Lodinews.com

default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

Letter: It is time to bring an end to the Benghazi silence

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Saturday, May 17, 2014 12:00 am

Just as the furor concerning the possibility of a government “cover-up” seemed to be coming to an end, a mysterious email has re-ignited the fires of public concern. Sent by a top aide to U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice just following the Sept. 11, 2012, atrocity, it appears to have clearly indicated to her that the attack on Benghazi was that of a terrorist Muslim group, and not by a spontaneous mob action.

Why then, with this information in hand, would Rice go on five news channels with an other-than-factual narrative? Speculation is that with the presidential election just around the corner, and with the voters having been assured that the terrorist threat had been mostly eradicated, it appears a political and not a truthful decision was somehow necessary. Kind of a “lift the rug, sweep it under, and hope it will not be noticed” approach.

Now that the “who” and “why” have reasonably been established, it’s only fair to ask which of our leaders failed to act in a way that might have saved the lives of the four brave, murdered Americans. My choice, from information I have gleaned from the media, would be to subpoena then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta.

How Mr. Panetta has remained under the Congressional radar is another political mystery, but next to the president, he would have the authority to issue a “stand down” to the military. If Panetta, under oath, stated he wanted to send help, then only the president could counter his decision. Such would raise the question, just where was the president during the conflict? No one seems to know!

To really clear the decks, ex-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also needs to be questioned to see if she had any involvement in the fiasco, but the progressives would never allow that to happen. With 2016 coming up, she will no doubt be, at all costs, well-protected. A banner day for all “political wonks.”

For 20 or so months, we citizens have been living under what was generally thought to be a dark cloud of malfeasance. Time to end all the manipulation and bring this to a conclusion.

Richard Viall

Woodbridge

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.

38 comments:

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 6:43 pm on Fri, May 23, 2014.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2986

    Yes, do more research. Sections 40 and 40A of the Arms Control Export Act were waived 18 months ago.

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/updated-obama-waives-ban-on-arming-terrorists-to-allow-aid-to-syrian-opposition/article/2535885

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/03/08/fact-sheet-implementation-export-control-reform

    http://rt.com/usa/obama-terrorist-arms-supply-966/

     
  • Christina Welch posted at 12:26 pm on Fri, May 23, 2014.

    Christina Welch Posts: 243

    No, I was not aware of the Arms Control Export Act anti-terrorism provision being waived; I honestly wasn't even aware of the law. I will need to do some more investigating about this topic. I will Google the "BGM 71-TOW Syria" as you suggest. I'm not one that really follows YouTube stuff, so I'll look for some articles to peruse. Perhaps I can find one that confirms your statement.

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 2:29 pm on Thu, May 22, 2014.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2986

    the NPR link wasn't an accident Brian...[lol]

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 2:22 pm on Thu, May 22, 2014.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2986

    Are you aware of the fact that President Obama waived the anti-terrorism provisions of the Arms Control Export Act that ban the supply of weapons and money to terrorists in order to supply weapons and money to terrorists?

    I'm guessing no.[lol]

    Search 'BGM 71-TOW Syria' on YouTube Christina. There are numerous videos uploaded by Jabhat al-Nusra. An organization Obama's own State Department considers a terrorist organization. They are firing Obama supplied BGM 71-TOW's.

    My statement is 100% accurate.

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 12:32 pm on Thu, May 22, 2014.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2986

    Your inability to digest a fact is absolutely pathetic.

    When Obama's own State Department declares Jabhat al-Nusra a terrorist organization it's pretty safe to assume Jabhat al-Nusra is a terrorist organization.

    A fact is a fact.
    [sleeping]

    When Jabhat al-Nusra posts videos of themselves firing Obama/CIA supplied BGM 71-TOW anti-tank weapons it's pretty safe to assume they are firing Obama/CIA supplied BGM 71-TOW anti-tank weapons.

    A BGM 71-TOW is a BGM 71-TOW.
    [sleeping]

     
  • Christina Welch posted at 9:25 am on Thu, May 22, 2014.

    Christina Welch Posts: 243

    Thanks, Andrew. Finally got a chance to watch the RT news report. It is troubling. But, it did not say that the US is directly supplying Al-Qaeda with weapons, either. As I said earlier, I do see how these weapons could fall into their hands, but it doesn't seem accurate to claim "Meanwhile... President Obama continues to arm and fund Al-Qaeda in direct violation of Article III, Section 3, Clause 1."

