One Question for Hillary: BENGHAZI pb


by OPOVV, ©2015

(May 1, 2015) — Seven hours. If one were so inclined, one could watch on the internet just about the whole seven hours that Ambassador Stevens was beaten, tortured, cattle-prodded, and burnt alive.

There’s a record of calls for additional security at the annex in Libya from our Ambassador which fell on deaf ears. Would you believe that the person who was charge of the security of our embassies was not a military veteran? Believe it.

I once did a contract for a VA hospital, and my liaison person with the hospital, the person in charge of remodeling and construction, had no experience in construction. None. Couldn’t read a blueprint if his life depended upon it. One would think that one would want the best qualified person possible to do the job at hand, and you would, if it was your money on the line. Unfortunately, our government isn’t concerned with filling a job slot with someone who can actually do the job. It seems as if the government goes out of its way to have incompetent people run the show on purpose.

Beaten: punched in the face, nose broken, kneecaps smashed, teeth cracked.

Tortured: fingernails ripped out, eyes poked, eardrums punctured, various ribs, arms and leg bones broken.  Cattle-prodded: 8,000+ volts, 2/100’s of an amp, would feel as you just got kicked by a mule. Ambassador Stevens endured hours of torture.

Burnt alive: use your imagination. I won’t describe what they did to the poor guy, but take my word for it: it’ll make you sick.

So what words does one use to describe the actions of the United States military and government the night of Benghazi? Bunch of Cowards? Back-stabbing? Left-out-to-dry? Payback? Pay-Off?

Who gave the “Stand-down order”? SOME LOWLIFE did, and it was followed all the way down the chain of command. Those other three guys who died with the Ambassador refused to follow illegal orders.

But it all had to start somewhere. Either one of three people had the authority to give the “Stand-down order”: Hillary, Obama or Valerie Jarrett.

But the order wasn’t followed all the way down, which just goes to show that, at any time and place while the “Stand-down order” was traveling down the chain of command, it could’ve been ignored. The only Patriots were the ones who fought and died that night. So where were all the other members of our military that night? Just what were the Captains of any of our Navy ships doing in the Med that night? Where was the cavalry, and why didn’t they even make an attempt to save the Ambassador and everyone else?

I have the right to know, as does every other citizen in the USA, who gave the “Stand-down order” that night: AND WHY? I want to know. I mean, I really want to know. Those guys didn’t have to die that night, and our Ambassador sure as blazes didn’t have to endure one New York second of torture.

Why the “Stand-down” order? For what purpose? And then, after it was all over and done with, why didn’t we go after the bad guys? Give them a choice: hand over those who tortured our Ambassador and we maybe won’t nuke Benghazi. We have a military for a reason. My “Rules of Engagement” are simple: you win with whatever will get the job done in the most expedient way without endangering any of our troops.

So Hillary: Who gave the “Stand-down order?”

Semper Fi


5 Responses to "One Question for Hillary: BENGHAZI pb"

  1. OPOVV   Saturday, May 2, 2015 at 12:45 PM

    You’re right. So much for hooking-up Hillary to a lie detector: you’d never get a base line!

  2. Stephen Hiller   Saturday, May 2, 2015 at 9:47 AM

    Do not forget that the foxes were guarding the hen house. I seem to remember a time when U.S. Marines were the guards at embassies, not private contractors who chose to use those not exactly pro-America to stand watch, then aid and abet the insurrection. Oh by the way, that was in the planning stages for months before the Mohammed movie came out. Ask Hillary a question – why bother, except to hear her add to her list of lies.

  3. Emerald Wish   Saturday, May 2, 2015 at 8:48 AM

    I mean Amb. Stevens

  4. Emerald Wish   Saturday, May 2, 2015 at 8:46 AM

    Until and unless the American start fighting and take this country back we will never know. I have to laugh!!!!!!!! The next election LOL, LOL. The evil will continue. Hillmurderer (Dem) Cruz, Rubio ineligible for office but!!!!!!! because the usurper got away with it they feel they can do the same thing. The day that usurper was sworn in the USA as I know it started to die. Our Military is a mess and I am so heart broken over what the higher ups in our Military have allowed to take lace only so they can have their pensions. God Bless our Vets. This adm. knows that our vets are the ones that will not surrender and will give their all to protect this country. The rest of the world are watching and waiting like buzzards circling for the final blow. Open boarders????? more evil to help with the take over. God Bless the good people and their children and what they are going to endore when the shtf. Ambassador Peters had not chance with the Military of today DO WE!!!!!

  5. thinkwell   Saturday, May 2, 2015 at 4:21 AM

    If not legally, aka obama was morally duty-bound not to leave the Americans in Benghazi (especially the four who lost their lives) in the lurch. He (or his string-pulling puppeteer, Jarrett) actively denied their rescue attempt, which was already automatically immediately underway. This flouts basic moral decency and all military tradition unless the lives of many more American citizens (at home or abroad) were immediately and directly at stake. There is absolutely no evidence of this or even the slightest reasonable supposition of any justifying circumstance of any kind.

    An honest investigation would likely reveal that the Benghazi betrayal was done to enable our enemies to succeed in capturing ambassador Stevens, either to trade him later for the Blind Sheik or to kill him outright in order to cover aka obama’s tracks in supplying weapons to our enemies in Syria or elsewhere. While the simple act of denying a rescue attempt might not by itself be treason, when coupled with the reason behind the denial, it most certainly is.

    Even the most addle-brained leftist Kool-Aid drinker can’t help but see that the rescue denial was an extreme act of self-serving cowardice in an attempt sweep under the carpet and hide that aka obama was “adhering to [the USA’s] Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort” (i.e., TREASON).

    Although aka obama’s desk is where the buck supposedly stops, there is guilt and treason a-plenty to condemn Hillary Clinton as well.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.