Obama Administration ran guns from Benghazi to Syria

[homersapien 11,425]

He quoted General Ham. That was the only thing that was a fact. The rest was snark. You go read his posts.

You, calling AUUSN's posts snarky?

I have read his posts. They are fact-based instead of emotionally and politically - based. We can review his and your's one by one if you really want to. Let's see who's trying to grind the political ax.

[AFTiger 282]

Two peas in a pod, you two.

[homersapien 11,425]

Two peas in a pod, you two.

Yep. Rational and objective.

[homersapien 11,425]

He quoted General Ham. That was the only thing that was a fact. The rest was snark. You go read his posts.

You, calling AUUSN's posts snarky?

I have read his posts. They are fact-based instead of emotionally and politically - based. We can review his and your's one by one if you really want to. Let's see who's trying to grind the political ax.

I just reviewed the first three pages of this thread. I'm ready for that direct comparison whenever you are.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Two peas in a pod, you two.

Truer words never spoken here

[AUUSN 823]

He has shown his opinion and refused facts. His loyalty to Obama and Hillary has blinded him.

That's ironic.

AUUSN talks facts. You talk Obama/Hillary.

Then you accuse him of being influenced by his feelings toward Obama/Hillary.

:-\

What facts?

Guess you missed the report I posted.......and where I said I was a registered Republican.

[AUUSN 823]

Waiting on that link....

As I said, stupidity is overwhelming. Again, how soon?

Where is the link or proof that the CIA sat on their hands. I answered your, how soon, question.

No you didn't answer my question. Read the book.

I dont want to read the book. I read the reports.

Where. Is. The. Proof.

If you dont have it, just say so.

Those who fought it say so. Show me proof they are wrong.

Then I guess we are done here. Just remember, I presented facts, you presented idiotic comments.

Just to be clear, are you calling the members of the annex team idiots? The brave soldiers who fought the fight that saved countless lives idiots? And yes, the soldiers who stated they were told to stand down idiots?

Drama much?

I was speaking of his idiotic comments.

The CIA team arrived 20 freaking mins after the attack started. How is that an order to stand down?

Oh and mr drama, they were not Soldiers. Don't get it twisted.

Please. These guys were former Army Rangers, Navy SEALS, Marine Force Recon and Army Special Forces. And while they were employed at the time with Blackwater, they were, they are and will always be soldiers.

Titles matter and you are getting it twisted.

We disagree.

Well you shouldn't use the word "soldier" in a narrative such as this because it clearly implies they were active members of the US armed forces and is therefore misleading.

Now if you want to call them soldiers on a social basis, fine. Once a Marine, always a Marine.

I think that's what AUUSN had in mind, not the traditional, social courtesy/respect aspect.

Exactly. They were hired contractors, not Soldiers. Titles matter in warfare.

[AUFAN78 3,926]

It is the most fateful moment in a movie that purports to present a searingly accurate account of the 2012 attacks that left four Americans dead in Benghazi, Libya: a scene in which the highest-ranking CIA operative at a secret agency compound orders his security team to “stand down” rather than rush off to rescue U.S. diplomats under siege less than a mile away.

According to the officer in charge of the CIA’s Benghazi base that night, the scene in the movie is entirely untrue.

“There never was a stand-down order,” said the base chief known as Bob, speaking publicly for the first time. “At no time did I ever second-guess that the team would depart.”

https://www.washingt...3c7d_story.html

It's a Micheal Bay film. Same guy that brought you Pearl Harbor where he interviewed like over 100 people actually there and then rearranged, changed, embellished, etc their accounts to bring you a film with lots of things going boom. Things like placing Admiral Kimmel actually at a golf course during the attacks which was not true. Though he usually did play on Sundays

It is the most fateful moment in a movie that purports to present a searingly accurate account of the 2012 attacks that left four Americans dead in Benghazi, Libya: a scene in which the highest-ranking CIA operative at a secret agency compound orders his security team to “stand down” rather than rush off to rescue U.S. diplomats under siege less than a mile away.

According to the officer in charge of the CIA’s Benghazi base that night, the scene in the movie is entirely untrue.

“There never was a stand-down order,” said the base chief known as Bob, speaking publicly for the first time. “At no time did I ever second-guess that the team would depart.”

https://www.washingt...3c7d_story.html

It's a Micheal Bay film. Same guy that brought you Pearl Harbor where he interviewed like over 100 people actually there and then rearranged, changed, embellished, etc their accounts to bring you a film with lots of things going boom. Things like placing Admiral Kimmel actually at a golf course during the attacks which was not true. Though he usually did play on Sundays

There is a difference here and that is he filmed Pearl harbor over 50 years later and even though he interviewed many who were there, how many of those he interviewed were actually involved in the screenplay? There are 3 guys who were government contractors that survived that attack that were there and participated in the actual filming of the scenes. IMV,its hard to argue with that aspect of his intent on presenting as close to a documentary as possible w/o being actually one.

Nope, it's fiction. Didn't tex tell you?

Bob told me.

According to the officer in charge of the CIA’s Benghazi base that night, the scene in the movie is entirely untrue.

https://www.washingt...3c7d_story.html

So did other agents that were there.

A second CIA officer at Benghazi that evening backed Bob’s account

https://www.washingt...3c7d_story.html

How many CIA agents do you know that speak out against the administration and don't fear for their jobs, their career, their life? It is a bit different being a contractor where the same fears don't exist.

[AUFAN78 3,926]

AUUSN has really shown his ass in this thread.

He's shown you facts but you can't tell the difference.

Prove they are facts. He showed a report. I can show you a similar report that says you can keep your doctor. So spare me your opinion. I am not interested in your blind loyalty.

[AUFAN78 3,926]

He has shown his opinion and refused facts. His loyalty to Obama and Hillary has blinded him.

Your hatred of them blinds you every day. He strikes me as loyal to facts, not politicians.

He shows you sworn testimony, you reference a Hollywood movie script.

Trying for stupid post of the day? The latter reference was from three American heroes.

[AUFAN78 3,926]

Waiting on that link....

As I said, stupidity is overwhelming. Again, how soon?

Where is the link or proof that the CIA sat on their hands. I answered your, how soon, question.

No you didn't answer my question. Read the book.

I dont want to read the book. I read the reports.

Where. Is. The. Proof.

If you dont have it, just say so.

Those who fought it say so. Show me proof they are wrong.

Then I guess we are done here. Just remember, I presented facts, you presented idiotic comments.

Just to be clear, are you calling the members of the annex team idiots? The brave soldiers who fought the fight that saved countless lives idiots? And yes, the soldiers who stated they were told to stand down idiots?

Drama much?

I was speaking of his idiotic comments.

The CIA team arrived 20 freaking mins after the attack started. How is that an order to stand down?

Oh and mr drama, they were not Soldiers. Don't get it twisted.

Please. These guys were former Army Rangers, Navy SEALS, Marine Force Recon and Army Special Forces. And while they were employed at the time with Blackwater, they were, they are and will always be soldiers.

Titles matter and you are getting it twisted.

We disagree.

Well you shouldn't use the word "soldier" in a narrative such as this because it clearly implies they were active members of the US armed forces and is therefore misleading.

Now if you want to call them soldiers on a social basis, fine. Once a Marine, always a Marine.

I think that's what AUUSN had in mind, not the traditional, social courtesy/respect aspect.

I call them soldiers on my terms.

[AFTiger 282]

What you call them is irrelevant to the events of that day.

[homersapien 11,425]

What you call them is irrelevant to the events of that day.

I think chain of command is always relevant.

[AFTiger 282]

Station Chief CIA. Still irrelevant. Ambassador was still murdered.

[AUUSN 823]

There was never a stand-down order,” Bob said. “At no time did I ever second-guess that the team would depart.”

After he heard gunfire, Bob said he immediately began a security response. He said there was “never any question” that a rescue mission was going to happen, even though security contractors leaving the CIA base to rescue diplomats would leave the base vulnerable.

http://www.businessinsider.com/cia-benghazi-chief-attack-stand-down-2016-1

[AFTiger 282]

So he did delay the rescue.

[AUUSN 823]

Stand down! Wait for my word ... You will wait."

The movie shows a CIA station chief identified only as "Bob" telling one of the contractors, Tyrone "Rone" Woods, that he and his team must wait for help from pro-American Libyan forces rather than move out on their own to rescue Stevens and other U.S. officials after they are attacked by Libyan militants. Bob explains that the existence of CIA annex is still secret, and says that by departing the annex, the contractors would be leaving it exposed to enemy assault and placing the lives of more than 30 Americans at risk.

"You're not the first responders. You will wait," Bob says in the movie. Eventually, the contractors leave anyway, about 20 minutes after the assault on the diplomatic mission begins. They are unable to save Stevens or communications officer Sean Smith; both died of smoke inhalation after the mission was set afire.

THE FACTS: A 2014 report by the House Intelligence Committee said it "found no evidence that there was either a stand down order or a denial of available air support" after the State Department compound came under attack. A report by Republicans on the House Armed Services Committee also said no restrictions were placed on a military response.

The "stand down" theory has taken on a life of its own and centers on a Special Operations team that was stopped from flying from the Libyan capital, Tripoli, to Benghazi after the attacks of Sept. 11-12, 2012, had ended. Instead, the team was instructed to help protect and care for those being evacuated from Benghazi and from the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli.

The senior military officer who issued the instruction to "remain in place" and the detachment leader who received it said it was the right decision and has been widely mischaracterized. The order was to remain in Tripoli and protect some three dozen embassy personnel rather than fly to Benghazi some 600 miles away after all Americans there would have been evacuated. The medic is credited with saving the life of an evacuee from the attacks.

The CIA base chief, whose name has not been made public, disputes the movie's account. "There never was a stand-down order," he told The Washington Post. "At no time did I ever second-guess that the team would depart."

The author of the book upon which the film is based, Mitchell Zuckoff, told The Associated Press that he based the scene on several firsthand accounts. Zuckoff collaborated on his book, "13 Hours," with some of the surviving security contractors.

"It's not credible what he's claiming," Zuckoff said of the station chief. Zuckoff said he had tried to interview the station chief when writing the book, but his request was denied.

http://news.yahoo.com/ap-fact-check-benghazi-movie-misstates-facts-085327343.html

[AUUSN 823]

In Washington, CIA spokesman Ryan Trapani referred to those findings and others as making it clear that the scene in the film is inaccurate. 'If one is looking for facts on Benghazi, those reviews contain them,' he said.

'No one will mistake this movie for a documentary,' Trapani added. 'It's a distortion of the events and people who served in Benghazi that night.

'It's shameful that, in order to highlight the heroism of some, those responsible for the movie felt the need to denigrate the courage of other Americans who served in harm's way.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3402125/Author-Benghazi-book-stands-pivotal-stand-scene.html#ixzz3xq5I7Zzy

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[AUFAN78 3,926]

So he did delay the rescue.

Of course he did. And please let us continue to ignore the testimony of three American heroes with no political agenda. You cannot say that about those that wrote "the report" LOL. But these three soldiers simply wanted the families of those killed to have the facts. The real facts.

[AUUSN 823]

2014 report by the House Intelligence Committee said it "found no evidence that there was either a stand down order or a denial of available air support" after the State Department compound came under attack. A report by Republicans on the House Armed Services Committee also said no restrictions were placed on a military response.

[AUFAN78 3,926]

2014 report by the House Intelligence Committee said it "found no evidence that there was either a stand down order or a denial of available air support" after the State Department compound came under attack. A report by Republicans on the House Armed Services Committee also said no restrictions were placed on a military response.

Look, I can appreciate your passion. I can respect your opinion. Where we differ most is I won't denigrate differing opinion. I respect free thought, I don't disparage it.

[AUUSN 823]

conservative Washington Postcolumnist Charles Lane explained that the delay was probably to ensure the safety of the remaining CIA security personnel and was, in fact, not controversial at all:

LANE: The person I want to hear from is Bob, the CIA guy who told them to wait. Because when we hear from Bob we'll hear why he told them to wait. What we heard from your interview was they assumed he was waiting for more support from the local militia. Which, by the way, might not be a bad reason to wait. In other words, you want to go - you don't want to rush in with just three guys into what was obviously a very, very dangerous situation. You'd want to wait to see if you could round up some more support. In other words, there's a difference between waiting and waiting for no good reason and, even worse, waiting because you were told 'we don't care what happens to the Ambassador.' I want to hear from Bob, I want to hear the CIA make him available and tell us exactly what was going on. What I'm not hearing in this is that anybody in Washington said, 'we don't care what happens to the Ambassador, write it off, stay away.'

[AUUSN 823]

"Congressional investigators also have concluded there was no “stand down” order."

http://variety.com/2016/biz/news/cia-benghazi-13-hours-michael-bay-as-distortion-of-benghazi-1201681295/

[AUFAN78 3,926]

Is this where I start posting articles upon articles stating there was a "stand down" order? Nah. I think this is where I will rise above the fray. Peace out. ;)/>

[AUUSN 823]

Michael Bay's 13 Hours promotes some of the worst Benghazi conspiracy theories

If anything, the story of Benghazi, as Bay tells it, has little or nothing to do with politics, and everything to do with the adolescent conceptions of masculinity that generally define his films. The heroes are the big, bearded, muscly private military contractors who fight off the bad guys and save the day. The real villains aren't the terrorists or even the Obama administration; they're the egghead "intellectuals" who get in the way of the beefy dudes with big guns.

http://www.vox.com/2016/1/15/10774928/13-hours-benghazi-michael-bay