Party groups bringing the “folks” over for dinner and justice. But never fear. It’s Obama’s biggest priority. Right after amnesty for illegal aliens, banning guns and playing golf.

Also throwing concerts in the White House, doing comedy skits with reporters and well a whole bunch of other stuff. But after all those other things, it’s his biggest priority.

And the results are in.


The U.S. has identified five men who might be responsible for the attack on the diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, last year, and has enough evidence to justify seizing them by military force as suspected terrorists, officials say. But there isn’t enough proof to try them in a U.S. civilian court as the Obama administration prefers.

The men remain at large while the FBI gathers evidence. But the investigation has been slowed by the reduced U.S. intelligence presence in the region since the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks, and by the limited ability to assist by Libya’s post-revolutionary law enforcement and intelligence agencies, which are still in their infancy since the overthrow of dictator Col. Moammar Gadhafi.

Since liberated Libya is on the verge of being overthrown by the Muslim Brotherhood and Benghazi is under the control of the same militias who attacked the mission, and the FBI couldn’t continue its investigation because the city was too unsafe, Obama’s biggest priority after throwing lavish banquets and promoting national health care is not looking too good.

Sure Obama could send them to Gitmo, but Obama didn’t even want to send Osama to Gitmo.


A senior administration official said the FBI has identified a number of individuals that it believes have information or may have been involved, and is considering options to bring those responsible to justice. But taking action in remote eastern Libya would be difficult.

FBI investigators are hoping for more evidence, such as other video of the attack that might show the suspects in the act of setting the fires that ultimately killed the ambassador and his communications specialist, or firing the mortars hours later at the CIA base where the surviving diplomats took shelter — or a Libyan witness willing to testify against the suspects in a U.S. courtroom.

Right. Or maybe they’ll just phone and turn themselves in hoping they can get $278,000 like Nidal Hasan.


Obama saw an opportunity to resurrect the idea of a criminal trial, which Attorney General Eric Holder had planned for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

This time, the president tells Bowden, he was prepared to bring bin Laden back and put him on trial in a federal court. “We worked through the legal and political issues that would have been involved, and Congress and the desire to send him to Guantánamo, and to not try him, and Article III.” Obama continues:

“I mean, we had worked through a whole bunch of those scenarios. But, frankly, my belief was if we had captured him, that I would be in a pretty strong position, politically, here, to argue that displaying due process and rule of law would be our best weapon against al-Qaeda, in preventing him from appearing as a martyr.”

Biggest priority indeed.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article printed from FrontPage Magazine: http://frontpagemag.com

URL to article: http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-refuses-to-bring-benghazi-killers-to-justice-because-he-wants-to-try-them-in-court/

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39698
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #182 on: May 21, 2013, 07:48:53 PM »
An AP report via Fox Nation via claims that although the FBI has identified five men believed to have been behind the September 11 Benghazi attacks, those men remain free because President Barack Obama will not allow the military to seize them.

According to the report, the FBI says it has evidence sufficient to support seizing the men as "suspected terrorists." Yet because such an action would have to be carried out by the military, Obama appears unwilling to authorize it.

Therefore, for the time being, the men are free while the FBI seeks enough additional evidence to clear a higher legal hurdle--which means "gathering enough proof to try them in a U.S. civilian court."

According to the AP, that is what "the Obama administration prefers."

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #183 on: May 22, 2013, 03:58:25 AM »
33,

when will the kneepadders start to use the "impeachment" word?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39698
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #184 on: May 22, 2013, 07:08:27 AM »
(AP) FBI ID's Benghazi suspects _ but no arrests yet

By KIMBERLY DOZIER

AP Intelligence Writer

WASHINGTON



U.S. officials say they have identified five men they believe might be behind the attack on the diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, last year. The officials say they have enough evidence to justify seizing them by military force as suspected terrorists _ but not enough proof to try them in a U.S. civilian court as the Obama administration prefers.

So the officials say the men remain at large while the FBI gathers more evidence. The decision not to seize the men militarily underscores the White House's aim to move away from hunting terrorists as enemy combatants and toward trying them as criminals in a civilian justice system.

The officials spoke only on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss sensitive briefings publicly.

Bad Boy Dazza

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3372
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #185 on: May 22, 2013, 07:29:19 AM »
Obama Refuses to Bring Benghazi Killers to Justice Because He Wants to Try Them in Court

Posted By Daniel Greenfield On May 21, 2013 @ 6:07 pm In The Point | 2 Comments


The only Islamic terrorists Obama wants to capture are ones that are already dead.

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #186 on: May 22, 2013, 07:57:54 AM »
Obama Refuses to Bring Benghazi Killers to Justice Because He Wants to Try Them in Court


this quote is hilarious in part because you are a lawyer.


Refuses to bring them to justice....but try them in court....

wow....thats a title fail there bro

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39698
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #187 on: May 22, 2013, 07:59:36 AM »
this quote is hilarious in part because you are a lawyer.


