Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

yes ask yourself why the Ambassador in a hot zone was not assigned a security detail commensurate with the threat matrix .

---

Maybe he was but declined to use it. He knew he was greatly loved and respected.

Hmmmm!

With or without adequate security, he went anyway knowing he had NONE. Knowing the whole region was hyped up over this film deal. Knowing this particular spot was a target, knowing he was a target.

I don't think this guy knew anything, he had an agenda, a job, and there weren't any other considerations

Quote:

---

Knowing the whole region was hyped up over this film deal.

---

No one was hyped up about the video . Please don't tell me you are still clinging to that falacy .

No oddly Libya wasn't hyped up over the video

No let-up in protests over anti-Islam film - CNN.com

US consulate 'easy target' for extremists - Features - Al Jazeera English

Quote:

---

Fawzi Abd al-'Aali, the interior ministry's representative for eastern Libya, told Al Jazeera that the American diplomats should have heeded the advice of Libyan officials and evacuated the building as soon as the protest began.

Four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens, and 10 Libyans were killed on Tuesday, after what began as a protest against a film mocking the Prophet Muhammed evolved into an armed attack.

"We expected something might happen, and we thought they would evacuate the American consulate sooner, while they still had a good chance," he said.

During the first two hours of the protest, he said, the crowd was small enough that they would probably have been able to escape. Al-'Aali said that Stevens had gravely miscalculated, and had believed the protest would soon die down.

---

Quote:

---

No let-up in protests over anti-Islam film - CNN.com

---

The attack happened on Sept 11 ;not the 18th

Quote:

---

It appears that US officials paid little heed to the implications of this security vacuum for their own staff. The diplomatic mission in Benghazi had light security, even though the building was hit by an improvised explosive device on June 6.

The International Red Cross was attacked in Benghazi in May, and there was an attempted attack on the British ambassador's motorcade.

There has been a spate of assassinations in Benghazi in recent months, which have killed more than a dozen top security officials who had defected from Gaddafi's regime during the revolution.

---

And yet the Ambassador was there on the anniversary of 9-11 ;with a light security contingent of locals ,to meet with a Turkish representative . Instead of focusing on Stevens lack of prudence; you should be asking yourself what was so compelling about that meeting that would make the Ambassador choose to ignore the security threat ,that he had identified to the State Dept. and risked travelling to Benghazi .

There were 30 Americans saved by the actions of former Seals who ignored direct orders to run to the rescue. Who are the 30 ? Where are they ? Why haven't we learned their names ? Why haven't they been interviewed ?

But continue believing that lie that even the White House has abandoned .


At least al Jazzera gets it right when they call the complex a 'mission ' and not a consulate .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

With or without adequate security, he went anyway knowing he had NONE. Knowing the whole region was hyped up over this film deal. Knowing this particular spot was a target, knowing he was a target.

---

It had nothing to do with the film, I can't believe you'd still mention that as an excuse it's been so thoroughly debunked. And to use Al Jazeera to back you up? Please.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

It had nothing to do with the film

---

That was the excuse to hype up the especially male populace which became cover for terrorism.

Nope ;you still don't get it... it was a coordinated attack . Video of the whole thing was viewed by the Congressional Intelligence committee and no one Democrat or Republican came out and said there was a protest that preceded the attack .That was open source info on Sept 13
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/09/1...zi-attack.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Nope ;you still don't get it ... it was a coordinated attack .

---

Ignorant males were duped into believing it was about the film. This was the cover story.

The attack itself, the guard said, was immediate and bold, initiated by a group of [125] men who approached the compound and lobbed grenades over the wall. Just behind them were scores of men, shooting wildly and yelling “God is great.”

Meanwhile, fallout continued Thursday from anger over an online video that Muslims said denigrated their religion.

-from your link

That narrative works for the Cairo Embassy . Not for the Benghazi mission. The Cairo Embassy could've been a diversion to the Benghazi attack that's true. But there was no protest preceding the Benghazi attack . That's indisputable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

that narrative works for the Cairo Embassy . Not for the Benghazi mission. The Cairo Embassy could've been a diversion to the Benghazi attack that's true. But there was no protest preceeding the Benghazi attack . That's indisputable.

---

I didn't say there was. But to the watching world, the protest was deliberately made to look like it was about the film.

Yes which brings up another interesting question. The video was out for months . Who fed the Egyptians the info on the existence of the video so they could coordinate "spontaneous" demonstrations on 9-11-12 ?

Hello again,

Personally, I think there's poetic JUSTICE when a country that LOVES spying on its own people, loses its OWN top spy because of it.

Republicans LOVE shooting themselves in the foot. I wonder if they had anything to do with THIS invasion of our privacy?? Oh, that's right, they DID.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Republicans LOVE shooting themselves in the foot. I wonder if they had anything to do with THIS invasion of our privacy??? Oh, that's right, they DID.

excon

---

What are you talking about?

Hello again, Steve:

Yeah, I know you righty's have trouble remembering beyond 4 years. But, there WAS a time in this country when the Fourth Amendment MEANT something... Then we got George W. Bush, a REPUBLICAN, who DECIMATED it. Our spy agencies were set loose upon US.

Now, jump ahead a few years... The FBI was spying on the top CIA guy, and BUSTED him. Now, maybe YOU can't make the connection, but I can. Look. You can't make the connection between the crash Bush caused and the unemployment Obama is suffering, so I DOUBT whether you'll be able to make THIS connection..

excon

He's talking about the FBI reading Petraeus gmails. Ummm G mail is not private . It is owned by the government .

Hello again, tom:

Well, there you go... The guvment is JUSTIFIED for violating Petraeus. I know you LOVE spying on your own people. I don't understand it, but I know you LIKE it.

Uhhhh, doesn't the clear Constitutional violation bother you?? I thought you guys LOVED the Constitution.. No, huh?

excon