Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Vermont Lt

There are only two possibilities for me given the debacle of the cover up.

Intelligence
Traitor

I am going with Intelligence - CIA.

And why was his diary there and not in Tripoli????????????????

William F Buckley CIA posing as State Department was warned about danger. He ignored it. He was kidnapped and tortured and killed because of it.

Stevens knew he was in danger.So why did he ignore it.


33 posted on 09/23/2012 5:29:42 AM PDT by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]


To: RummyChick

My qusetion would be, which sob outed him and revealed the location of his safe house to the muslims.The sonsof bitches that put this imposter in the White House... words fail me after this. I find that I despise them more each day that passes.


37 posted on 09/23/2012 5:40:39 AM PDT by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

To: RummyChick
WHY didn't the rebels nd the LOCALS take his diary....they took EVERY OTHER piece of paper....probably a LOT of classified info there.

WHY DIDN"T THEY TAKE HIS DIARY???? hmmmmmmmm

It was still there until Anderson Cooper took it??? Fake story??

41 posted on 09/23/2012 5:46:06 AM PDT by Ann Archy ( ABORTION...the HUMAN Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

To: RummyChick

I don’t disagree.

But is it normal for an Ambassador to travel to a consulate without a security team?

No one has explained why he was there.

Clearly, at least to me, is this trip was a normal part of his routine. And that someone who knew that tipped off the terrorists. They knew he was there. They knew he was without his security.

Why would someone travel without security?

They would if they did not want to draw attention to themselves or if they did not want the security to know what they are doing. Or both.

So, you have a man routinely traveling to a remote site with no security because he did not want to draw attention to himself or he did not want his security team seeing what was going on.

There are very few possibilities for WHY he was there that are not really embarrassing or just plain bad.


42 posted on 09/23/2012 5:48:36 AM PDT by Vermont Lt (I am NOT from Vermont. I am from MA. And I don't support Romney. Please read before "assuming.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

To: RummyChick

I don’t disagree.

But is it normal for an Ambassador to travel to a consulate without a security team?

No one has explained why he was there.

Clearly, at least to me, is this trip was a normal part of his routine. And that someone who knew that tipped off the terrorists. They knew he was there. They knew he was without his security.

Why would someone travel without security?

They would if they did not want to draw attention to themselves or if they did not want the security to know what they are doing. Or both.

So, you have a man routinely traveling to a remote site with no security because he did not want to draw attention to himself or he did not want his security team seeing what was going on.

There are very few possibilities for WHY he was there that are not really embarrassing or just plain bad.


43 posted on 09/23/2012 5:48:36 AM PDT by Vermont Lt (I am NOT from Vermont. I am from MA. And I don't support Romney. Please read before "assuming.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson