13 Benghazis That Occurred on Bush’s Watch Without a Peep from Fox News

1 star within the first 30 seconds of posting the article.

The difference is that troops were not order to "stand down". (And therefore no subsequent cover-up.)


Moron.

We’ve since learned that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, in conjunction with the U.S. Africa commander General Carter Ham, along with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Dempsey, didn’t authorize the deployment of troops during the attack because it was unclear what was happening on the ground. Panetta: “As a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, General Ham, General Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.” Furthermore, it’s likely that the attacks weren’t pre-planned and, in fact, used the protests as an impromptu cover to launch the missiles. Just as Susan Rice and others have said.


Here's some more reading for you.

I’ve had this ongoing theory that if Al Gore had been president during 9/11, the Republicans would’ve tried to impeach him for allowing it to happen. They would’ve immediately began screeching the question: What did Gore know and when did he know it? Instead, Bush was president and the entire nation rallied around him in the wake of the largest terrorist attack on American soil. It was a testament not only to the patriotism of the American people but to the cooperative fairness of partisan Democrats to shelve their animosity about the 2000 election and leave politics aside for the sake of national unity.

No one demanded accountability from anyone other than the criminals who committed the attacks.

What we know now is that the Bush administration was, in fact, aware of Bin Laden’s determination to engage in a large-scale attack inside the United States (reference to the August 8, 2001 presidential daily briefing intentional).

If the Bush administration had taken reports of Bin Laden’s intentions more seriously, perhaps the 9/11 attacks could’ve been prevented. But they weren’t. Richard Clarke, in particular, a Clinton era counterterrorism holdover in the Bush White House was fanatical bordering on obsessive during the early months of 2001 in his efforts to get then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice and other officials to take seriously the threats from Bin Laden. Last month, the New York Times reported that Bush officials were warned on multiple occasions.

[link to thedailybanter.com]

Last Edited by LSDreamer on 05/09/2013 06:59 AM

So did the other news agencies cover these things?

No doubt everyone one of them did, but how many supported impeachment proceedings?

That was my question too.
ABC, CNN, NBC, PBS etc.

Since almost all of those attacks I think all the other channels that are either afraid of islam and don't report out of fear (they've been terrorized which is the goal of a terrorist) or they are accomplices with the terrorists, globalists are known to work together with the globalist religion islam and underreport and almost never say it's muslims doing the attack they even invented a new world for it called "islamist" while anyone that isn't a complete idiot knows muslim means a person that submits to islam, submits.
So this garbage about people being muslims not submitted to their religion and it's regulations and laws is not a muslim.

You especially hear that garbage from muslims that do not follow that religion as submitted followers.

So it would be interesting if these other channels did report it or not, this concentration on the saudi owned Fox news is kinda uninteresting the interesting thing is who did and who did not and I'm sure it wasn't just Fox, also what news papers reported or not?

Also in case your sound bite memory fails you, we have been engaged in a war which was fought under false pretenses. I agreed on the main point, to bring democracy to an oppressed people and to remove a genocidal regime from the face of the earth. There was however, an undeniable amount of lying done by the Bush administration and a certain news agency. A cover up if you will. This cover up resulted in the death of 5,000 American troops and an undisclosed amount of contractors. Are you going to sit there and compare a mistake, to an actual cover up? If you are, which no doubt you will be, then why aren't repubs demanding bush be on trial next to Obama?

Bump for later.

This^

i dunno if your username is indicative of who you are, but if you have children you are too stupid to have children

A lot of repubs abandoned the party because of Bush, me being one of them. I'd have NO problem with the pair of them sitting side by side at the defendents table.

W told the Air Force to stand down during 9/11. Otherwise there would have been F-16's intercepting the Boeings shortly after they deviated from their flight plan; nothing would have gotten near the Twin Towers.

Same shit, different day.

I believe you are posting propaganda. See below:

January 22, 2002. Calcutta, India. Gunmen associated with Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami attack the U.S. Consulate. Five people are killed.
[link to news.bbc.co.uk]
the attackers never made it to the embassy.

June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. Suicide bomber connected with al-Qaida attacks the U.S. Consulate, killing 12 and injuring 51.
[link to edition.cnn.com]
The attacker blew up a car OUTSIDE the embassy.

October 12, 2002. Denpasar, Indonesia. U.S. diplomatic offices bombed as part of a string of “Bali Bombings.” No fatalities.
[link to en.wikipedia.org]
Again, nothing to do with lack of security. Bomb went off in the street.

February 28, 2003. Islamabad, Pakistan. Several gunmen fire upon the U.S. Embassy. Two people are killed.
[link to www.cnn.com]
Well, still nothing to do with security. The gunman was driving by on a motorcycle.

May 12, 2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Armed al-Qaida terrorists storm the diplomatic compound killing 36 people including nine Americans. The assailants committed suicide by detonating a truck bomb.
[link to www.rewardsforjustice.net]
What a bunch of crap…STILL nothing to do with security. So far, seems someone has an agenda they are pushing with false information. THIS incident was in a residential area. NOT any embassy compound.

July 30, 2004. Tashkent, Uzbekistan. A suicide bomber from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan attacks the U.S. Embassy, killing two people.
[link to news.bbc.co.uk]
This was, as I figured, no breaching any security. The bomb went off ‘near’ the embassy compound.