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 8:38 am on Thu, May 22, 2014.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2814

    And the fillibustering continues ala Ms. Bobbin. She does provide a certain amount of entertainment value.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 8:34 am on Thu, May 22, 2014.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2814

    Ms .Bobbin stated:

    The source could be the old maid down the street and as long as the source supports his thinking, Mr. Liebich will believe it.

    -Of course Ms. Bobbin has NEVER quoted or spoke about sources that supports her thinking.

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 11:23 pm on Wed, May 21, 2014.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2986

    Obama's own State Department declared Jabhat al-Nusra a terrorist organization over a year ago Bobin.

    Source: The U.S. State Department

    Maybe you missed that part, eh? [sleeping]

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 11:14 pm on Wed, May 21, 2014.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2986

    Meanwhile... Jabhat al-Nusra continues to upload videos of BGM 71-TOW anti-tank weapons while Opologists continue to pretend Obama hasn't supplied Jabhat al-Nusra with BGM 71-TOW anti-tank weapons.

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 10:07 pm on Wed, May 21, 2014.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2986


    Epic fail Mr. Barrow.
    [sleeping]

    Jabhat al-Nusra continues to post videos of themselves firing Obama/CIA supplied BGM 71-TOW anti-tank weapons just as the NPR link clearly stated, "some of these weapons are antitank weapons." "They're called TOWs."
    [sleeping]

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 5:23 pm on Wed, May 21, 2014.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    [lol]

    So? Al Jazeera America broadcasts from its studios in Manhattan. So we are supposed to believe that they (both RT and Al Jazeera) are telling the true story just because they broadcast from American soil?

    Duh! [sleeping]

    That has to be the most silly reasoning I've ever, well, maybe not EVER, read in this forum.

    Try again, Mr. Liebich.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 2:56 pm on Wed, May 21, 2014.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1460

    No "President Obama continues to arm and fund Al-Qaeda in direct violation of Article III, Section 3, Clause 1." supported by the NPR link you provided, morphs into "the links you provide seldom support your arguments"

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 2:17 pm on Wed, May 21, 2014.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2986

    RT America broadcasts from its studio in Washington, DC.[sleeping]

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 2:10 pm on Wed, May 21, 2014.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2986

    "dozens of these TOWs have already made it to the field. And some of the rebels are even putting them up on YouTube videos" does not magically morph into "the links you provide seldom support your arguments."
    [sleeping]

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 1:17 pm on Wed, May 21, 2014.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    The source could be the old maid down the street and as long as the source supports his thinking, Mr. Liebich will believe it.

    Ooooh - he hates to be wrong or contradicted.

    And BTW, Mr. Liebich, the report DOESN'T say that the groups these weapons have supposedly been delivered to are terrorist groups. Maybe you missed that part, eh?

    This is the same RT that supported Putin's claim that Russian troops and Russian insurgents were not present in Crimea or in Ukraine.

    [lol][sleeping]

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 12:48 pm on Wed, May 21, 2014.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1460

    RT claims to be the first 24/7 news station that brings a Russian perspective on the news. Why is it that you believe a Moscow news station but nothing that is reported by any mainstream US news organizations? I'm not saying the story is wrong or right but I would think you would at least give them the same scrutiny that you do to every word out of the government of the United States

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 12:35 pm on Wed, May 21, 2014.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1460

    I was just pointing out that as usually the links you provide seldom support your arguments besides "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

    Grow up

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 11:24 am on Wed, May 21, 2014.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2986


    http://youtu.be/W-WSdGasWpg


     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 11:15 am on Wed, May 21, 2014.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2986

    Jabhat al-Nusra was declared a terrorist organization by Obama's own State Department over a year ago and now Jabhat al-Nusra is posting videos of themselves firing Obama supplied BGM 71-TOW anti-tank missles.

    What planet are you on?[sleeping]

     
  • Christina Welch posted at 3:57 pm on Tue, May 20, 2014.

