Topic Author's Original Post - Nov 1, 2012 - 06:15pm PT
Larry Bell, Contributor, Forbes
Benghazi Stand Down Denials Don't Stand Up To Reason
There are some large disconnects between Obama administration explanations concerning security and response actions taken before, during and after the disastrous terrorist attacks on our Benghazi consulate and accounts, compared with those which continue to emerge from outside sources. Following numerous White House claims now known to be inaccurate and intentionally misleading, we are repeatedly assured that we will get the real scoop in due time after full investigations are complete. One perplexing issue, among many, revolves around conflicting accounts regarding requests and denials of military aid which might have saved American lives.
Further delays only increase wide-spread suspicions that there are no legitimate answers, and that the president’s strategy is to run out the clock until after his final election is over. If this were not the case, it would seem logical that he would seize upon every opportunity to demonstrate evidence of the leadership and transparency he has repeatedly promised. Meanwhile, those who dare to raise those questions and express such suspicions are often subjected by his supporters to scornful reproach. And yes, I speak from experience on this…a subject I will get to later.
Putting serious questions aside regarding why early requests for enhanced consulate security had been repeatedly denied, along with misplaced blame for the attack on an obscure anti-Muslim video, let’s focus exclusively upon controversies surrounding that fateful seven-hour assault period.
During an October 16 interview, Denver’s WUSA-TV reporter Kyle Clark asked President Obama a two-part question: “Were the Americans under attack at the consulate in Benghazi, Libya denied requests for help during that attack, and is it fair to tell Americans that what happened is under investigation until after the election?” Expressing his regret about the casualties and sympathy for their families, plus a determination to bring the perpetrators to justice, the president didn’t answer either question.
After dodging, Clark asked the first and most important part again: “Were they denied requests for help during the attack?” And once again Obama offered a non-answer, saying: “I can tell you as I have said over the last couple of months since this happened, that the minute I found out this was going on, I gave three very clear directives. Number one, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to. Number two, we’re going to investigate exactly what happened to make sure it doesn’t happen again. Number three, find out who did this so we can bring them to justice.” He continued, “I guarantee you that everybody in the State Department, our military, CIA, you name it, had number-one priority making sure that people were safe. These are our folks. And we’re going to find out exactly what happened.”
So are we to take it from this that President Obama expressly said that in the very beginning he issued a clear directive instructing that all possible means be employed by his National Security Council to secure our personnel? Such a directive would constitute an “Execute Order”, an official mandate that would carry the inviolate authority of our nation’s commander-in-chief. Where is that document?
The New York Times reported that defense department officials said they did not receive a request for help from the State Department as the attack unfolded. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who was with President Obama in the Oval Office for a regular meeting when the first attack reports came in, then later said: “There’s a lot of Monday-morning quarterbacking going on here”, adding that “the basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on, without having some real-time information about what’s taking place.”
Yet the administration had already put our people in harm’s way…and did so without providing adequate protection. So if the president had issued a formal order to “employ all possible means to secure our personnel”, then wouldn’t the correct decision be to deploy aid to save them? And in not doing so, didn’t the defense secretary countermand the alleged direct order? On the other hand, it wouldn’t seem very likely for that to occur when his military superior, the president, was right there in the Oval Office with him.
According to a Fox News report by Jennifer Griffin, former Navy Seals Ty Woods and Glen Doherty (who were later killed), were ordered to stand down three times following calls during the attack. The first two times occurred soon after they heard initial shots fired, informed higher-ups at the CIA annex, and requested permission to go to the consulate to help out. However, they ignored those orders and made their way to the consulate, which by that time was on fire. The rescue team then returned to the CIA annex about midnight after evacuating those who remained at the consulate and retrieving the body of Sean Smith. They had not succeeded in locating Ambassador Stevens.
Woods and Doherty called again for military support as they began to take on gunfire at the annex. Again, the request was denied. According to those present at the compound, there were no communications problems at the annex, and the team was in constant radio contact with headquarters. Ty Woods was manning a machine gun on the annex roof at the time. He painted a targeting laser on the enemy mortar that later killed him after calling for support from a Spectre gunship that never arrived.
The fighting at the CIA annex lasted for more than four hours. That provided plenty of time for American aircraft and commandos based at our Sigonella Air base in Italy 480 miles away to intervene.
Two separate Special Operations forces were instructed to stand down. Senior military and intelligence sources informed Fox News that a force specializing in counterterrorism rescues which was already in place at Sigonella could have reached Benghazi within less than two hours. The other team had previously operated in Central Europe, and was being moved to Sigonella.
CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Youngblood denied claims that any requests for support were turned down. She said: “We can say with confidence that the Agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi. Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need: claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.” So if not the CIA…then who did issue the stand down orders?
Larry Womack, writing in the Huffington Post, did a hatchet piece which referred to my earlier October 24 article titled “White House Watched Benghazi Attacked And Didn’t Respond” as a “jumble of lies” and a “rant”. He asserted I had erroneously stated that European military forces that might have rapidly responded did not arrive at Sigonella “until after the attack was over”. However this is directly at odds with reports that at least one counterterrorism force was already in place there ready for immediate deployment.
Womack also challenged my “outlandish claim” that “absurdly” misrepresented drone footage of Benghazi events as “live video” and my assertion “that a series of email alerts received late Tuesday evening provides additional information that was known to Obama administration officials shortly after the attack commenced.”
Well actually…yes! Two surveillance drones had been redirected to Benghazi shortly after the attack began, and were already hovering over the compound. One was sent to relieve the first, perhaps due to fuel issues, and both were capable of sending real-time visuals back to Washington. Any U.S. official or agency with the proper clearance, including the White House Situation Room, State Department, CIA, Pentagon and others could continuously call up that video on their computers.
As for real-time emails, there were lots of them also. According to reports, between 300 and 400 national security figures received these real-time updates throughout the attack. The first one came in about 20 minutes after the fighting began. Another, received just two hours into the raid, advised White House and State Department officials that an Islamic militant group called Ansar al-Sharia had taken credit.
Just to prove that I really can’t be trusted to present accurate information, Mr Womack pointed out that I’m “a climate change denier!” (exclamation emphasis in original). Although I really don’t appreciate the Holocaust implication of that “denier” term, he’s at least correct that I’m a bone fide skeptic on that subject… to the extent this conceivably matters. He also cited a reference to some related statements I have made on that subject which appear in an alarmist blog link. Frankly, I enthusiastically stand by all of them.
Womack concluded his article expressing angry disdain for conservative blogs which he believes callously exploit the Benghazi tragedy for political purposes. Here, he echoes a defense repeatedly voiced by the president. Yet if President Obama is offended that people suspect he hasn’t been forthcoming, there’s a very simple solution. Just provide real evidence to back up his administration’s claims…perhaps starting with that three point order he purportedly issued immediately upon learning of the attack.
I want to know and I want to know now, and if I don't hear what I want to know now, I now get to make up what I want to know.
OK, here's what you want to know. Obama watched the Ambassador die from a drone, denied all attempts from patriotic Americans wanting to rush in and save him, then went on a vacation to Las Vegas.
