Obama’s Situation Room Told Within Hours That Al-Qaeda Affiliated Group Claimed Responsibility for Benghazi Attack
Officials at the White House and State Department were advised two hours after attackers assaulted the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11 that an Islamic militant group had claimed credit for the attack, official emails show.
The emails, obtained by Reuters from government sources not connected with U.S. spy agencies or the State Department and who requested anonymity, specifically mention that the Libyan group called Ansar al-Sharia had asserted responsibility for the attacks.
The brief emails also show how U.S. diplomats described the attack, even as it was still under way, to Washington.
U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the Benghazi assault, which President Barack Obama and other U.S. officials ultimately acknowledged was a “terrorist” attack carried out by militants with suspected links to al Qaeda affiliates or sympathizers.
But who was told?
A third email, also marked SBU and sent at 6:07 p.m. Washington time, carried the subject line: “Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack.”
The message reported: “Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli.”
While some information identifying recipients of this message was redacted from copies of the messages obtained by Reuters, a government source said that one of the addresses to which the message was sent was the White House Situation Room, the president’s secure command post.
Luckily, Mitt Romney pressed President Obama on this hard last night, causing Obama to commit, in a high profile setting, to a version of events that increasingly appears inconsistent with the emerging facts.
What’s that? He didn’t?
D’oh!!!
Patterico (8b3905) — 10/23/2012 @ 8:15 pmIf mitt can’t stand up to Obama how can we trust him to stand up to the terrorists
happyfeet (9011eb) — 10/23/2012 @ 8:32 pmI just have a two not word comment for Obeyme’s administration.
peedoffamerican (ee1de0) — 10/23/2012 @ 8:34 pm.
.
.
.
.
UH! OH!
Mitt is the consummate politician. One of the *good* traditions that politicians used to rely on and Romney appears to be relying on is establishing that politics stops at the water’s edge.
He was trying to be presidential in the last debate; he didn’t want the squishy middle to be alarmed at this passionate right winger who is angry didn’t fight hard enough.
This is a huge let down to those of us who wanted to see Romney really rip into Obama, but Romney decided to court those whose votes he can’t rely on yet.
I think he will not rely on the same political assumptions or personal views when it’s time to stand up to other countries or terrorists. I suspect Romney is savvy enough to know to present our country’s strength instead of bowing all the time, too.
Dustin (73fead) — 10/23/2012 @ 8:41 pmhey what’s this in my cheek
OWWW I juth bit my tongue
happyfeet (9011eb) — 10/23/2012 @ 8:47 pmSooper seekrit intelligence came in later.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/23/2012 @ 8:47 pmI went back and read the transcript and Obama never answers the moderator’s question about what happened in Libya. And Mitt just talks general policy, good stuff, but not Libya.
Pure BS, but I guess Mitt didn’t want a brawl, he just wanted to sound like a president. And leave the brawling to his surrogates.
Patricia (e1d89d) — 10/23/2012 @ 8:48 pmI guess I betrayed my own thought process then. I personally would have enjoyed seeing Obama finally face a very harsh criticism of his foreign policy, in person, without the MSM filter.
But Romney didn’t do that, probably because it was playing it safe and kept domestic policy and the economy as the controversies of the day.
Dustin (73fead) — 10/23/2012 @ 8:53 pm____________________________________________
specifically mention that the Libyan group called Ansar al-Sharia had asserted responsibility for the attacks.
Mark (4de17c) — 10/23/2012 @ 8:54 pmThe WH is not going to keep the lid on this.
Too many people knew.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/23/2012 @ 9:26 pmDo not confuse the Left with facts, their emotional well-being will be at risk.
When the simple truth is available, Obama will always seek out an obfuscation that will allow him to feel better about himself; for the truth is too damaging when you invariably do the wrong thing.
AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (2bb434) — 10/23/2012 @ 9:42 pmRe-watching the 1980 debate between Reagan and Carter. Amazing! Dems still hung up on more govt spending, investing in bio-fuels, solar energy, blah, blah, blah ad infinitum. Crap didn’t work then and ain’t agoin to work now. Look’s just like Obeyme copied Carter’s energy plan and everything else. Here’s the link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8YxFc_1b_0
peedoffamerican (ee1de0) — 10/23/2012 @ 9:46 pmWhat was all that “we’re still looking at it” bs when the terrorists copped to it right after the attack? Obama told The View days later that they were still looking at it.
j curtis (65a6dc) — 10/23/2012 @ 9:50 pmRomney was just playing it smart. Since he did not have the full scoop on everything that transpired in Benghazi and who was told what when, it would be foolishly risky to dive into the issue – especially when undoubtedly he can see from polling that he’s on the track to win, and foreign policy is not at the top of voters’ concerns. Like Reagan in 1980, he only needed to reassure the swing voters that he’s not a warmongering lunatic, and he did.
Estragon (13e813) — 10/23/2012 @ 9:54 pmIt won’t work.
I don’t know for a fact how State’s DSS works. It can’t be too different from DoD, though. “We’re getting overrun” is a pre-formatted message. The WH situation room watchstanders start making phone calls within minutes when they see that one.
I don’t think I’m giving anything away, divulging that.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/23/2012 @ 9:56 pmThe reporting system is also intended to clear things up. Not muddy the waters.
Just keep that in mind when Hillary! spouts off on the fog of war.
She’s working the fog machine, that one.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/23/2012 @ 10:38 pmThere was no need for Mitt to get his hands dirty on this story. It was all going to come out anyway.
Gazzer (8c7c95) — 10/23/2012 @ 10:52 pmRipping into Obama last night would have reinforced those who are already committed to voting for Romney, and would have alienated anyone left uncommitted who is unsure who they are going to vote.
Obama acted like a politician who was behind and desperate. Why give him an opening by going at him on an area where he was sure to be prepared to fight back — true or not. The press already covered for him once after the second debate, they were certain to cover for him again.
Romney’s biggest task last night was to NOT do anything to disrupt his momentum. All these swing state polls are limited samples and subject to weighting errors.
Here is all you need to know about why the Gallup Poll is the most accurate — Gallup relies on the fact that their sample in the rolling 7 day average is so large that the do not weight for party identification. They figure that by taking a big enough cross-section of voters, night after night, they are going to get a balanced and representative sample of what the electorate actually is, without weighting the sample to shape it into what the pollster thinks it might look like on election day.
IIRC, Gallup does 700 live interviews every night, and comes out with around 450 likely voters from each. Those likely voters are then put into a rolling 7 day average — or about 3000 likely voters reflected in each days results.
You can go back more than 20 days now, and see Romney consistently above 50%, and Obama consistently below 47% — and those numbers have been rock solid.
Those 20 days involve 14,000 interviews, and 9000 likely voters. The stability of those numbers coming out of the first debate, and the fact that none of the 3 subsequent debates have moved them, tells you the cake is baked here.
Obama might creep above 48% the days ahead, but without a Romney error, there isn’t much chance for him to slip under 50%.
No one can win the electoral college while getting less than 49% of the vote.
If Romney wins 51% of the vote, he’ll carry 3-4 states that are right now considered “lean Obama”.
If you doubt this is true, look back to 2008. Virginia was thought to be a toss-up, but nobody thought Obama’s win in Virginia would also carry him to a win in North Carolina.
Similarly, Obama won Ohio, but no one thought that would carry him to a win in Indiana — but he did.
shipwreckedcrew (59011e) — 10/23/2012 @ 10:56 pmI agree with Gazzer, Estrogon, shipwreckedcrew, et al. I think that at this point the Romney folks have run a competent enough campaign that they have earned the benefit of the doubt from me. If all the polling and focus grouping and all that nonsense told them that Mitt was better off not going hard after Obama on Benghazi, then I will trust their judgement, no matter what happens on November 6.
