Benghazi is begining to stink.

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:18 pm

There is also the question was they were exactly doing there. The two navy seals were seemingly working for the CIA and I read somewhere (and I am not sure that this is correct) that the so called "consulate", was really just a "mission", with the actual consulate being in a different part of the country. Some information was seemingly widthheld by the request of the CIA for national security reasons, whatever that means... I am sure that will get conspiracy theorists go crazy....
Personally, I think that the US should have stayed out of the whole "arab spring" movement. It is not like those that are in charge now, are big fans of the US or Israel anyway...

mvanwink5 · Post by **mvanwink5** » Sat Nov 03, 2012 12:16 am

Things never seem to change, Geraldo has always been a classic, and I will never forget the vault.

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Sat Nov 03, 2012 12:55 am

Skipjack wrote:There is also the question was they were exactly doing there. The two navy seals were seemingly working for the CIA and I read somewhere (and I am not sure that this is correct) that the so called "consulate", was really just a "mission", with the actual consulate being in a different part of the country. Some information was seemingly widthheld by the request of the CIA for national security reasons, whatever that means... I am sure that will get conspiracy theorists go crazy....
Personally, I think that the US should have stayed out of the whole "arab spring" movement. It is not like those that are in charge now, are big fans of the US or Israel anyway...

They were former frogs. They were civilian contracters to the CIA to help look for Former Regime unaccounted weapons. Manpads were high on the list.

The Benghazi site had been in use for some time. You can have more than one consulate in a country. The Embassy is in Tripoli.

It is not as big a secret as you think.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:33 pm

CBS Held Damaging Obama Benghazi Tape

ANALYSIS: Two days before the election, CBS posted additional portions of a Sept. 12 "60 Minutes" interview where President Obama seems to contradict himself on the Benghazi attack. As the Benghazi investigation gets more attention and focus, CBS is once again adding to the Benghazi timeline.

In the interview, according to the latest portions, Obama would not say whether he thought the attack was terrorism. Yet he would later emphasize at a presidential debate that in the Rose Garden the same day, he had declared the attack an act of terror.

http://nation.foxnews.com/60-minutes/20 ... ghazi-tape

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:51 pm

CIA Director Petraeus Resigns Over 'Affair'

Petraeus was slated to testify before Congress next week on the murder of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, in Benghazi. Bret Baier of Fox News just tweeted, "With Petraeus’ resignation effective immediately, he will not testify next week & lawmakers are said to be 'stunned' by the announcement."

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012 ... us-Resigns

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Fri Nov 09, 2012 10:25 pm

Well that certainly qualifies as a "thing that makes you go hmmmm."

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Fri Nov 09, 2012 10:53 pm

ladajo wrote:Well that certainly qualifies as a "thing that makes you go hmmmm."

From a comment at "Ace of Spades"

325 Sooo... lets see....

Panetta is going... Patreus is gone... General in charge of Africa is gone... Admiral in charge of Carrier closest to action Gone....

Geeee.... what a coincidence.

Posted by: Romeo13 at November 09, 2012 05:47 PM (lZBBB)

http://minx.cc/?post=334814

paperburn1 · Post by **paperburn1** » Fri Nov 09, 2012 10:57 pm

ladajo wrote:Well that certainly qualifies as a "thing that makes you go hmmmm."

Very interesting times on the hill this week

hanelyp · Post by **hanelyp** » Sat Nov 10, 2012 2:50 am

I don't have enough facts to be sure what's going on with Petraeus, but a foul odor is coming from the direction of the resignation.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Sat Nov 10, 2012 6:55 pm

More on the Timing of Petraeus’s Resignation

FBI agents on the case were aware that such a decision had been made to hold off on forcing him out until after the election and were outraged.

“The decision was made to delay the resignation apparently to avoid potential embarrassment to the president before the election,” an FBI source says. “To leave him in such a sensitive position where he was vulnerable to potential blackmail for months compromised our security and is inexcusable.”

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2 ... nation.php

paperburn1 · Post by **paperburn1** » Sat Nov 10, 2012 7:05 pm

Diogenes wrote:More on the Timing of Petraeus’s Resignation

FBI agents on the case were aware that such a decision had been made to hold off on forcing him out until after the election and were outraged.

“The decision was made to delay the resignation apparently to avoid potential embarrassment to the president before the election,” an FBI source says. “To leave him in such a sensitive position where he was vulnerable to potential blackmail for months compromised our security and is inexcusable.”

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2 ... nation.php

I don't believe that, there is more than what is being told ere.

GIThruster · Post by **GIThruster** » Sat Nov 10, 2012 7:41 pm

Why do you say that?

GIThruster · Post by **GIThruster** » Sat Nov 10, 2012 7:41 pm

Why do you say that?

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Sat Nov 10, 2012 11:30 pm

Diogenes wrote:More on the Timing of Petraeus’s Resignation

FBI agents on the case were aware that such a decision had been made to hold off on forcing him out until after the election and were outraged.

“The decision was made to delay the resignation apparently to avoid potential embarrassment to the president before the election,” an FBI source says. “To leave him in such a sensitive position where he was vulnerable to potential blackmail for months compromised our security and is inexcusable.”

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2 ... nation.php

Petraeus can still be called to testify before congress. That has no bearing on whether he holds public office or not. All persons are subject.

He was wrong as a sworn officer to do what he did. He manned up and moved on. If Congress wants him to testify, he can be called forth just like any of you.

paperburn1 · Post by **paperburn1** » Sun Nov 11, 2012 3:11 am

GIThruster wrote:Why do you say that?

the risk with an affair is blackmail, once you man up the potential problems are minimize. For such a speedy removal there has to be more. I bet it will come out in the next few days.it could have been a long term deal that he did not disclose on his read in to the cit position. All speculation on my part of course.