Stage 1 Obama Derangement Syndrome
Early symptoms include subtle, low level criticisms of Obama's "leadership" abilities. A simple understanding of separation of powers and what Obama can/can not do is enough to reverse most ailments.
Stage 2 Obama Derangement Syndrome
At this stage, attacks on the President begin to take on a nonsensical element such as criticism of Obama playing Golf, taking a vacation with his family, or eating mustard on his hamburger. The tone used by stage 2 sufferers mimics that of a gossip tabloid or an unhappy teenager's blog.
Stage 3 Obama Derangement Syndrome
As the disease progresses, deeply held anger, resentment, and fear manifests itself. Those afflicted with ODS-3 are unable to call the President by his name. They use incendiary monikers such as Barry, Obummer, Zero. The derangement begins to branch out to Obama's family. Even mentioning Michelle Obama's campaign to encourage healthy lifestyles is enough to cause hysterical fits of rage.
Stage 4 Obama Derangement Syndrome
Opposition to Obama becomes not just predictable, but a force of habit. Those afflicted use phrases like, "Anyone but Obama." The diseased begin to take any position, so long as it is not Obama's position. They begin to mock ideas like "hope" and "change" as naive, simply because Obama embodies them.
Stage 5 Obama Derangement Syndrome
As stage 5 ODS sets in, the assaults on the President's character begin to imply he is evil at his core. The development of conspiracies that suggest Obama is knowingly executing an agenda that will harm America are commonplace. Questions like, "Is Obama A Bigger Threat Than Al Qaeda?" and "Obama: A Radical Leftist Who Seeks To Dismantle Capitalism?" are common place.
Stage 6 Obama Derangement Syndrome
This stage is mostly reserved for birthers and bigots. People who have developed ODS-6 are offended by Barack Obama's very existence. The subtle racial undertones, kept concealed in the previous stages of the disease, can no longer be contained. They find it impossible to believe that a black man could be elected President of "their" country, despite the overwhelming evidence that the President was born in America.
wrong
I have been 100% correct on everything I ever posted
I don't post anything that I haven't verified as true
and will say I was wrong anytime someone can prove that I was wrong
now cragman comes
outta the woodwork
for an easy cheap shot
at a fraction moment
in time that he tries
to magnify into reality and intent.
to that note,
crag you were probably mastrabating
in your family room
while that biker gang
was beatin the shet outta
me at the bar in your small
town.
What a as#@&%e like thing to say
Thanks alot
I warned you
But No
So you say that Bush couldn't save a single person during 911
But what happened in Libya is totally the fault of Obama, where 4 people died half way across the planet
everyone knows Bush could have prevented 9/11 simply by ordering all cockpit doors be hardened steel and locked at take off, and he could have done that on "day one"
but the dipshits voted for a total moron and put him in charge
simple
the Israelis have been doing it for decades and have never had an attack
total national security failure while the Repubs had the Senate, House, and Presidency
i would respectfully suggest
to mr five none and all of
his limping coherts
to buy a couple cases
of diapers
and a few parcels
of tear tissue
because you've at
least 4 more years
of lament,
shiteing your drawers
and weeping out your growing pains.
get outta the way
of change,
ya false inheritants of resolve.
I think we should all ask why Cragman is being such an a hole?
Too much meth?
So you say that Bush couldn't save a single person during 911
But what happened in Libya is totally the fault of Obama, where 4 people died on the other side of the planet
Sounds like you are very misinformed
What about the WMDs???
First Iraq, now Iran?
Why would anyone choose to go back to being terrorised by our own Government?
Why??
Do you hate America that much, or is it just the blacks you hate?
or just the lies about Liberals
Is that what you hate?
Should Obama have gone before Congress and asked for a declaration of war on Al Q? Would they have accomdated him?
Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Pearl Harbor Speech December 8 1941
To the Congress of the United States
Yesterday, Dec. 7, 1941 - a date which will live in infamy - the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.
The United States was at peace with that nation and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with the government and its emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific.
Indeed, one hour after Japanese air squadrons had commenced bombing in Oahu, the Japanese ambassador to the United States and his colleagues delivered to the Secretary of State a formal reply to a recent American message. While this reply stated that it seemed useless to continue the existing diplomatic negotiations, it contained no threat or hint of war or armed attack.
It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time, the Japanese government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.
The attack yesterday on the Hawaiian islands has caused severe damage to American naval and military forces. Very many American lives have been lost. In addition, American ships have been reported torpedoed on the high seas between San Francisco and Honolulu.
Yesterday, the Japanese government also launched an attack against Malaya.
Last night, Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong.
Last night, Japanese forces attacked Guam.
Last night, Japanese forces attacked the Philippine Islands.
Last night, the Japanese attacked Wake Island.
This morning, the Japanese attacked Midway Island.
Japan has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.
As commander in chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense.
Always will we remember the character of the onslaught against us.
No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.
I believe I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost, but will make very certain that this form of treachery shall never endanger us again.
Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory and our interests are in grave danger.
With confidence in our armed forces - with the unbounding determination of our people - we will gain the inevitable triumph - so help us God.
I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, Dec. 7, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese empire.
Jesus, dumb as stumps and mindless political fodder.
Have any of you clowns been in a conflict, riot, large consulate demonstrations, large-scale emergency, or other chaotic environment? I have - all of the above.
Events unfold which cannot be micro-managed from abroad and the pace of events cannot controlled on the ground, many layers of people are involved, it's hard to tell the players, communication are difficult, context is hard to establish, lines of authority blur, decisionmaking against regualtions and policy objectives becomes difficult, misinterpretation and miscommunication happens, mistakes get made at both end of the line, and in general Murphy takes hold and rules. Add to that a long history of State relying mercs and locals for worldwide protective services and the result is bad sh#t occasionally happens - particularly when the mission involved is a makeshift one in the aftermath of a violent revolution in the third world.
The idea that the President, SecDef, SecState, SecHSC, or Joint Chiefs are capable of, or should be, running groundOps as as an attack unfolds is so patently and blatantly stupid as to really not being worthy of a response.
'Libyagate' is yet another clear case hypocritical indignation on the part of the far right and a clear case of putting its desperate clawing for power way, way out ahead of our national interest.
In short, and given you keep posting up this sort of moronic bullsh#t, more like 5.6...
Keep in mind that in less time than what has elapsed since Obama began the coverup of what happened in Benghazi, President Bush was bringing down the wrath of our armed forces in Afghanistan on the Taliban heads.....half a world away.
07:27 PM ET From CNN
Intelligence official offers new timeline for Benghazi attack
From Suzanne Kelly
A senior U.S. intelligence official discounted a Fox News report from last Friday that said officials within the CIA chain of command denied repeated requests from its officers on the ground to assist during the attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya.
The official insisted that the CIA operators on the ground were in charge of their movements and the safety of those who were preparing to respond was also an important consideration.
"There were no orders to anybody to stand down in providing support," the official said.
The official detailed a minute-by-minute account of what the official said occurred September 11.
There was a roughly 25-minute gap between when the officers at a nearby annex received the call for help from the mission to when the officers were able to get on their way to assist. During that time the officers at that annex location were getting their weapons loaded into vehicles, while others were on the phone trying to get local "friendly" militias with heavier weapons to help.