JVW (f5695c) — 10/23/2012 @ 11:34 pmYou could evolve around this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFRikZ2Mwao&feature=related
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/23/2012 @ 11:47 pmAfter re-watching the 1980 debate between Reagan and Carter, I have come to the conclusion that this is election 1980 all over again. Since having seen it live 32 years ago many things had slipped my mind. That year I was able to cast my vote for Reagan.
After watching the three recent debates, I had this niggling voice in the back of my head that they seemed eerily familiar to me, and after watching the 1980 debate again, I had an AH HA moment.
In this election, we have the black Jimmah Carter that wants to raise taxes and make the ‘rich pay their fair share’. In 1980 raise taxes and make the evil rich oil companies pay their fair share thru the ‘Windfall Profits’ tax.
This time lets spend more on domestic programs such as unemployment, welfare, food stamps, Obamacare. 1980 spend more on domestic programs like unemployment, welfare, food stamps, and a reduced for of bammycare called medicaid.
In 1980 a controversial crisis in the middle east, Iran. This crisis occurred because Jimmah threw an ally under the bus and takeover by radical islamists ensued. At least Jimmah had the grace to have called the hostages “victims of terrorism and anarchy”, adding that the “United States will not yield to blackmail”. However, the crisis should never had happened because they had warnings in advance that pointed to acts by radicals, and had time to either evacuate embassy personnel or strengthen security at the embassy. Other nations did exactly this. The resultant botched rescue attempt on April 24, 1980, which resulted in a failed mission, the deaths of eight American servicemen, one Iranian civilian, and the destruction of two aircraft.
This year the attack in Benghazi, Libya resulted in the deaths of 4 Americans after the administration had received warnings several days prior to the event in which the personnel could have been evacuated or security increased. While QuDaffy Duck was not an ally, Obama decided he had to go and assisted the radical islamists by bombing the crap outa Libya, which allowed again, a takeover by radicals.
In 1980, gas prices were at all time highs because of unrest in the middle east and our reliance on Arab oil. Jimmahs solution? Invest in bio-fuels, wind, and solar power. He did also advocate more drilling and more coal production, claim it was up under his administration, in this debate.
In 2012, gas prices are at near all time highs because of a hell of a lot more civil unrest in the middle east. Black Jimmahs solution? Invest in bio-fuels, wind, and solar power. Also claim that oil, natural gas, and coal production is up in the USA in the debate.
In 1980, appease the Soviet Union by giving up the ship in the SALT II treaty by projecting weakness thru a reduced military and military assets. When his representatives went to negotiate with the Russians it was from a position of weakness. Naval vessels were being mothballed, cancelled the B1 Bomber, had slowed down production of the Minuteman to a slow crawl, and cancelled the MX missile. Said America couldn’t afford more spending on the Constitutionally authorized military but that we had to spend taxpayer dollars on unconstitutional social programs.
2012, the Black Jimmah, takes a worldwide apology tour. Bows to terrorists and terrorist supporting heads of state, talk about how we tortured poor innocent muslims, project weakness by announcing the absolute date that we will leave Iraq and Afghanistan so all the terrorists have to do is wait til the day after to take over. Says America can’t afford more spending on the Constitutionally authorized military but that we have to spend taxpayer dollars on unconstitutional social programs.
1980, Reagan says to reduce taxes, insure peace with a strong military, cut wasteful domestic spending, remove onerous regulations so businesses can grow, and basically get the hell out of the way and let the private sector do what it does best and create jobs.
2012, Romney says to reduce taxes, insure peace with a strong military, cut wasteful domestic spending, remove onerous regulations so businesses can grow, and basically get the hell out of the way and let the private sector do what it does best and create jobs.
