Benghazi "Scandal"

Post spam, politics, funny things, personal stories, whatever you want. Please remain respectful of all individuals regardless of their views!

Re: Benghazi "Scandal"

Postby WD-40 » Wed Oct 31, 2012 3:20 am

CacophonousFlatulence wrote:
WD-40 wrote:As far as the name 'Raghead' goes, that's a term we used in the Military as far back as the 1980s.


How is this possibly an excuse? So we're cool using words like "jap" and "nip" and "gook" and "slope," too? All you're seemingly trying an offer is an excuse to justify using what is widely viewed as a racist/prejudiced term. Who cares if it was used by soldiers? I'm sure plenty of your average soldiers back in the day loved saying "[plz ban me]," too. The perspective of time has shown these behaviors to be reprehensible; that you have the benefit of hindsight and are still trying to find reasons to justify it is ridiculous.

The lazy mindset of "oh, they're just words" never fails to come across as pitiful. They're words that betray the user as being hateful and simpleminded who wishes to dehumanize the people they're talking about. Someone who just tosses around "raghead" doesn't actually give a damn whether or not it's in regard to who they claim "deserves" to be called that.

I never said it was right to do or to say. but it has happened and will continue to happen in this world whether you like it or not. Secondly, screw you and your pity. Third, I have a much different background, career, and world view and experiences than you have, I'm sure. I served my Country, have travelled all around the world and have been to Muslim countries from the 1980s to today on many, many occasions. Do not presume to lecture me with your limited worldly experience of how I should feel about anything or anyone. I hate terrorists...not Muslims. I dont go around 'using' the term Raghead anyway, and haven't even discussed it outside this Forum. But I did use it in my younger days in the Military like many others did. It wasn't frequently used, but it was used when terrorists attacked a US compound, base, killed citizens or members of our military out of anger 'toward the terrorists'. Occasionally, I'll still hear it for that very reason. Maybe I should have made myself more clear. This has gotten a lot more attention than was worthy having.
User avatar
WD-40
SWBF2 Admin
 
Posts: 4537
Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 10:12 pm
Location: Likely on some crappy Hotel internet connection
Xfire: faststart0777

Re: Benghazi "Scandal"

Postby MATTHEW'S_DAD » Fri Nov 02, 2012 11:30 am

Copy and paste from CBS....link is at the bottom.

CBS News has learned that during the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Obama Administration did not convene its top interagency counterterrorism resource: the Counterterrorism Security Group, (CSG).

"The CSG is the one group that's supposed to know what resources every agency has. They know of multiple options and have the ability to coordinate counterterrorism assets across all the agencies," a high-ranking government official told CBS News. "They were not allowed to do their job. They were not called upon."

Information shared with CBS News from top counterterrorism sources in the government and military reveal keen frustration over the U.S. response on Sept. 11, the night ambassador Chris Stevens and 3 other Americans were killed in a coordinated attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya.

The circumstances of the attack, including the intelligence and security situation there, will be the subject of a Senate Intelligence Committee closed hearing on Nov. 15, with additional hearings to follow.

Counterterrorism sources and internal emails reviewed by CBS News express frustration that key responders were ready to deploy, but were not called upon to help in the attack.

CBS News has agreed not to quote directly from the emails, and to protect the identities of the sources who hold sensitive counterterrorism posts within the State Department, the US military and the Justice Department.

As to why the Counterterrorism Security Group was not convened, National Security Council Spokesman Tommy Vietor told CBS News "From the moment the President was briefed on the Benghazi attack, the response effort was handled by the most senior national security officials in governments. Members of the CSG were of course involved in these meetings and discussions to support their bosses."

Absent coordination from Counterterrorism Security Group, a senior US counterterrorism official says the response to the crisis became more confused. The official says the FBI received a call during the attack representing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and requesting agents be deployed. But he and his colleagues agreed the agents "would not make any difference without security and other enablers to get them in the country and synch their efforts with military and diplomatic efforts to maximize their success."

Another senior counter terrorism official says a hostage rescue team was alternately asked to get ready and then stand down throughout the night, as officials seemed unable to make up their minds.

A third potential responder from a counter-terror force stationed in Europe says components of AFICOM -- the military's Africa Command based in Stuttgart, Germany -- were working on course of action during the assault. But no plan was put to use.

"Forces were positioned after the fact but not much good to those that needed it," the military source told CBS News.