The Fox report also suggested that the officers on the ground asked for military backup but the CIA denied those requests. The official again said this report was wrong. The military, the official said, provided drone surveillance and a tactical security team to assist.
The timeline:
– Around 9:40 p.m.(local time) the annex receives the first call that the mission is under attack.
– Fewer than 25 minutes later, a security team leaves the annex for the mission.
– Over the next 25 minutes, the team members approach the compound, attempt to secure heavy weapons and make their way onto the compound in the face of enemy fire.
– At 11:11 p.m., the requested drone surveillance arrives over the mission compound.
– By 11:30 p.m., all U.S. personnel, except for Ambassador Chris Stevens, who is missing, depart the mission. The exiting vehicles come under fire.
– Over the next roughly 90 minutes, the annex receives sporadic small arms fire and rocket-propelled grenade rounds. The security team returns fire and the attackers disperse at approximately 1 a.m.
– At about the same time, a team of additional security personnel lands at the Benghazi airport and negotiates for transport into town. Upon learning the ambassador is missing and that the situation at the annex has calmed, the team focuses on locating Stevens and tried to obtain information on the security situation at the hospital.
– It is still predawn when the team at the airport finally manages to secure transportation and an armed escort. Having learned that the ambassador was almost certainly dead and that the security situation at the hospital was uncertain, the team heads to the annex to assist with the evacuation.
– They arrive with Libyan support at the annex at 5:15 a.m., just before the mortar rounds begin to hit the annex. Two security officers are killed when they take direct mortar fire as they engage the enemy. That attack lasts only 11 minutes before dissipating.
– Less than an hour later, a heavily-armed Libyan military unit arrives to help evacuate the compound of all U.S. personnel.
Cragman, again, both moronic and completely untrue in every respect, and please note the invasion of Afghanistan was one of the most ignorant, ill-advised decisions ever taken by an American president but the neocons weren't going to miss their opportunity.
Perhaps Obama has timed the attack on whoever was behind and organized the attack in Libya - if anyone was, that is - for say Sunday or Monday. It would reinforce his image as a decisive, competent leader, waiting until he was sure who the murderers ("perps") were, and then visiting justice on them, while minimizing harm to others. A November surprise.
Keep in mind that in less time than what has elapsed since Obama began the coverup of what happened in Benghazi, President Bush was bringing down the wrath of our armed forces in Afghanistan on the Taliban heads.....half a world away.
Not only ignorant and ill advised, but an absolute failure responsible for 10s of thousands of Afghan civilian deaths and thousands of American and allied forces' deaths.
How can you condemn Obama's response to the Libya attack and crow with pride about the response to 9/11, Cragman, and call yourself a Christian all at once? Do you realize 90% of the attackers on 9/11 were from Saudi Arabia, as reported by the bush administration anyway, just to make the Afghan invasion even more absurd?
You seem like basically a good guy, but I just don't get it.
At all.
AND your new candidate for president, and his running mate, are willing to lie over and over again blatantly to attempt to fool the public into voting for them, on top of all that.
What's up with you religious conservatives, Craggy?
Welcome back Rosneau.....! Rudy Guliani brokered a deal between a cell phone provider and the city that resulted in a communication break down between the fire department and other rescue teams during 9-11...Rudy made some cash and gambled with rescue personel safety and it back fired on him in a big way...It's irritating to watch Rudy bark and snarl at president Obama on Fox news after having contributed to American rescuers death's due to his own incompetence...I think hypocrite applies aptly to Rudy....
Clueless in every respect, and you ask about heat rising? That's about the best you can say about this - political heat started by professional political arsonists.
Rove & co. has you guys all wired up to the indignatron twenty ways to Sunday and plays you all like a strad. It always amazes me none of you clowns can see the puppet strings, especially given how tightly they're wound.
healyje, it's only that the ENTIRE rest of the media is so pro Obama liberal, and know that the TRUTH will hurt their boy....that's why the truth is not being sought.
How can you condemn Obama's response to the Libya attack and crow with pride about the response to 9/11, Cragman, and call yourself a Christian all at once? Do you realize 90% of the attackers on 9/11 were from Saudi Arabia, as reported by the bush administration anyway, just to make the Afghan invasion even more absurd?
Cragman this question seems on topic. Please discuss. Discussion was the the intent of the OP, right?
Double standard. Bush orders the military to take action, and it's "President Bush was bringing down the wrath of our armed forces in Afghanistan". Obama orders the military to take action, and it's "Navy SEALS killed bin Laden". Sorry, you can't have it both ways.
Apparently the bet was only $10 dollars
you must have read it wrong
But you first have to prove it here on ST, with diagrams
Why no one on top of the twin towers could be saved
Not some link that no one will click on
come on!
Crag, you said on 9/11/01 'our president took it to the enemy' , meaning W. Bush. Do you think George W. really fought? Same as Obama killing Bin Laden. You use the same figure of speech but then try to use it against me?
This is a perfect example of the hypocracy of the Republicans.
By the way Obama finished the job and is cleaning up the mess that 'your president' left the world to deal with.
Ah man, you welshed! You edited your post! Now you dropped the bet to one measly buck. You think I'd waste my time for one lousy buck? I'd better copy the rest of it, quick:
"I will bet anyone $1 dollar that the Twin Towers Had a Helicopter Rescue plan, for exactly what happened."
Dude, Fox News hasn't even pretended to broadcast 'truth' since Murdoch started it as a for-hire corporate PR outlet and rightwing barking dog. Hell, Al Jazeera provides far less biased reporting.
As for the the 'liberal media' - a meme born of rightwing political operatives opposed to civil rights and folks like Hamilton, Reed, and Rove who needed a vehicle for racial indignation in their efforts to convert the south - it just appeals to those white males who can't resists appeals to their inner victim and all the deep outrage and indignation that entails.
The neocons were and are draft dodgers almost to a man. And you're going to vote for a guy with five sons none of which served in any of the wars he so vociferously supported. How unsurprising.
Good point healyje about those as#@&%e republicans who always want to send troops somewhere, but were to chicken sh#t to serve their country that they are so patriotic about.
Did you serve in the military Cragman? How about you Ron Anderson? Yosemite 5.9?
I did. Veteran of the U.S. Army.
Did you serve in the military Cragman? How about you Ron Anderson?
I don't know how it plays out in the rest of the world, but here on Supertopo it seems that most of those who howl for blood have never worn a uniform, while most of those who actually did serve oppose knee-jerk militarism.
What branch of the military did you do your time in Dean?
So let me get this straight - I can only lobby my tax-paid gov't to kick someone's ass if I volunteer to do the ass-kicking? Why do I need gov't? Why am I paying taxes?
Obama might be hiding something. I am not delusional or pompous enough to claim I know he is or isn't. I do know that the media rarely reports the facts accurately, and that the government has lots of information that they don't make public. I also know that the Commander in Chief for the next four years will be chosen next Tuesday, and that means all news is especially tainted.
I'm not passing judgement yet, but you're way past that already, Dean.
