You think you are so clever that no one would catch what you just did. Well, you thought wrong. In your previous post you quoted from (without properly citing) a CNN online report, dated 11/1/12, entitled "Intelligence Official Offers New Timeline for Benghazi Attack". In this CNN report, they used as their source an unnamed "senior intelligence official" to dispute the Fox News report, which used multiple unnamed sources on the ground in Benghazi. You were not quoting from a previous statement from the CIA spokesperson, that was issued on 10/26/12. To now claim that you were is a blatant lie and you know it. I have cited the link from the CNN report, so you and everyone else can see what you did. http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/1...nghazi-attack/Im trying to figure out who you believe ... apparently its Fox.
The CIA spokesperson did say that the CIA did not tell anyone to stand down (and I am paraphrasing here). General Petraeus also said, on 10/26/12, "no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need". I have no reason at this point to doubt an honorable man like Gen. Petraeus. But the boots on the ground in Benghazi say they were told to stand down several times. If the order to stand down did not originate from the CIA director then it had to originate from someone in the White House or another senior administration offiical. So, who do you believe here? The boots on the ground in Benghazi or some political hack in the Obama administration. Obama and his team have been lying to us from day one about what happened in Benghazi.
Just to emphasize here. I asked you to name the "senior intelligence official" you quoted in your original post. You could not do so because this official was unnamed. Instead you come back with the name of the CIA spokesperson, who said the CIA did not tell anyone to stand down. And that is not what I asked you jack. You know on second thought, I doubt that you even realized what you were doing. You are such a dumbass, CBJ7. Originally Posted by NiceGuy53
Fox made the case against the CIA handing down the order ..
the CIA argues they didnt and Petraeus backs them up .. I believe the latter, unconditionally.
as for the boots on the ground, what boots on the ground, names ranks and SN's of said boots? Maybe you mean The Fox operatives? like Fox said gave the intel? Isnt it somewhat strange Fox just hapened to have an operative at that particular embassy on the night the ammbassador was visiting? it reeks of Fox horseshit, believe that..
a Seal IS NOT TRAINED to disobey a direct order, exactly the opposite ... if a higher command odrers a seal to stand on his head in shit, the Seal stands on his head in shit. ERGO: Im really having a difficult time believing anyone in uniform took it upon themselves to make a decision on their own after recieving a direct order from Brass .. regardless how the simpletons think or spin they put on the situation, IT DONT WORK THAT WAY.. saying otherwise is an insult to a Seal and the training it took him to be on the team. PERIOD.
I wasnt trying to cover up anything .. the first post was from an official from the Pentagon, not the CIA, and given to a reporter under the condition the source remain unnamed ... doubt that all you want, like I said before pick and chose the facts to suit your agenda, youre an idiot so not much else matters.
the second quote was from the CIA and debunked the CIA story Fox came up with, so see the comment/s above.
I rescind my comment about rightwingers being hard to educate. Fox knows exactly how to bend a simle mind, and how easy it is to make the bend permanent.
the attack moved from the embassy to the annex where the seals were, and anyone that believes any oders came from anyone or anywhere telling the seal team to lay down and be killed is one stupid motherfucker ..