"The response process was isolated at the most senior level," says an official referring to top officials in the executive branch. "My fellow counterterrorism professionals and I (were) not consulted."

The official says a protocol set forth in a classified presidential directive calls for the Counterterrorism Security Group (CSG) to be convened in the event of a possible terrorist attack. According to a public military document, the directive was designed to "synchronize the efforts of all the government agencies that have a role to play in the Global War on Terrorism."

The Administration also didn't call on the only interagency, on-call, short notice team poised to respond to terrorist incidents worldwide: the Foreign Emergency Support Team (FEST). FEST's seasoned experts leave within four hours of notification and can provide "the fastest assistance possible."

FEST Teams deployed immediately after al Qaeda bombings of US embassies in East Africa in 1998, and the USS Cole in 2000, but were not used for Benghazi, to the chagrin of some insiders. It's likely that the CSG task force, if contacted, would have recommended FEST aid.

"First a tactical response was needed," says a senior U.S. counterterrorism official, "and while that was being implemented, the holistic response could have been developed and deployed within hours" which could have allowed the FBI investigate safely on site well ahead of the "24 days it took."

When asked why the FEST wasn't utilized, a State Department official said it was used previously in East Africa because of damage sustained to a US embassy "to help restore communications and other infrastructure support. In this case, that was unnecessary at Embassy Tripoli."

A White House official told us that at the start of the attack, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Martin Dempsey and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta "looked at available options, and the ones we exercised had our military forces arrive in less than 24 hours, well ahead of timelines laid out in established policies." He also said a "small group of reinforcements" was sent from Tripoli to Benghazi, but declined to say how many or what time they arrived. The Pentagon moved a team of special operators from central Europe to Sigonella, Italy but gave no other details.

Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans died in a protracted battle over the course of eight hours. It's believed two of the victims, Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, died in a mortar attack some six or seven hours after the US Mission was first overrun by a terrorist mob that burned buildings and used AK-47 rifles, bombs, and mortars.

In the days after the assault, counterterrorism officials expressed dismay over what they interpreted as the Obama Administration's unwillingness to acknowledge that the attack was terrorism; and their opinion that resources which could have helped were excluded.

Counterterrorism officials from two agencies said they concluded almost immediately that the attack was by terrorists and was not spontaneous. "I came to this conclusion as soon as I heard the mortar rounds were impacting on top of the building our people were occupying," says one. "The position of the mortar must be plotted on a map, the target would have to be plotted, computations would be calculated that would result in the proper mortar tube elevation and the correct number of powder bags to be attached to the rounds."

A White House official says President Obama immediately acknowledged the assault was a terrorist attack. However, there was confusion as White House spokesman Jay Carney said three days later, "We have no information to suggest that it was a preplanned attack."

On Sept.16, US Ambassador Susan Rice told CBS' "Face the Nation" and other talk shows that the assault appeared to have grown from a spontaneous protest over an anti-Islam video.

CBS' Bob Schieffer asked Rice whether she thought "that this was something that had been plotted out several months ago?" Rice answered, "We do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned."

In an interview last week, President Obama said "the minute" he became aware of the Benghazi attack, he directed his staff to "make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to do."

www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-5...288381481237582
When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic. - Ben Franklin
User avatar
MATTHEW'S_DAD
SWBF2 Admin
 
Posts: 2212
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 12:47 pm
Location: behind you
Xfire: matthewsdad

Re: Benghazi "Scandal"

Postby Duel of Fates » Fri Nov 02, 2012 3:01 pm

Duel of Fates wrote:I think in the final analysis, the original question of cover up is the least of our worries. Politics has derailed this line of thought to the point that the real problem is never going to get looked at, let alone resolved so that it does not occur again. The problem is that we left our ambassador woefully understaffed and under-secured to the point that any attack would cause casualties. That is unnacceptable. Instead of thinking logically, tactically, and with common sense, we have politicians, people appointed by politicians, and morons who never stepped into Libya, making decisions that cost us an ambassador and three men assigned to keep him safe. I don't give a flying [m'kay] what side of the aisle you claim is "yours", four people had the ultimate bad day.

Look folks, you can go back and forth all day about which side is "better" and which side screwed the pooch. One thing remains. Terrorism is still here, no matter how much our President and crew want you to believe they are on the way out like the dodo bird. It is still killing, destroying, shooting little school kids, blowing up busses, . . . etc. Hiding our heads in the sand of politics is not going to get the job done.