Another basic problem with advocating some kind of immediate military response to the Benghazi situation is that it's not in the United States. If some American homegrown anti Muslim group attacked the Libyan embassy in the US, would you support an immediate military response from their country inside the US, Cragman? If they had drones would you be cool with the Libyan military using them in response here?
Would you do unto others as you would have them do unto you?
Steve, nobody said you couldn't lobby your government to order some brave young men to go and kick someone's ass on your behalf.
You may never have had the courage to do it yourself, but since you live in a democracy, you get to vote for some politician who will send someone else to do it for you.
An attack is not the time for debate of politics nor is it time to appease any other feelings than THOSE UNDER ATTACK. An attack is an attack. US citizens under fire deserve EVERY response deemed needed by those at the scene. Facts are out and the left two brave guys on a rooftop fighting against overwhelming odds for HOURS. All because someone didnt want to step on the toes of someone else. And it will be known in the very short future just who blew it,, but it WAS BLOWN with a capitol B. There were Marine teams frothing to go in. They were not used. Spectre gun ships were not used , and in fact NOTHING OR NO ONE was used to help defend the consulate but two BRAVE American guys that gave it hell for hours..
Cragman's anger about a black man becoming the most powerful man in the world has clouded his judgment. Now that Obama is going to get reelected Crag is going over the edge.
It never ceases to amaze me at the verbal attacks against Obama, but total silence when Bush was f*#king this country up bigtime.
The Fox report also suggested that the officers on the ground asked for military backup but the CIA denied those requests. The official again said this report was wrong. The military, the official said, provided drone surveillance and a tactical security team to assist.
Dirt,, seriously,, this is all too familiar just from recent history- bush made several manuvers that obama has seemed to copy. That is why its easy to smell the rat now. Iran is coming and libya is a full on shite storm now.Syria, Turkey Yemen Egypt all in complete chaos.. and obama has his finger in everyone of those cookie jars.. That WONT get us out of the dependence of arab oil, that wont get actual viable energies produced any quicker, but it will waste more lives for no changes...
Mono,, of COURSE the CIA DENIES ... jeeeezzzz man!;-) Clinton DENIED too!
and NO ONE showed up for the two guys,, zippoo nadda zilch.
Ron, You contradict yourself in your 1st sentence. Romney and his followers are making this political since it started. Sadly, because it is a futile argument for you, and your side would be better served focusing on the issues you might know something about like the economy but that is still up for debate by others, not me. But I can't really think of what the Repubs strengths are.
It is a fact that terrorism works and will continue. It is too cheap and easy too execute, and too hard to stop. Romney won't be able to stop sh#t. Be realistic.
baahaha,, lets see WHO was arming the militias over there?? the US- obama.
Who helped seat the new regime,, obama. who relied on rag tag militias of muslim brotherhood members for "security"- obama. Who DIDNT show up till it was over? the "libyan army" Many questions and thats only a start. Others would include WHERE did the intel of the CIA safe houses and compounds learned by the attackers? This was a NEW regime just installed -- supposedly all lovery dovery right? WRONG! In reality, its a FREE FOR ALL of about four different factions all of which are made of radical muslims. They once had to worry only about one regime, and now they have four. Why AGAIN did we take out kadufus??
Again, get a grip. You have a completely clueless assessment of how reality works in a place like Libya during and after the revolution. There is virtually no way to equip 'opposition' forces in any Mideast country without it being a complete crap shoot as to who gets those weapons or who we are even supporting.
That's because the Mideast is complex with lots of sectarian and tribal forces at play both in-country and in neighboring states which we are less than intimately familiar with. And in the aftermath of any such violent revolution the turf fragmentation gets even worse with no effective government forces to assert control.
That means the whole place is unstable, loyalties are shifting, you can't count on any logistics, reaction to military incursions are entirely unpredictable both on the ground and internationally, and you basically can't asses threat levels or security conditions on the ground prior to going in.
In other words it's a full-on clusterf*#k and that makes for a situation where on-the-ground, off-shore, and command-and-control decisions at a distance are all exceedingly hard with folks high in the chain-of-command loathe to make blind calls - particularly in the wake of the Mogadishu 'Black Hawk Down' fiasco.
I.e. it's the real f*#king world, not the the simplistic, macho fantasy world you wish it were.
Eyes on Spies: Congress and the United States Intelligence Community
The lecturer, considered one of the most distinguished expert on our Intelligence community, had a lot to say that was revealing. It was taped, and when available, I'll provide the link.
In the Q&A, she was asked about this issue. Her apolitical view is that it is absurd to be questioning the admin on the basis of a coverup of any sort.
In this, she is in agreement with her colleague, and the person who was the head of disertation committee, Condolezza Rice.
Hmmmm. The professionals seem to be pretty united on this, irrespective of party.
You guys are unbelievable.....we get attacked on 9-11-01 and our president takes the fight to the enemy.
No, he attacked Iraq and Afghanistan. Neither of which were the enemy.
In the process he killed nX times the number of people killed on 9/11, both Americans and other nationals. And he has yet to be brought to justice for these murders.
I believe that dirty nigra obummer is hiding his buddy Osama there..
That is what he is hiding..
All Al Queda along with the Muslim brotherhood is hiding there with the help of our Kenyan born president.
He is going to place them in his Cabinet after he wins the next election.
Wake the f*#k up!
We are all going to Muslim hell if you do not vote for Romney!
I believe that dirty nigra obummer is hiding his buddy Osama there..
That is what he is hiding..
All Al Queda along with the Muslim brotherhood is hiding there with the help of our Kenyan born president.
He is going to place them in his Cabinet after he wins the next election.
Wake the f*#k up!
We are all going to Muslim hell if you do not vote for Romney!
Republitard dipshits..
You might want to read this...
U.S. officials: CIA ran Benghazi consulate
Published: Nov. 2, 2012 at 3:00 AM
WASHINGTON, Nov. 2 (UPI) -- The CIA was the real commanding agency at the attacked U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, not the State Department, senior U.S. intelligence officials said.
In addition, two of the four men who died in the Sept. 11 attack -- former Navy SEAL commandos Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty -- were actually CIA contractors killed defending the mission, not State Department contract security officers, as originally publicly identified, the officials told several news organizations on condition of anonymity.
Also killed in the attack were U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and U.S. Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith.
The intelligence officials said that within 25 minutes of being alerted to the attack in a desperate phone call, the CIA rushed a half-dozen security operatives to the mission from a secret base about a mile away.
The operatives, who arrived at the mission about 25 minutes after that, joined State Department security agents in a futile search through heavy smoke and enemy fire for Stevens, the officials said in the most thorough account to date of the assault and of the CIA's authoritative role at the consulate.
The operatives evacuated mission personnel and took control of an unarmed U.S. military drone to map possible escape routes, the officials said. The MQ-1 Predator drone, used by the CIA for reconnaissance, began providing video surveillance.
In the midst of the assault, the operatives also dispatched an emergency reinforcement team from Tripoli, the capital, and chartered aircraft that ultimately carried surviving U.S. personnel to safety, the officials said.