    Christina Welch Posts: 243

    Andrew, I read the article/interview from NPR and I'm not sure how it supports your claim? It talks about the US giving more antitank weaponry and maybe some shoulder-fired missiles to the rebels in Syria. By your comment, you seem to be implying that those Syrian rebels are Al Qaeda? I did not see that direct connection made in the article. Do you have an additional article that I could read that explains the connection? When I Googled "Syrian rebels and Al Qaeda" I got an article from US Today and some other sources that were over a year old and infowars, but I'm looking for something more recent and mainstream, if you will. Goodness knows things can change daily over there. Either way, it definitely is a precarious situation and there is always the possibility that those arms could fall into Al Qaeda's hands, even if not directly given by the US.

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 12:38 pm on Tue, May 20, 2014.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    [lol]

    Surprise, surprise. A Neo-con writes the ultimately history on Benghazi.

    It was the stupidity of neo-cons that got us into Iraq and Afghanistan in the first place.

    Sorry, Mr. Kindseth, if I don't buy your "premier classisists (sic)" theory. Neo-cons have absolutely NO credibility. They should be wiped off the face of the Earth. Period.

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 12:31 pm on Tue, May 20, 2014.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    [sleeping]

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 12:23 pm on Tue, May 20, 2014.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1460

    Nice to see you're listening to a little NPR but the story doesn't match your claim in fact the story states that the Whitehouse is providing aid to the Syrian rebels and are concerned that that those weapons may fall into the hands of Al-Qaeda clearly not what you stated and certainly not a treasonous act.

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 10:16 am on Tue, May 20, 2014.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2986

    Meanwhile... President Obama continues to arm and fund Al-Qaeda in direct violation of Article III, Section 3, Clause 1.
    [sleeping]

    http://www.npr.org/2014/04/24/306390368/u-s-ramps-up-aid-to-syrian-rebels

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 9:59 am on Tue, May 20, 2014.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Here you go, "Liebich."

    "There was no military “stand-down” order given the night of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, military officials told lawmakers late Wednesday, contradicting a State Department official’s account of the event."

    "Reports of a military stand-down order have circulated almost since the night of the attacks, which unfolded in two stages over several hours at two locations — the U.S. diplomatic post and a nearby CIA building, where survivors of the first assault took shelter.

    Such reports increased earlier this year after congressional testimony from Stevens’ deputy, Greg Hicks, who said that a site security team at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli had been ordered to stand down — that is, not to go to Benghazi and battle terrorists or rescue U.S. personnel. Mr. Hicks noted that the site security team leader, Army Lt. Col. S.E. Gibson, expressed frustration over being ordered to stand down.

    But Col. Gibson said Wednesday that no stand-down order was given, according to the House Armed Services subcommittee on oversight and investigations. The subcommittee held a classified briefing with Col. Gibson; retired Army Gen. Carter F. Ham, former commander of U.S. Africa Command; and Navy Rear Adm. Brian L. Losey, former commander of U.S. Special Operations Command Africa."

    Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/27/lawmakers-no-stand-down-order-given-benghazi/#ixzz32HAPewz5
    Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter


    Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/27/lawmakers-no-stand-down-order-given-benghazi/#ixzz32HA5Wsco
    Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 9:54 am on Tue, May 20, 2014.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    [sleeping]

    Great! Try sleeping well at night with that attitude, Mr. Hawk. Bluster with no substance. That's what is very dangerous.

     
  • John Kindseth posted at 9:49 am on Tue, May 20, 2014.

    John Kindseth Posts: 242

    Written by one of the premier classisists and historians of our time.

    heavy on facts, light on opinion:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/378292/benghazi-constructs-victor-davis-hanson

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 8:38 am on Tue, May 20, 2014.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2814

    Ms. Bobbin stated:

    More waste of time while Republicans whine about the lack of focus on jobs and boosting the economy. They are completely frightened about immigration reform in an election year. But what do they focus on?
    Benghazi, the IRS, (and for die-hard Lodians), Fast and Furious.

