• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Ambassador Stevens' Murder A Hit Job?Tues. 10/9/12

Faster horses

Well-known member
Are Americans Dead Because Barack Hussein Obama Didn't Want To Hurt His Prospects For Re-Election?


Are Libyan Ambassador Chris Stevens, Information Specialist Sean Smith and former Navy SEALS Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods dead simply to satisfy one man's ego?

Were lives actually placed in peril simply to conceal from the American people that Barack Obama's proclaimed "Arab Spring" was an abject failure?

Is the leader of the free world that narcissistic... that self-absorbed? Is he simply an incompetent buffoon? Or... is the truth much worse?

The American people want answers. The American people deserve answers; and with Congressional hearings starting this week, the time to demand that Congress give us some REAL answers is now... before we step into the voting booth.

But The Obama Regime Isn't Simply Covering Up A "Policy Failure" ... What We Already Know Is Even More Shocking.

He lied to US and he apologized to OUR ENEMIES to SAVE HIS POLITICAL SKIN... and if Congress can't hold his feet to the fire this time around, then none of them deserve to be in office next year.


The fact that Team Obama knew Stevens literally had a target on his back and did nothing is not the issue. At issue is the fact that Team Obama continually downgraded Stevens' security as the threats against him became ever more apparent.

It's almost as if someone wanted Stevens dead.

Lt. Col. Andy Wood, a Green Beret with the Utah National Guard who headed the team assigned to protect Stevens and Libyan embassy personnel told CBS News that his sixteen man team and another six-man team were recalled from the embassy a month prior to the September 11th attack.

According to FOX News, Woods said "it was unbelievable to him that the State Department decreased security in Libya when it did, [after] he showed them how dangerous and volatile and unpredictable the entire environment in Libya was with at least 13 security incidents before September 11th backing up his case."

You read that right. AFTER multiple reports that Stevens' life was in jeopardy, Wood's unit and another unit assigned to protect Stevens were ordered back to the United States.

For those who asked why Stevens' security was so lax, there's the answer... an answer which raises far too many disturbing questions... questions that demand answers.

"Revealed: Jihadists Had Threatened To Kill Ambassador On FACEBOOK And The U.S. Consulate In Libya Was Attacked TWICE Before 9/11 Anniversary."


But Woods wasn't the only one sounding the alarm. If you didn't see the headline above, that's because it was carried by The Daily Mail in England on October 2nd.

The terrorists responsible for the attack on our consulate in Libya actually announced their intentions on Facebook (yeah... Facebook) beforehand and apparently, even Stevens had knowledge of the Facebook post.

According to The Daily Mail: "One such post mentioned the route that Stevens took on his morning jog, prompting the diplomat to briefly stop running for his own safety."

Requests for more security were ignored and FBI investigations into the incident were stonewalled under the premise that the "crime scene" wasn't safe.

Of course, safety issues didn't stop CNN reporters from picking up Stevens' diary from the rubble. Entries confirmed that Stevens knew he was in grave danger. And how did the Obama Regime react to CNN reporters doing the job it had refused to do. Philippe Reines, a State Department spokesman, called CNN's actions “indefensible.”

A reporter with The Daily Caller wrote: "considering my own encounter with the State Department and the way they’ve handled it — lying and stonewalling — it’s nauseating to watch them pontificate about ethics. To them, I’m just another 'bump in the road.' Literally."

Negligence that can't simply be attributed to gross incompetence? ... outrageous lies? ... stonewalling, cover-ups and refusals to investigate? ... there's much more going on here than meets the eye, and the American people need the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.



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


It's Almost As If Someone Wanted Stevens Dead.


We know what people are thinking. An article by columnist Erik Rush, published by Canada Free Press, actually carried the headline: "Was Ambassador Stevens’ Death A Hit?"

Those who maintain suspicions can't be dismissed. Gross incompetence coupled with intricate and highly complex disinformation campaigns will only lead rational people to conclude that something smells rotten in the State of Denmark.

And a lack of concrete and plausible answers will only lead even rational people to speculate and imagine the worst.

Rush states: "U.S. diplomats in Libya were repeatedly denied enhanced security precautions by the Obama administration prior to the Sept. 11 attack on the consulate."

The "Other Rush" goes on to ask, "why would Stevens and his staff have been consigned to such a dangerous detail with horribly substandard protection, and repeatedly denied augmented security? In my view, this is the pertinent question, because it speaks far more to Obama’s duplicity and ruthlessness."

Why indeed? In that regard, Rush is right and once and for all, the American people deserve to know whether the man who is likely ineligible to sit in the Oval Office and has committed scores of impeachable offenses is also one of the greatest security threats to the United States.

Read more at:www.grasstopsusa.com
 

Tam

Well-known member
The voters will not know the truth before they go to the ballot box as we know none of these investigations will be completed before the election so they need to go on their gut feeling about just how high the corruption in the Obama Administration goes.

Judge him on Fast and Furious and him using Executive Privilege to protect Holder from something he claims he knew nothing about.

Judge him on A $16 trillion debt when he promised to cut the deficit by half and saddled another 6 trillion onto the debt in 4 years.


Judge him on the lying he has been doing over the Ambassador's death as for over a week he claimed it was a spontaneous protest over a video when sources from within the intel agencies said he was told within hours it was a TERRORIST ATTACK and now we know Steven's didn't get the added security he requested due to the Prior attacks on the consulate, because Obama State Department said NO.

Judge him on the reports of his campaign deliberately taking illegal campaign donations from Foreign nationals as it is his Administration that tried to stop the story from being reported and it is his campaign team that has shut off the security systems that are available to assure the donations are LEGAL.

Judge him on the price of gas and the fact he promised to make the US energy independent yet he stops off shore drilling in the US while using US tax payer money to invest in Brazilian OUT SHORE DRILLING done by SORO's Brazilian Oil Company.

Judge him on the green energy companies that were owned by his campaign donors that he lost US tax payer money in when they went BANKRUPT AFTER HE BAILED THEM OUT.

Judge him on his golf game totals

Judge him on the leaks from his White House that risked and Cost US citizens lives.

Judge him on his campaigns continuous race bating and war on the wealthy. He was to be the UNITING President but the US is more divided now than it has been in 100 years due to his divide and conquer campaign strategy

Judge him on his promise to be transparent and all the lawsuits and investigations into his SEALED PAST.

JUDGE HIM ON HIS TRUE RECORD NOT THE ONE HE WANTS PEOPLE TO JUDGE HIM ON. And vote accordingly.
 

Steve

Well-known member
smalltime said:
Judge not lest ye be judged tam.

that is fine for our daily lives,.. we shouldn't be judgmental,.. but we must evaluate a person before we vote..

if we are hung up on verbiage.. and word usage... instead of honestly looking at the persons record.. then how can we do so with out "judging" his record,actions.. and even his character

should we listen to what he says like a sheep... and follow him because he tells us to?... or should we dig deeper ? ,..and make a fair judgement of his record, his actions and his character, .. ?

We should judge him.. and vote with conviction...
 

okfarmer

Well-known member
smalltime said:
Judge not lest ye be judged tam.

Lets just call it what it is, an employee evaluation... and he should not be rehired for his actions and inactions that are not in the best interest of the ones he was hired to represents. He should have been terminated previously.
 

Tam

Well-known member
smalltime said:
Judge not lest ye be judged tam.

smalltime if I were running for the most powerful office in the world I would expect to be judged on my record and so should Obama. That is why he is trying his hardest to distract attention from his horrible record. :wink:
 

flounder

Well-known member
Jason Chaffetz Admits House GOP Cut Funding For Embassy Security: 'You Have To Prioritize Things'


The Huffington Post | By Sarah Bufkin Posted: 10/10/2012 1:32 pm EDT Updated: 10/11/2012 6:55 am EDT




Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) acknowledged on Wednesday that House Republicans had consciously voted to reduce the funds allocated to the State Department for embassy security since winning the majority in 2010.

On Wednesday morning, CNN anchor Soledad O'Brien asked the Utah Republican if he had "voted to cut the funding for embassy security."

"Absolutely," Chaffetz said. "Look we have to make priorities and choices in this country. We have…15,000 contractors in Iraq. We have more than 6,000 contractors, a private army there, for President Obama, in Baghdad. And we’re talking about can we get two dozen or so people into Libya to help protect our forces. When you’re in tough economic times, you have to make difficult choices. You have to prioritize things.”

For the past two years, House Republicans have continued to deprioritize the security forces protecting State Department personnel around the world. In fiscal year 2011, lawmakers shaved $128 million off of the administration's request for embassy security funding. House Republicans drained off even more funds in fiscal year 2012 -- cutting back on the department's request by $331 million.


"It seems to be a coordinated effort between the White House and the State Department, from Secretary [Hillary] Clinton to President Obama's White House," Chaffetz told Fox and Friends on Tuesday.

Chaffetz and Issa co-signed a letter to the State Department, demanding answers on to the Benghazi security detail. State Department officials and other witnesses will testify before the House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland Defense, and Foreign Operations on Wednesday.



Ahead of the hearing, some Democrats claim that partisanship and campaigning are corrupting the Libyan investigation, The New York Times reports. The charges come as some GOP members attempt to frame the incident as a failure of the Obama's foreign policy and to call criticize the administration for engaging in a "cover-up" of what really occurred.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/10/jason-chaffetz-embassy_n_1954912.html



seems the only coordinated efforts are the continued lies by the GOP...
 

flounder

Well-known member
When House Republicans called a hearing in the middle of their long recess, you knew it would be something big, and indeed it was: They accidentally blew the CIA’s cover.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-letting-us-in-on-a-secret/2012/10/10/ba3136ca-132b-11e2-ba83-a7a396e6b2a7_story.html
 

Mike

Well-known member
How many $BILLIONS$ did Buckwheat spend on the bombing of Libya?

UNAUTHORIZED, I might add.

Looks like to me he could have saved a few Billion on SECURITY.

Plus, last time I looked, it takes both the Senate & the House to authorize a spending Bill.
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
flounder said:
When House Republicans called a hearing in the middle of their long recess, you knew it would be something big, and indeed it was: They accidentally blew the CIA’s cover.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-letting-us-in-on-a-secret/2012/10/10/ba3136ca-132b-11e2-ba83-a7a396e6b2a7_story.html

Did you happen to notice that was an OPINION page?
 

Tam

Well-known member
flounder said:
Jason Chaffetz Admits House GOP Cut Funding For Embassy Security: 'You Have To Prioritize Things'


The Huffington Post | By Sarah Bufkin Posted: 10/10/2012 1:32 pm EDT Updated: 10/11/2012 6:55 am EDT




Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) acknowledged on Wednesday that House Republicans had consciously voted to reduce the funds allocated to the State Department for embassy security since winning the majority in 2010.

On Wednesday morning, CNN anchor Soledad O'Brien asked the Utah Republican if he had "voted to cut the funding for embassy security."

"Absolutely," Chaffetz said. "Look we have to make priorities and choices in this country. We have…15,000 contractors in Iraq. We have more than 6,000 contractors, a private army there, for President Obama, in Baghdad. And we’re talking about can we get two dozen or so people into Libya to help protect our forces. When you’re in tough economic times, you have to make difficult choices. You have to prioritize things.”

For the past two years, House Republicans have continued to deprioritize the security forces protecting State Department personnel around the world. In fiscal year 2011, lawmakers shaved $128 million off of the administration's request for embassy security funding. House Republicans drained off even more funds in fiscal year 2012 -- cutting back on the department's request by $331 million.


"It seems to be a coordinated effort between the White House and the State Department, from Secretary [Hillary] Clinton to President Obama's White House," Chaffetz told Fox and Friends on Tuesday.

Chaffetz and Issa co-signed a letter to the State Department, demanding answers on to the Benghazi security detail. State Department officials and other witnesses will testify before the House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland Defense, and Foreign Operations on Wednesday.



Ahead of the hearing, some Democrats claim that partisanship and campaigning are corrupting the Libyan investigation, The New York Times reports. The charges come as some GOP members attempt to frame the incident as a failure of the Obama's foreign policy and to call criticize the administration for engaging in a "cover-up" of what really occurred.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/10/jason-chaffetz-embassy_n_1954912.html



seems the only coordinated efforts are the continued lies by the GOP...

House Democrats opened Wednesday’s House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing by attacking Republicans for cuts to embassy security funding — cuts that only happened thanks to overwhelming support from House Democrats, including House Oversight Committee Ranking Democratic member Rep. Elijah Cummings. In fact, more House Democrats – 149 of them — voted for the cuts than did House Republicans, of which 147 voted for them.

“We have to examine the funding,” Cummings said in his opening statement. “The fact is, since 2011, the House has cut embassy security by hundreds of millions of dollars below the amounts requested by the president. The House has done that. The Senate restored some of these funds but the final amounts were still far below the administration’s requests and they were far below the levels we enacted in 2010.”

Democratic staff on the Oversight Committee circulated a memo to Democratic members on Tuesday evening, too, that also attacks Republicans along the same line of reasoning.

“Since gaining the majority in 2011, House Republicans have voted to reduce embassy security funding by approximately half a billion dollars below the amounts requested by the Obama Administration,” the memo reads. “Although the Senate has been able to restore a small portion of these funds, the final appropriations enacted by Congress in the previous two Fiscal Years have been far below the amounts requested by the Administration for embassy security, and far below the levels enacted in Fiscal Year 2010, the last year Democrats controlled the House.”

What Cummings and the Democratic Oversight Committee staff are referring to is the final fiscal year 2012 omnibus appropriations package that included $2.075 billion for the programs – $567.5 million less than the Obama administration’s request.

Cummings and the Democratic staff memo don’t mention that Democrats made those cuts into embassy security funding possible.

A spokeswoman for Cummings has not returned a request for comment on the matter

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/10/dems-accuse-gop-of-cutting-security-funding-in-libya-despite-majority-dem-support-for-vote/#ixzz293bHsOWE

Can you really put all the blame on the GOP when more Democrats voted for the cuts than did Republicans? :?
 

Mike

Well-known member
My guess is flounder won't address this. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

He and OT have a habit of tucking their tails between their legs when caught not knowing the facts.
 
Top