December 6, 2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al-Qaida terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate and occupy the perimeter wall. Nine people are killed.
[link to www.cnn.com]
Ah! A true report!!! Bravo! The militants made it into the compound. However, action was taken immediately to rescue the hostages.

March 2, 2006. Karachi, Pakistan again. Suicide bomber attacks the U.S. Consulate killing four people, including U.S. diplomat David Foy who was directly targeted by the attackers. (I wonder if Lindsey Graham or Fox News would even recognize the name “David Foy.” This is the third Karachi terrorist attack in four years on what’s considered American soil.)
[link to www.cnn.com]
Ugh…this is getting tiring. A car bomb rams David Foy’s car on the street outside the consulate before thee enter the parking lot.

September 12, 2006. Damascus, Syria. Four armed gunmen shouting “Allahu akbar” storm the U.S. Embassy using grenades, automatic weapons, a car bomb and a truck bomb. Four people are killed, 13 are wounded.
[link to www.cnn.com]
ANOTHER car bomb outside the embassy. The shootout was with Syrian guards.

January 12, 2007. Athens, Greece. Members of a Greek terrorist group called the Revolutionary Struggle fire a rocket-propelled grenade at the U.S. Embassy. No fatalities.
[link to www.nytimes.com]
You post up an RPG lobbed at an EMPTY building? And equate this with Benghazi? Wow.

March 18, 2008. Sana’a, Yemen. Members of the al-Qaida-linked Islamic Jihad of Yemen fire a mortar at the U.S. Embassy. The shot misses the embassy, but hits nearby school killing two.
[link to www.longwarjournal.org]
I guess the Embassy has a force field.

July 9, 2008. Istanbul, Turkey. Four armed terrorists attack the U.S. Consulate. Six people are killed.
[link to www.nytimes.com]
Terrorists fired at Turkish guards outside the consulate. What was your point about security?

September 17, 2008. Sana’a, Yemen. Terrorists dressed as military officials attack the U.S. Embassy with an arsenal of weapons including RPGs and detonate two car bombs. Sixteen people are killed, including an American student and her husband (they had been married for three weeks when the attack occurred). This is the second attack on this embassy in seven months.
[link to www.nytimes.com]
Another attack via a car bombs outside the embassy. Evidently the security worked.

So, I have to ask…
WHAT WAS YOUR POINT? Agenda much? (to the original author)

You are an idiot! In fact, you are so fucking stupid it hurts.

Did you see that 12 of the 13 references were debunked?

Did you?

Any of these attacks last 8 hours?

These things always go on, they happened in the past and will happen in the future.

The difference is the blatant cover up.

Plus maguyver debunked 12 of the incidents..

The repukes are playing their usual disgusting political games.

They never said a word of complaint about security when 13 American embassies and consulates were bombed and shot up during the dark years of the Bush Regime, killing and maiming hundreds of people.

The reason why Benghazi is an issue of such importance to Faux News and the GOP is that Hillary Clinton may run for President in 2016 against whatever prick they nominate.

You are a moroon! 12 of those 13 instances we outside the security perimeter. The article is a sham! Something for the libtards to parade around as fact. BUT it's a LIE!!!

AND the one that did get past the gate, the hostage rescue was implemented IMMEDIATELY.

Please, get your head out of the sand.

Each and every one of these are irrelevant in relation to Benghazi on the account that...

No United States Ambassador's were killed, and no President ever gave any direct Order to "stand down" and refused to sent help.

Has nothing to do whether they happened on Bush' watch, Bill Clinton's watch, Reagen's watch.... neither of them ever gave an order to refuse to send the Marine's to aid in rescue and evacuation operations...

Benghazi lasted for NINE STRAIGHT HOURS!

There was a U.S. Marine Rapid Response Team, just 3 hours away, suited up and ready to go! They were BOARDING THE PLANE...

At the very last minute, they were told to "stand down" !

Who told them to stand down?

Only the President of the United States has that authority!

Thread: ****OBAMA GAVE THE STAND DOWN ORDER ON BENGHAZI****Rep. Ann Wagner states that the President of the United States gave the command to stand down

Thread: Lt. General Mclnerney: “THERE IS ONLY ONE PERSON WHO CAN SAY STAND DOWN, AND THAT’S THE PRESIDENT”

No disagreement here. Bush should have been impeached too, and in fact bought a ranch in Paraguy where they do not extradite, so he might have been thinking he would still be tried even in his after days.

Just be glad an administration is being called to the carpet for once!

i thought cheney did the stand down order !

You know I hated Fox news during the Bush era and so only watched CNN because they had no love for him. Now I still watch CNN just to keep up on how badly they defend the crap of this current admin.

Still can't stand Fox or any of them, but it's good to know what they are feeding the sheeple.

I've heard that rumor for years. Not ever any real info like the paparazzi following his entourage through a Paraguy airport, or protesters outside the lands entrance. Nothing but Sorcha Fal saying so with vague confirmation from some mysterious government official.

Facts...gimme facts. Those pesky bits of information that can be verified from several independent sources, at least. Documents, pictures, and video are even better.

Not picking on you, AC, specifically, just venting a bit since so much stuff can be put out there as fact, if it's repeated just a few times.

Were any of these blamed on some obscure Youtube video and dismissed / ignored or were they investigated honestly?

Great Post and the Australian asswipe has been put to rest. Bravo!!!

Maguyver is schooling all the libtards on this thread.

Well done, and as you would expect, the OP has vanished. Truth is to liberals like sunlight is to vampires. Feel free to read into the comparison...