    -Many Democrats are also focusing on these issues. Lately they have been distancing themselves from Obama because he wants to sweep them under the rug. But Ms. Bobbin thinks they are a waste of time. Tell that to the families of those murdered in Benghazi, or the people's lives have been destroyed because of the IRS scandle. Or those that now have more fire power because of Fast and Furious.
    Actually, I thought the Left thought they could pin it on Bush. Evidently this cannot be the case anymore. No wonder they want it to be a non issue.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 8:26 am on Tue, May 20, 2014.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2814

    Chuckle,

    Ms. Bobbin can't conclude there was no stand down because prior investigations have proven to be inconclusive. As ridiculous as it seems to others, she doesn't see it ridiculous to conclude the case is closed on Benghazi as far as she is concerned.

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 2:39 pm on Mon, May 19, 2014.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2986

    Not true Bobin.

    Greg Hicks, who was number two to Ambassador Chris Stevens, testified that US special forces were ready to board a plane in Tripoli but were prevented from coming to the aid of those under assault.
    [sleeping]

     
  • Ed Walters posted at 2:32 pm on Mon, May 19, 2014.

    the old dog Posts: 441

    You evidently don`t get out much, there were Special Ops troops in the area and could have moved at a minutes notice, who says there wasn`t a stand down order, if it was me I would have sent everything I had in defence of the Americans that were killed at the compound. Who investigated, you believe what you want to believe, this country is weak and getting weaker. I am a hawk and proud of it, not some sniveling Demo. afraid of making someone in another country mad, they hate us but love our money that we got from China in the first place, and owe billions of dollars a month in interest, and thats a fact that you cannot disprove. [thumbup]

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 12:32 pm on Mon, May 19, 2014.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Who says that there was a "stand-down" order?

    Prior investigations proved there was no such thing.

    But die-hards like Mr. Viall and Mr. Walters keep insisting there was.

    Were they there? Maybe THEY gave the stand-down order!

     
  • Ed Walters posted at 10:51 am on Mon, May 19, 2014.

    the old dog Posts: 441

    Here`s the question, only two or three people in high places could have ordered that stand down at Benghazi, Rodham Clinton, Leon Panetta or Barry, seems no one knew where he was at the time, golf perhaps?

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 9:59 am on Sun, May 18, 2014.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    [thumbup]

    More waste of time while Republicans whine about the lack of focus on jobs and boosting the economy. They are completely frightened about immigration reform in an election year. But what do they focus on?

    Benghazi, the IRS, (and for die-hard Lodians), Fast and Furious.

    Who cares about the REAL issues that need to be addressed.

    Let's just focus on bleeping over President Obama and to heck with the American people who need to have action from the Congress.

    Bunch of hypocrites that need to get out and make room for the doers.

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 9:54 am on Sun, May 18, 2014.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    And al Qaeda or other terrorists attacked the CIA annex to stop the transfer of weapons to themselves?

    Do you ever listen to the nonsense that you write, Mr. Liebich?

    [sleeping]

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 9:00 am on Sat, May 17, 2014.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2986

    The true purpose behind the Benghazi cover-up is being obfuscated – the fact that the CIA annex was being used to transfer BGM 71-TOW missiles and other weapons to Al-Qaeda in Syria. That’s the real reason why the White House is desperate to bury Benghazi.

    Treason is an impeachable offense.[sleeping]

     
  • Jeff Tillett posted at 7:31 am on Sat, May 17, 2014.

    Jeff Tillett Posts: 541

    You do realize there have 7 different investigations, rounds of hearings, and congressional reports, and all of your "unanswered questions", have, indeed, been answered.

     

Recent Comments

Posted 1 hour ago by Walter Chang.

article: Letter: Joe Guzzardi’s June 20 column c…

Hi Joanne, good letter. Debunking Joe's nonsense can almost be a fulltime job!! I have to admit that I seldom read anything that the man …

More...

Posted 1 hour ago by Thomas Heuer.

article: Letter: Questions for Obama supporters

Do you even understand the difference between denial and "SO WHAT"? Its called reality awareness-speak. Its like I can't believe…

More...

Posted 1 hour ago by Jerome Kinderman.

article: Letter: Questions for Obama supporters

Is "Hussein" not the president's middle name? I've often used peoples' middle names, especially those in prominent positions, whe…

More...

Posted 1 hour ago by Andrew Liebich.

article: Letter: Questions for Obama supporters

Mike, If you were to research the dates rather than admit, "No I don't know the dates" you could easily find out the date each wr…

More...

Video

Popular Stories

Poll

Loading…

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists