CIA Operators Told “Stand Down” Rather Than Help Ambassador.

Yes, let's just forget the conspiracy theory nonsense we, or should I say you wing nuts have been spewing and just move on to brand new conspiracy nonsense. Geesh!

 

So these are the only facts you can present?

 

He hasn't presented ANY facts...

 

Yes, I think the CIA confirming that they were not told to stand down and that they did arrive within 45 minutes pretty much debunks Fox and their silly conspiracy nonsense. Was that not clear enough for you?

 

Wow! Deaf, blind, and stupid. A triple threat.

 

So they or someone did not follow Panetta's orders?

 

You know what they say about conspiracy theory nuts right? Once you prove their conspiracy to be false, they simply expand their conspiracy to include other conspirators. They never do accept that they have been completely taken in by a few vague truths mixed in with a truck load of lies and fiction. You certainly are an interesting case study if only a typical one.

 

You have succeeded in proving there was a problem. Panetta "ordered all appropriate forces to respond to the unfolding events in Benghazi ....." yet somehow nothing (or at your best case, almost nothing) happened to save the ambassador. Obviously, there is a disconnect there somewhere. If it is not that Panetta's orders did not get through or that t was disobeyed, please tell me what else went wrong? BTW, in 7 hours, they actually had the time to fly from the US and get there before it was over - really.

 

Funny how the "conspiracy" expands as administration officials begin coming clean, real-time video is discovered & those on the scene speak out.

 

Good grief! ;(

 

And that is the best fact you can find?

 

Lil joe moen & that ilk don't concern themselves with facts!

 

Chimes the lapdog.

 

I got you loud and clear.

to wit;

 

You guys sure need to reassure each other a lot. Feeling a little insecure about Tuesday are you?

 

'Swift-Boating' of Obama fails
By ROGER SIMON | 11/2/12 2:39 PM EDT

Obama should have been destroyed by now. That was the plan.

He was going to be “Swift Boated” in this election, just like John Kerry was in 2004.

It would be about Benghazi, where on Sept. 11 of this year, U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed. This would be the spear point that would fatally wound the Obama campaign.

It would be a classic smear: The Obama administration had delivered a “stand down” order to potential rescuers, and so the four Americans had died.

Why would any agency or anybody in the administration do such a thing? It didn’t matter. Wingnuts can always find motives. There are still people who say Bill Clinton murdered Vince Foster. Whole books have been written about that one.

There are legitimate questions to be answered about what happened at Benghazi. There always are questions after such tragedies. Warnings were ignored by the George W. Bush administration before the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, after all. Were warnings ignored in Libya? Hindsight will probably find some.

But Ambassador Stevens would hardly have ventured to Benghazi with inadequate protection if he thought there were legitimate warnings not to do so.

So a different narrative, a different point of attack, would have to be found for Benghazi. On Oct. 26, Fox News reported that urgent requests for military backup during the attacks in Benghazi “was denied by officials in the CIA chain of command - - who also told the CIA operators twice to ‘stand down’ rather than help the ambassador’s team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.”

The CIA and State Department denied it, but “stand down” would become the rallying cry for the far right.

It not only appears everywhere on social media, but on Friday Obama was on his way to a rally at the Franklin County Fairgrounds in Hilliard, Ohio, when, according to the White House press pool report, it “passed small groups of onlookers, including a slightly larger cluster holding signs related to Benghazi such as: ‘We won’t stand down … Benghazi’ and ‘What are you hiding?’ ”

But Benghazi has proven to be not dynamite, but a firecracker. The October surprise has not turned into a bombshell. Instead, it has bombed.

Romney might have made it an issue, but he blew two chances. In the second presidential debate, Romney delivered a muddled attack as to whether the administration had called the killings a terrorist act quickly enough. Then Romney finally managed to remember his talking point.



Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83236.html#ixzz2BCPJwUTx