The militant assault went quite around 1 a.m., the officials said in a written account that said the pause lasted until almost daybreak and apparently led CIA and State Department officials to think the danger had passed.
But just before dawn -- and not long after the CIA-led reinforcement team, including two military commandos, arrived from Tripoli -- the militants launched a brief but deadly mortar attack that surprised the Americans, the officials said.
Two CIA security officers defending the base from a rooftop -- Woods and Doherty -- were killed in the attack, the officials said.
Of the more than 30 U.S. officials evacuated from Benghazi, only seven worked for the State Department, officials briefed on the intelligence told The Wall Street Journal. Nearly all the rest worked for the CIA, under diplomatic cover, which was a principal purpose of the consulate, the Journal said.
Most public criticism for consulate security lapses has so far been directed at the State Department, not the CIA. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said last month she took responsibility for what happened.
The new information does not address the Obama administration's various depictions of whether the assault was a protest that turned violent or a planned terrorist attack. But the officials reiterated early intelligence was patchy and often contradictory. They said talking points for members of Congress and senior administration officials did not at first discuss possible links between the attackers and al-Qaida because the information was classified.
"It wasn't until after the points were used in public that people reconciled contradictory information and assessed there probably wasn't a protest around the time of the attack," a senior U.S. intelligence official said in a statement.
Congressional investigators say it appears the CIA and State Department weren't on the same page about their respective security roles at the consulate, which the Journal said raised questions about whether the Benghazi security arrangement was flawed
Well I was correct, as always
all you have to do is google "twin towers helicopter rescue' that there are kinds of articles about how 100s of people could have been saved
But Bush told them to Stand Down
You can keep you dollar, even though I didn't see any proof or any diagrams
So QINTL, please unbunch your panties
We all know that they use helicopters to put out fires, so the idea that they can't be used around a fire is pretty lame.
Just more lame excuses for Bush, and hatred for Obama, very Unpatriotic and basically just groveling in evil for the right wing propaganda
Thats because republitards f*#k up and break the law everyday - they own the media, or at least the large corporations do, who than own the Republicans.
Ya - you would never hear FOX talking about any of that would ya..LOL
But made up bullshit in anoher land they know nothing about - 24/7 baby!!
OK
You are correct
THERE was No Helicopter Rescue Plan for TT
But it was possible to rescue people off the TT, I proved that
and Bush told them to stand down, which was true
And It seems that if we can't save 1000s of people on top of building, in the Center OF NYC,,,,,,,,,,
Then it must of been quite tough to save 4 people on the other side of the planet during a terrorist attack
So the Intention of my post was 100% correct
But you went off a tangent that wasn't the point of the Post, and you had to prove me wrong, well done
You win the tangent award, send me your Paypal account
Wrong?
I was wrong about one thing that was a complete tangent off my OP
and said I was wrong, but it had no effect of the intention
Only the noble can say they were wrong
Interesting to see who the dyed in the wool, kool-aid drinking Obama apologists are.
No matter how bad he screws something up, they will never admit it.
Amazing how almost everyone else knows exactly what happened in Bengazi, except the president who watched it go down on multiple live video feeds,
all the while claiming they had no "real time" information.
Then Obama sends Penetta out to deflect some heat who stated, in what is being referred to as the "Penetta Doctrine" that,“(The) basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on; without having some real-time information about what’s taking place,” Panetta told Pentagon reporters. “And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.”
Everyone in the Tier One community KNOWS that is a crock of sh#t.
One former Detla Force Operator says, "Leon Penetta is Either a Dumbass or a Liar."
He goes on to call the Penetta Doctrine "The dumbest sh#t I ever heard" and tells why...
First. I am certain that Penetta realizes that we have very specially trained folks whose job it is to execute missions just like what was needed in Benghazi. On the other hand, maybe he didn’t, since both of the Generals who he supposedly consulted with have a grand total of ZERO days duty in any Special Operations organization. In fact, they are both old tankers. The senior of which, General Dempsy, has a Master's degree in literature from Duke University, where he wrote a thesis on the Irish poet W B Yeats. He was a Captain then, and that thesis alone should have rendered him ineligible for promotion to field grade officer.
Second, and this is very important. I don’t know what Penetta’s definition of “real-time information” is, but I suspect that, if Eisenhower had the same doctrine, we’d still be sitting in England waiting to invade Europe.
Let’s review the real-time facts that we know so far. The entire event was being streamed live to the State Department and, in all likelihood, the White House situation room. That’s pretty “real-time” if you ask me, but it gets worse. Not only were we watching the entire damn thing on expensive televisions; we had at least two highly trained special operators on the ground in direct communication!
Do you think the whole Pointe Du Hoc event would have happened during the D-Day attack if Ike and boys had two Navy SEALs telling them that the artillery had been moved?
Maybe MacArthur should have cancelled the Inchon landings in Korea because having a live tv stream and two highly trained individuals on the ground just wasn’t quite enough “real-time information”?
And this is why “The Dumbest Sh#t I Ever Heard Doctrine” is so ridiculous.
The best “real-time information” possible is eyes on the objective.
Even better is people on the objective with eyes on the enemy.
Even better than that is people on the objective that are highly trained with years of special ops experience in direct communications.
My God people, this was a perfect intelligence situation to execute a forced entry relief operation!
I spent my youth (24 years) in Infantry and tier one Special Ops units and have been up to my ass is serious fighting on many occasions. In all that time, I never hit an objective where two Navy SEALs were already there and feeding me all the information I could ever want! Hell, that wouldn't even be a raid, it would be a link-up!
What more information do you need? Or was this never about information at all? Was it really the president deciding that the lives of four Americans wasn't worth as much as a campaign talking point?
In any case, this was not a military consideration made by Penetta or any Generals, it was purely political.
And that pisses me off.
You have to be blind, stupid or in denial to think there was nothing that could have been done.
Ok, you can put your head back in the sand now and continue to mainline MSNBC directly to your brain.
Stage 4 Obama Derangement Syndrome
Opposition to Obama becomes not just predictable, but a force of habit. Those afflicted use phrases like, "Anyone but Obama." The diseased begin to take any position, so long as it is not Obama's position. They begin to mock ideas like "hope" and "change" as naive, simply because Obama embodies them.
Stage 5 Obama Derangement Syndrome
As stage 5 ODS sets in, the assaults on the President's character begin to imply he is evil at his core. The development of conspiracies that suggest Obama is knowingly executing an agenda that will harm America are commonplace. Questions like, "Is Obama A Bigger Threat Than Al Qaeda?" and "Obama: A Radical Leftist Who Seeks To Dismantle Capitalism?" are common place.
Do your own research, see what those in the know say (not the politicians),
and you will see the truth.
But first you have to remove your head from your ass and turn off MSNBC and the rest of the liberal biased media.
I don't really care what you say about me because personal attacks only confirm that you have nothing.
"plenty was done"???? Hahahaha
"A force from the safe house mobilized" ....you mean the 2 former Seals who went against orders to try and save the ambassador? The ones who weren't even there to protect the consulate?
"called in the drone" There were 2 drones, already airborne. They sure did a lot of good for the Seals.