Since it still applies and seeing how all of your political discussion has deteriorated into a Racial PC controversy, I thought I would save time and not type out a new post, just reiterate the obvious for the clueless. (except :fight2: )
Image
User avatar
Duel of Fates
SWBF2 Admin
 
Posts: 2812
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 9:21 pm
Location: I am here, and there.
Xfire: virago777

Re: Benghazi "Scandal"

Postby MATTHEW'S_DAD » Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:54 am

This Petreaus (i'm sure I spelled it wrong) thing is going to get away from these amatuers running the White House. CIA director resigns, sec of state too busy to testify. Executive privilege will certainly be invoked. LOL at transparency.
When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic. - Ben Franklin
User avatar
MATTHEW'S_DAD
SWBF2 Admin
 
Posts: 2212
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 12:47 pm
Location: behind you
Xfire: matthewsdad

Re: Benghazi "Scandal"

Postby Darth Crater » Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:28 am

... Why would Petraeus' resignation prevent him from testifying?
User avatar
Darth Crater
SWBF2 Admin
 
Posts: 1324
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 2:26 pm
Xfire: darthcrater1016

Re: Benghazi "Scandal"

Postby Yanoda » Tue Nov 13, 2012 10:10 am

MATTHEW'S_DAD wrote:This Petreaus (i'm sure I spelled it wrong) thing is going to get away from these amatuers running the White House. CIA director resigns, sec of state too busy to testify. Executive privilege will certainly be invoked. LOL at transparency.

You do realize Petraeus' resignation is due to the affair he had. This has nothing to do with the "amateurs running the White House". Guess blaming The President and Cabinet for unrelated things/events is back in business...

Cheers

Yanoda
User avatar
Yanoda
SWBF2 Admin
 
Posts: 1121
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 8:43 pm
Xfire: yanoda
Steam ID: Yanoda

Re: Benghazi "Scandal"

Postby MATTHEW'S_DAD » Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:05 pm

Yanoda wrote:
MATTHEW'S_DAD wrote:This Petreaus (i'm sure I spelled it wrong) thing is going to get away from these amatuers running the White House. CIA director resigns, sec of state too busy to testify. Executive privilege will certainly be invoked. LOL at transparency.

You do realize Petraeus' resignation is due to the affair he had. This has nothing to do with the "amateurs running the White House". Guess blaming The President and Cabinet for unrelated things/events is back in business...

Cheers

Yanoda

You guys will see what I mean as this continues to leak out. The administration is so deep in this mess, there's no getting out of it. I don't dispute the affair at all, I only question the timing of this thing. The admin either didn't vet this guy properly or they were aware ahead of time. As time goes by, it'll be the latter.
When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic. - Ben Franklin
User avatar
MATTHEW'S_DAD
SWBF2 Admin
 
Posts: 2212
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 12:47 pm
Location: behind you
Xfire: matthewsdad

Re: Benghazi "Scandal"

Postby THEWULFMAN » Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:06 pm

These last few posts are doing it wrong, they're way too on-topic. They need to be a lot more confusing, off-topic, and insulting.

Now, go!
I'm James, the Executive Director of Frayed Wires Studios. Check out our page for info on all our mods. We're the developers of mods like Mass Effect: Unification, and many others.
User avatar
THEWULFMAN
Community Member
 
Posts: 1188
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 9:31 am
Location: The Presidium
Xfire: thewulfman

Re: Benghazi "Scandal"

Postby Darth Crater » Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:41 pm

MATTHEW'S_DAD wrote:You guys will see what I mean as this continues to leak out. The administration is so deep in this mess, there's no getting out of it. I don't dispute the affair at all, I only question the timing of this thing. The admin either didn't vet this guy properly or they were aware ahead of time. As time goes by, it'll be the latter.

Do you have any evidence of this, or is it just what you want to see?
User avatar
Darth Crater
SWBF2 Admin
 
Posts: 1324
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 2:26 pm
Xfire: darthcrater1016

Re: Benghazi "Scandal"

Postby MATTHEW'S_DAD » Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:30 pm

I'll have to take the 5th on that.
When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic. - Ben Franklin
User avatar
MATTHEW'S_DAD
SWBF2 Admin
 
Posts: 2212
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 12:47 pm
Location: behind you
Xfire: matthewsdad

PreviousNext

Return to Non-Game Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 54 guests

cron