Refuses to bring them to justice....but try them in court....

wow....thats a title fail there bro

Obama, the communist terrorist you voted for 2x over, aides and abets terrorisrts

Bad Boy Dazza

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3372
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #188 on: May 22, 2013, 08:01:33 AM »
this quote is hilarious in part because you are a lawyer.


Refuses to bring them to justice....but try them in court....

wow....thats a title fail there bro

Harder to convict them in regular court, yet they ARE terrorists.

If you don't get that, then YOU fail.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39698
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #189 on: May 22, 2013, 08:02:47 AM »
Harder to convict them in regular court, yet they ARE terrorists.

If you don't get that, then YOU fail.
]

Mal excuses anything and everything b/c obama is 1/2 black - forgive him 

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #190 on: May 22, 2013, 08:03:36 AM »
ok lets try this again....


Refuses to bring them to justice, Wants to try them in court...


please tell me you see the irony of this post

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #191 on: May 22, 2013, 08:06:11 AM »
]

Mal excuses anything and everything b/c obama is 1/2 black - forgive him 

ok....

ill phrase it another way

Obama wants to try them in court instead of bring them to justice.....

Dude even a brain retard like yourself has to see the irony in this title...

Malcolm refuses to play football, but instead he will run down a field with a helmet, shoulder pads, cleats, a football and he will score touchdowns.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39698
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #192 on: May 22, 2013, 08:07:35 AM »
ok lets try this again....


Refuses to bring them to justice, Wants to try them in court...


please tell me you see the irony of this post

Obama is playing cutsie on this too trying to let them get away w this.

Bro - honestly - no kidding aside - Go fucking F yourself 10x over for the bullshit you now defend and kneepad SOLELY out od racial solidarity.  

you are a disgrace  as is the piece of fucking shit you voted for 2x over

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39698
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #193 on: May 22, 2013, 08:09:40 AM »
Hey shitstain - this was a terrorist attack on the anniversay of 9/11 that the ghetto coke head obama lied about and went to a fundraiser the next day w Jay Z and blamed on a fake video

Keep up the kneepadding - looks great to everyone else. 

ok....

ill phrase it another way

Obama wants to try them in court instead of bring them to justice.....

Dude even a brain retard like yourself has to see the irony in this title...

Malcolm refuses to play football, but instead he will run down a field with a helmet, shoulder pads, cleats, a football and he will score touchdowns.

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #194 on: May 22, 2013, 08:10:19 AM »
Obama is playing cutsie on this too trying to let them get away w this.

Bro - honestly - no kidding aside - Go fucking F yourself 10x over for the bullshit you now defend and kneepad SOLELY out od racial solidarity.  

you are a disgrace  as is the piece of fucking shit you voted for 2x over

lmao...im seriously laughing my ass off right now....i just asked to consider the irony of the title and then you go full retard.

I refuse to get buff, instead, i will go to the gym, lift weights, eat protiens and carbs and then lift some more

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #195 on: May 22, 2013, 08:12:59 AM »
Hey shitstain - this was a terrorist attack on the anniversay of 9/11 that the ghetto coke head obama lied about and went to a fundraiser the next day w Jay Z and blamed on a fake video

Keep up the kneepadding - looks great to everyone else. 


Do you have the ADD or some kind of MPD....
Im talking about a title of an article and youre going around the world talking all crazy....

3333 refuses to get his JD..instead he will just go to law school and pass the bar....

do you get where im going with this...its a retarded title....now you can agree and say the writer fucked this one up.. or you can go on about Jay Z and Kenya and Golf

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39698
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #196 on: May 22, 2013, 08:14:59 AM »
lmao...im seriously laughing my ass off right now....i just asked to consider the irony of the title and then you go full retard.

I refuse to get buff, instead, i will go to the gym, lift weights, eat protiens and carbs and then lift some more

you do laugh - cause like obama - you dont give a fucking rats ass if people die, corruption occurs, lies are told, cover ups are happening so long as the head 95% in charge is not put into prison where he belongs for this

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #197 on: May 22, 2013, 10:21:19 AM »
Do you have the ADD or some kind of MPD....
Im talking about a title of an article and youre going around the world talking all crazy....

3333 refuses to get his JD..instead he will just go to law school and pass the bar....

do you get where im going with this...its a retarded title....now you can agree and say the writer fucked this one up.. or you can go on about Jay Z and Kenya and Golf
bump

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39698
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #198 on: May 22, 2013, 10:23:15 AM »
bump

Bump for what - obama = fail 

many deadm cover up, incompetence, etc. 


Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
Re: The Benghazi Testamonies
« Reply #199 on: May 22, 2013, 10:41:07 AM »
Bump for what - obama = fail 

many deadm cover up, incompetence, etc. 



try to stay on topic...

do you not see the retarded title fail?
"refuses justice, seeks trial"