"nothing was done cuz an AC130 didn't blast everyone in sight"...Do you even know what an AC-130 is? If you do you would know they can lay down pinpoint fire from 30mm cannons to 105mm Howitzer.
One Seal, on the roof of the consulate manning a .50 cal with a IR laser designator, had the AQ mortar team in his sights for hours before the final attack. The Spectre gunship could have easily landed a round or two on them with zero collateral damage. Is that too much to ask? What would be the down side?
One well placed piece of ordinance would have done wonders.
Do your own research, see what those in the know say (not the politicians),
and you will see the truth.
But first you have to remove your head from your ass and turn off MSNBC and the rest of the liberal biased media.
I don't really care what you say about me because personal attacks only confirm that you have nothing.
Truth's a bitch. You don't know sh#t. That article is speculative smear piece by someone who wasn't there.
One Seal, on the roof of the consulate manning a .50 cal with a IR laser designator, had the AQ mortar team in his sights for hours before the final attack
Then why the hell didn't he fire? Oh, right, Obama ordered him to stand down.
The final attack happened at the safe house, not the consulate, and the mortar fire was unexpected.
One Seal, on the roof of the consulate manning a .50 cal with a IR laser designator, had the AQ mortar team in his sights for hours before the final attack. The Spectre gunship could have easily landed a round or two on them with zero collateral damage. Is that too much to ask? What would be the down side?
The Predators could have done it too with one AGM 114
Nope. Never listened to one single politician on this. They are all liars.
The former Delta Commanders that I believe, know exactly how those situations are supposed to be handled plus they have inside sources that most do not.
Is anyone here claiming to have a source that was there?
Who are your sources?
MSNBC doesn't count.
The former Delta Commanders that I believe, know exactly how those situations are supposed to be handled plus they have inside sources that most do not.
but what about the other two that don't agree with them?
yes there were embassys attacked under bush therefore all embassay attacks after are okeedokee...cuz you know BUSH had some too....What is it about you libers that makes you constantly bring up bush..2052 and you STILL be bringing up bush
Because it is absolutely pertinent not only to the current situation but to your false equivalencies.
For you to dismiss Bush because he is not now President is absurd and exactly why you and the Repukes seemed doomed to repeat historical mistakes. Deliberately forgetting everything that came before in a "hope and a prayer" that it will be different is classic insanity. Call it Hannity Insanity..
well Philo,, bush has nothing to do with benhgazi- nadda, zippo , and zilch. But i do understand you confusion- i mean ,, obama DID extend the bush tax cuts to the "rich",, and hasnt taxed them as promised in four years thus far- and he did keep bushs patriot act and then gave it some real teeth against the constitution.. I can see why your confused.
Bush and Cheney need to be prosecuted for lying and tricking America into 2 phony wars..They need to be made an example of just like they tried to do to Clinton with the Lewinsky scandal...This way , a lesson may be learned , and history , hopefully will not be repeated...Anything less than an international tribunal makes the rest of Americans' look like accomplices in murder..
Ron you are spinning out of control. You want to call Obama incompetent as President because of the episode in Libya. But you also want to completely ignore the truth and forget Bush's utter lack of any competency.
Will you RightWingNutz ever get over the ass whuppin' the liberals gave to Tricky Nixon?
Virtually all the BS coming from the talking heads of the GOTbaggers is an effort to color the Democrats with the same sh#t colored crayon that Nixon was slathered in.
jeeezussrice Philo.... This election is between a guy named romney and obama.. Bush retired-- bush is no longer --bush is history.. obama will NEVER prosecute bush for anything because hes doing the same damm thing.
thats right philo,, obama WILL LET bush party on... Uh huh...
Ron...Romney is Bush ...Not in name but in spirit...Romney , like Bush , is the lobbyist for Koch Inc. Norquist , Limbaugh....The same people who got junior in office...The same policies of hosing the 47% country clubbers which you and i , inspite of honest efforts , are destined to be members in..
Hey DumbAss, dismissing all that was Bush is ignorant.
Like forgetting you had Triple By-Pass surgery as you are packing the deep fried BBQ down your gullet.
What Lincoln did as President is still impacting US.
What Jefferson did as President is still impacting US.
etc, etc, etc.
What Bush did to US will affect us for many, many years and should NEVER be forgotten!
Even if all of you on the whacknut side are desperate to forget.
Doc obama has already threatened Iran. He went along with most all of bushs taxs, increased the patriot act to an astoundingly illegal degree and has left us with a tripled deficit. obama has engaged our military and will again- if given the chance. Hes smack in the middle of the libyan fiasco- all those guns provided to rag tag militias were used against us AGAIN. Sound familiar?? Yep. Obama TRUSTED "libyan forces" made up of libyan police, and the muslim brotherhood for "security" .. How DUMB was that?
Yeah the same libyan police that were photographing the embassy in the early morning of the attack day. Remember when i said LIBYAN govt factions WILL BE FOUND to be involved?? Damm skippy....
edit: Philo,, youve NO idea what "independent" means
No philo Ive been trying to get folks to register INDEPENDENT for quite some time. Ive opened my eyes and seen the two partys do nothing but further the erosion of our rights. The executive "powers" have been increased by each pres for quite some time now, and obama is worse than them all for what hes done with the patriot act. let alone the economy. He PROMISED to cut the deficit in half n 2008..One MAJOR fail. He got bin waden and then claims alkayduh is finished LMAO! Yeah he will send in troops teams and aircraft to get one lousy towel head while a consulate team fights for HOURS requesting help that never came. I wouldnt want obama for a turd wrangler in the toilet bowl.
sure Philo tell me how Kent State "affects you".....good lord.. Cant wait for that (not)...
Sure Mono,, i could talk about Gary Johnson,, but then WHY? Until campaign reforms are accomplished, there will be ONLY two partys of power. That is because you whacko lefts and rights WONT register independent. That IS the only voice that will ever bring real change to whom we have in power. Or you can just keep swingin and watchin us go down the tubes.
Gitmo still goin strong-- thanks obama! (ooooo want that a bush deal)
Wars in the ME still going strong
And now thanks to obama anyone can be hauled off to gitmo and held there indefinitely without sooo much as a courtesy reach-around. And if he gets a second term im willing to bet the internet is his next victim...(other than those dying in the ME for nothing)
How can you condemn Obama's response to the Libya attack and crow with pride about the response to 9/11, Cragman, and call yourself a Christian all at once? Do you realize 90% of the attackers on 9/11 were from Saudi Arabia, as reported by the bush administration anyway, just to make the Afghan invasion even more absurd?
Cragman this question seems on topic. Please discuss. Discussion was the the intent of the OP, right?
Edit:
FOX is willing to tell the truth...wise up.
never mind. out.
The whole idea of taking down Ghaddafi and letting militants have free reign in Libya was totally misguided feel-good bullsh#t.
Same thing with Egypt. And the same will probably happen in Syria.
Without boots on the ground (like Iraq), you can not control what happens. It's f*#king Islamic chaos!
The people who were behind this idiotic adventure in nation-deconstruction are the usual as#@&%es. George Soros, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Sandy Berger, and more specifically The Int'l Crisis Group (ICG) and the Responsibility To Protect group.
Yes im still cornfused over the taking out of kadufus.
But even more confusing was the FAITh by the obama admin that the militias there would actually act in defense of our consulate. We can have full platoons guarding places like GERMANY,, but nothing for benghazi?? Really?
That is a good question, Ron. They were literally BEGGING for security upgrades!
I've heard that this whole deal may have been a CIA op, including the Ambassador operating covertly as a CIA agent. But the question still begs answering, why were they begging for MORE security and a HIGHER visible footprint if they were trying to operate covertly?
I disregard that premise, it doesn't hold water.
But the ret. Navy SEAL illuminating a mortar team from the roof while waiting for air support is undeniable. He did his job and saved a bunch of people. Our gov't didn't pick up the phone when he called.
When the prez called the SEALS to kill Bin Laden, they answered.
When the SEALS called the prez for backup, he hung them out to dry.
Big can of worms there, Locker. But I generally agree.
Some people need a good killing sometimes. But yes, we are spread way to f*#king thin right now and we need to come home.
As for oil? Well, the prez shot-down a gimme from Canada in the Keystone Pipeline! The were begging us to take it up. Now that oil will probably go to China and Asia. Smart, huh?
We need more refining capacity and fewer regulations that prohibit or deter that. We are very capable of giving a big finger to the Middle East if we want to. Do you?
Well, I hear ya, Locker. I wouldn't say drill the fuk out of them, but we should be utilizing our own natural resources. And when we have Canadians offering cheap sh#t, WE SHOULD EXPLOIT THAT OFFER!~ Win-win!
yep,, we have the oil and the means . We DO NOT NEED ME oil. We are smart enough to rely on our OWN reserves while we actually work on alternative energies. What we have no is nothing but RIP offs as far as alternative energies go. And obama has HURT our oil production with moratoriums.
The whole OIL speculation crap is enough to DUMP any and all agreements with foreign oil alone.
. As for oil? Well, the prez shot-down a gimme from Canada in the Keystone Pipeline! The were begging us to take it up. Now that oil will probably go to China and Asia. Smart, huh
Umm, that oil is China's oil - why do you think they are building a pipeline all the way to the Gulf of Mexico? Lol - to ship it to Cali?
It was just the easiest way for rich mulitnational oil companies to ship their oil to China - most of the pipeline is already built - no oil, no real jobs, except a handful of temporary jobs, and a big oil tanker picking up the oil and taking it to China.
It's not even Canada's oil - it's been bought and paid for - oil companies own the Oil Sands now.
Only reason they are going south is that Americans are easier to manipulate and they will let oil companies drive pollution through some of the remaining wetlands in the States - Fox news just gets on the horn and the zombie sheep start crying.
So now they are trying even harder to drill that pipeline west through British Columbia and through sensitive mountain areas and native lands - which means paying off Native Chiefs with trucks and cash - but its probably not needed - the oil companies know sooner or later they will get their way in America.
Think about it?
Why a pipeline to the Gulf or pacific?
There are not even any refineries in BC.
Blue - I grew up right in the place where that Oil comes from.
Canadian companies or Canada don't own any of it anymore.
It's like the diamond mines that are owned by mulitnationals in Africa.
Sure it is in Canada - but it has nothing to do with being given to America by Canada.
It's owned by mulitnationals now.
We are fighting the same kind if oligarchy control of government and resources in Canada as they are in the States.
My dad actually still worked at Syncrude, retired now, when Cheney sent Scooter Libby up there and shortly after that Mulitnationals bought Syncrude...no sh#t...
They thought it was Texas - they fired all upper management - got ride of a bunch of cold weather procedures they didn't think they needed and had the first freeze up and the first complete f*#ked up shut down in the history of the company that winter...LOL
I don't think the multinationals care that much if the pipeline goes to Texas or the pacific - what ever is easier -that oil goes to China. Although I think Texas, what with it being full of f*#king retards, is a much easier deal. And refining it there would be easier.
Not sure how that works on the west coast of Canada...
The whole idea of taking down Ghaddafi and letting militants have free reign in Libya was totally misguided feel-good bullsh#t.
Same thing with Egypt. And the same will probably happen in Syria.
Without boots on the ground (like Iraq), you can not control what happens. It's f*#king Islamic chaos!
OK. ... .. so what's your solution? Or how would you have done it differently? So many here in the US seem to sweat from their pores the ideal of democracy, the people choosing for themselves a government to lead them. But when given the chance and those other people choose something that's not in line with American interests it becomes "totally misguided feel-good bullshit".
Again, how would you have responded differently? Would you have pulled strings from the inside, used your influence to guide those friendly to the US of A into power? The west has been playing puppeteer in the ME since at least the mid 1800s. How has that worked out for us? I wold say that economically it worked out great!! Especially for us here in the US. Our string pulling has let us live and act as if energy were actually cheap. Our string pulling has allowed us to continue after depleting the majority of our own energy/oil.
Pull those strings. But they come with unintended consequences. The ME is and has been for many, many years nothing but a playground for unintended consequences. Maybe we as the US or collectively as the UN shouldn't have supported the rebels (which like so much of the "Arab Spring" started out as popular demonstrations) but where would we be then? Dealing with a country of squashed down people ruled by a totalitarian government at least willing to marginally work with the US government? F*#k the people?
Without boots on the ground (like Iraq), you can not control what happens.
How well did we "control" that? Iraq is still a mess. And none the better for our having gone in and "control"ed it. Do you really think we can walk into another country and control anything for any length of time? Without consequences? Who are we to try to "control" anything about their country, their outcome, their lives?
The arrogance of the self-assumed puppet master.... .. As long as oil continues to play the role as the cheapest lubricant to economic prosperity or longevity this charade will continue. The second that ceases the ME will drop from the west's radar and will revert into the factious, tribal states it once was and is still only now obfuscated by the veil of legitimacy placed by puppet masters in the west be it governments or corporations.
The enduring neocon belief that we as the god-ordained, white superpower can control and dictate events in the Mideast is still alive and well and underlies most of the Libya hysteria on the right beyond it's immediate political utility. That despite the fact that decisions taken on that belief during the Bush administration actually reduced our security, economy, influence, and power in the world.
The banter is interesting as always. I just wonder why Obama can't give an explanation seven weeks now after the event. What is he hiding?
Or is he just too arrogant to think he doesn't need to? Personally, I think his arrogance in general will cost him the election.
I am a little suprised there hasn't been more stories about Mormonism like four years ago to try to discount Romney.
A couple of hours of photo ops with Gov. Chris Christy, then off to Vegas again.
No better than "Good job, Brownie."
All those people in the Northeast will soon learn how worthless FEMA is, just like for the earthquakes here in CA and the hurricanes in the South. Doesn't matter who the president is at the time.
Just for the record, I agreed with everything Bill Clinton did policy wise and thought the Republicans mercilessly hounded him out of office.
I did not vote for Obama four years ago, but I did not vote for McCain either because he has serious anger management problems, for one thing.
Obama's performance reminds me of Carter, a man I like, but just not up to the job.
"All those people in the Northeast will soon learn how worthless FEMA is, just like for the earthquakes here in CA and the hurricanes in the South. Doesn't matter who the president is at the time. "
Hahahaha, so cute when children can't accept reality
Takes us adults back to our care-free, oblivious childhood
I have a long time customer ive known for years. Their son is in Tripoli right now. A Marine officer, who was on alert yet never sent to benghazi. They were ready willing and quite able.
He is now rethinking his future with the Marines. Hes a damm good man and a LOSS to the marines if he decides to quit them.
i rely on much more than that Dirt. But ill tell you flatly that NONE of the major new shows/sites are worth a fart.
I made several predictions at the very start of all of this. each one has been proven out now. Yes obama passed blame to billary, and yes now factions of the libyan govt and police have been implicated. This WASNT hard to figure out from DAY ONE. Exacting intel of the compound and safe houses, and the locations of the attackers with mortar rounds was all one needed to hear to KNOW this would be the case. This is pretty simple stuff.
Benghazi was a CIA failure compounded by the lingering aftereffects of "Black Hawk Down", not the conspiracy the right created for the election.
But I do expect it to become a wingnut talk radio conspiracy meme that will help us win again in 2014/6. It's just more political fodder for indignant white guys who will be yelling "but what about Benghazi?" long after they have faded into irrelevance.
this has never been a "campaign" issue with me. It smacks of bush. just as the many other policies obama continued or added to. The new NDAA act is proof of that- the patriot act on steroids.
Look, like any number of unfortunate events in conflict zones you sometimes end up behind the curve, respond too slow or not at all, or fail to keep your eye on the ball and bad things happen and people die as a result. It's an unavoidable cost of being present in conflict zones.
In this case this was the CIA base for sorting out wtf was evolving in Libya and IDing the players of note. The fact the guys on the ground who were our eyes and ears got blindsided in combination with the dual nature of the chain of command is what generated the response paralysis. The fact we now have the technology to micro-manage our embassies and local military from afar also contributed to the snafu of it all (as was predicted by ambassadors early in the twentieth century with the advent of radio).
Unfortunate in the extreme, but it was even more unfortunate it was seized on by the right as political fodder and another indication of just how desperate and nasty the wing nut radio jocks are.
There were close by on alert,, fiddling with gear,, waiting to go do it. And thats a fakt Reilly..
but as ive said many times, i was stunned when i learned obama decided to rely on a militia that contained muslim brotherhood members as "security". And that was basically IT for protection in behgazi,, other than two Bad Ass Soldiers that held em off for 7 hours...
7 hours,, the situation room was informed.. Wonder how many meals were ordered in or gone out for? Maybe a snipper or two of brandy with it as you "discussed" the situatuion. hell i dont know..
The thing I wonder about is why there wasn't a Marine platoon there.
I guess a low-level ambassador doesn't rate such protection.
why?
because our American embassy in ANY foreign country is as a GUEST
that country decides, not us, IF we are allowed an embassy and also how much, if ANY,
US security force will be ALLOWED
in many countries, our agreement is that THEY will provide the PRIMARY security, and only if they agree can we employ US troops
And if that agreement is not acceptable to us then we can choose to not have an embassy in those countries.
In the case of Libya, their forces were on the scene and many of them died trying to protect our people, and even the people of Libya the next day marched and held up signs basically saying the attack was not from the people of Libya but from a planned terrorist effort
The thing I wonder about is why there wasn't a Marine platoon there.
I guess a low-level ambassador doesn't rate such protection.
a) It was largely a CIA station and they undoubtedly felt too heavy a uniformed presence would have hindered and impeded their intel gathering efforts.
b) All embassies employ nationals as the primary security outside the gates and most as adjunct security inside the gates. That's part and parcel with the whole purpose of embassies. See wikipedia for the US Diplomatic Security Service (DSS).
Well, that's no real surprise given we have heavily provided for Germany's national security over the years. We have 54k troops there and the German army is only 70k.
H and the fact that he had previous intel and warnings from Stevens about up coming attacks? early as August and 9-11 coming up?...Stevens specifically asking for additional security forces? Tyrone Woods Father wants to know who didnt send in the reinforcements..And i do too. When obama tells up front about this, i may garner some respect for him. I wont hold my breath. Hes been transparent as THICK MUD thus far.
White house shoots off at the mouth before they had good intel and you guys attack em for being wrong.
Then White house admits some errors and plays close to vest till they have all the intel and you guys blast em ...
You guys are funny
Personally I don't care about the details. The basics are pretty simple. Security was f*#ked up and 4 good Americans died as a result. No one disputes that.
Fix the stuff that went wrong and don't let it happen again.
H and the fact that he had previous intel and warnings from Stevens about up coming attacks? early as August and 9-11 coming up?...Stevens specifically asking for additional security forces? Tyrone Woods Father wants to know who didnt send in the reinforcements..And i do too. When obama tells up front about this, i may garner some respect for him. I wont hold my breath. Hes been transparent as THICK MUD thus far.
My best guess is that had this been solely a State facility then, while still not meeting full DSS site security requirements for a permanent embassy, it would have had a contingent of marines alongside the contractors. If you dug into the details I'm betting the CIA made the call for restraint. Remember who the new head of the CIA is? And that's why his call would've have been deferred to by State and the administration.
He's also the head of the CIA because the call has been made for the agency to take a more involved operational role, but they clearly have a ways to go to come up to speed on that front and he's there to help. That was the thrust of the swap between the defense and intel chiefs - to better integrate the capabilities of each organization and that's going to take a decade and a lot of cultural shifts on both sides.
it would seem instead its an episode of keystone cops. With a very non-funny ending. Wonder how one feels knowing and watching two guys fight like hell for 7 hours? And just setting there.?
Cannot the same thing be said about the Bush administration and the actual 9/11?
yes, but George Bush is not a Democrat, therefore he is not mentioned or compared to
the focus, always the "point" is to find a reason, any one will do, to diminish, to criticize, to mock, to point out how ignorant, is THIS particular President
as long as one remembers that agenda, all else becomes clear
Come on you guys, where are the conspiracy theorists? Does anyone think that Am Stevens was left open for a hit? Or was his abandonment just another example of bureaucratic incompetence? How can you have the CIA annex with armed agents just blocks away told to stand down. Troops in Tripoli told to stand down.The assistant ambassador watching a tv show after he knew the Egyptian embassy was under attack and not answering his phone until after some one knocked on his door. Just explain to me why? Why did we sacrifice our diplomats and embassy. Were we afraid to start a civil war? Were we afraid to expose gun running. Did Steven have some argument with the administration? Were we just caught off guard, totally surprised by an attack, even though the Brits had already pulled out of Benghazi due to the instability? Can some one just lay out why no attempt was made to aid these men until so much time had past? Was it all about the campaign? It sickens me to think Stevens, while he was being sodomized, knew that just blocks away were armed Americans that weren't coming to his aid. Perhaps we should all consider this, when we are asked to accept loss of our personal freedoms for added "security". I am not sure I trust folks that stand by and watch one of their own sodomized and murdered and then sit around and discuss who wrote which email and if it was a lie. Really is that the point here? Really?
...
Let us know!