Anyone watching the hearings?

[i'va biggen]

anyone? or just bitching...not me I'm going on a date...

[JD Barleycorn]

Are you talking about the "closed door" hearings?

[Whirlaway]

Good one JD....LOL

[i'va biggen]

Were streaming on line on yahoo...

[JD Barleycorn]

I thought you weren't watching...

[i'va biggen]

Came on as I was leaving,,,,

[acp5762]

Well the truth to this attack is already known, but the hearings still have to take place. The reason or suspicion of a cover up is because it wasn't suppose to go down like it did. Security was cut intentionally because Stevens was suppose to be kidnapped and then Obama was going to orchestrate his rescue all in the effort to give himself a boost in popularity. Seals had a shoot out with Terrorist and it got out of hand. Steven's rescue was originally suppose to be an exchange for the Blind Sheik. Things didn't work out quite as planned so the Video and budget cuts on security was a reason which no one buys, except for idiots. This will be proven and uncovered during the hearings. I suspect some charges will be filled and possibly conferences on the impeachment of Pres. Obama. Information to this affect is all over the internet and it sounds more feasible than a demonstration to some stupid fucking video.

[JD Barleycorn]

I have heard that and it sounds more like Hollywood than DC. Then again maybe "Wag the Dog" wasn't far off the mark. Obama does tend to hang around with Hollywood types. That would explain a lot. Why security was removed prior to the attack. Why no one was killed early on with all the weapons and bullets flying. They set a fire around the main house to flush out the ambassador rather than to kill him. They seemed happy to see that the ambassador was alive at one point. A dead hostage is no good. We'll never know unless the guy in charge of the attack says something...wasn't he killed recently?

[acp5762]

Well JD, when I first heard this, I thought that would be really going out of your way with so much that can go wrong. But why would security be abruptly cut, why would requests for security be denied? One thing they weren't banking on was the Navy Seal that disobeyed the Stand Down Order and engaged on the terrorists to help secure the compound. This account may sound fantastic, but they needed something outrageous to justify releasing that Sheik. It will all come out in the wash of course. Technology makes it hard to keep things under wraps. We'll just wait and see.

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I have heard that and it sounds more like Hollywood than DC. Then again maybe "Wag the Dog" wasn't far off the mark. Obama does tend to hang around with Hollywood types. That would explain a lot. Why security was removed prior to the attack. Why no one was killed early on with all the weapons and bullets flying. They set a fire around the main house to flush out the ambassador rather than to kill him. They seemed happy to see that the ambassador was alive at one point. A dead hostage is no good. We'll never know unless the guy in charge of the attack says something...wasn't he killed recently?

Guess you didn't read the thread COG posted on the other one on this.It stated the Ambassador was in Benghazi for a cultural opening not running from the crowds ,and didn't think more security was needed,as he was use to walking around the streets alone.He was well liked by the people.

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Are you talking about the "closed door" hearings?

No the hearings of the meeting McCain missed as he was holding a press conference..