Final conclusion Election 2012 is redux Election 1980, hopefully with the same result and extended period of growth afterwards.
peedoffamerican (1c60b5) — 10/24/2012 @ 12:18 amand a reduced for of bammycare called medicaid. end of paragraph 4 should read:
and a reduced forerunner of bammycare called Medicaid.
peedoffamerican (1c60b5) — 10/24/2012 @ 12:25 amFinal conclusion Election 2012 is redux Election 1980, hopefully with the same result and extended period of growth afterwards. Also with no George H.W. Bush type to follow and screw it up with a demoncrap demanded tax hike after saying, “Read My Lips”! From which they proceeded to ram up his rear after promises of not to do so. And hopefully no more Clintons, Gore’s, crappy ‘compassionate conservatives’, media darling squishy RINO McCains, or especially liberal Black Jimmah Carter’s to follow.
peedoffamerican (1c60b5) — 10/24/2012 @ 12:36 amGreat ad by the GOP would be to contrast the Obama debate video followed by Carter debate video where they basically say the same things. Followed by Romney saying, “Failed policies of Obama are the same failed policies of Carter. Didn’t work then and won’t work now. My name is Mitt Romney and I approve this message”
peedoffamerican (1c60b5) — 10/24/2012 @ 12:57 amwhat he said.
Reagan was my first Presidential vote and my first C-in-C.
i’ll be voting for Romney too.
redc1c4 (403dff) — 10/24/2012 @ 12:59 amYet, until last week, Obama continued to use the “AlQaeda is on its heels” line in his speeches.
MayBee (4901b0) — 10/24/2012 @ 1:00 amand JEFH is a stuttering clusterf**k of a miserable failure.
SCOAMF, as it were.
redc1c4 (403dff) — 10/24/2012 @ 1:01 amAt what point in the timeline did Obama/Axelrod take a moment to tweet about Mitt Romney?
MayBee (4901b0) — 10/24/2012 @ 1:01 amBarry and Moochelle keep talking about a recovery too MayBee…
redc1c4 (403dff) — 10/24/2012 @ 1:03 amMaybe someone told Romney they were going to release their copies of WH emails, so he didn’t need to carry this story anymore.
MayBee (4901b0) — 10/24/2012 @ 2:06 amEspecially since Romney was getting hit for “politicizing” what happened in Benghazi.
If Romney stays out of it, it isn’t a political story anymore. It’s a real story.
I don’t control what gets leaked in D.C.
I also don’t advise President Tiger Beat.
But I will say this. For Axelrod’s campaign narrative to work a ton of people will have to be willing to say they didn’t do their jobs.
No freakin’ clue.
Sorry. I don’t see it working.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 2:24 amSteve- agreed. They are asking too many people to fall on their swords for a President who has already irritated the wrong people with his selective security leaks and credit-claiming.
I think this situation is illuminating about what would have happened had the #gutsycall to kill Bin Laden gone wrong. We would have heard lie after lie about it. Obama would have blamed State, Defense, and Intelligence. He would have criticized those who “politicized” the tragedy of the failed attempt.
MayBee (4901b0) — 10/24/2012 @ 2:51 amJust like he’s doing now.
Honorable Democrats, Independents, and undecided voters should consider making a call, email, or write the Democrat National Committee in Washington DC and tell them their vote will go elsewhere unless Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Susan Rice come clean about the attack on Benghazi and provide a forthright explanation why they conspired to deceive the American people.
Democrat National Committee
430 S. Capitol St. SE
Washington D.C. 20003
(202) 863-8000
ropelight (09095a) — 10/24/2012 @ 4:32 amhttp://www.democrats.org/
Romney was interviewing for President and his audience was the small percentage of folk who have not made up their mind. The Republicans have a guy who can win the debate, Gingrich. Unfortunately he can’t get elected President.
Dos Equis Guy (4e3454) — 10/24/2012 @ 4:54 amInteresting that the usual trolls are not participating in this thread
EPWJ (719277) — 10/24/2012 @ 5:14 am0bama’s on the record as making several conflicting statements about what did and didn’t happen – I think he refers to that as being “all over the map” – so the American people can decide for themselves whether 0bama is (or is not) an honest, trustworthy leader.
Colonel Haiku (54c225) — 10/24/2012 @ 5:27 amExcept the problem today is another butt fucking stupid moron Republican sticks a pipe up his own ass talking about Rape and saying things which even the most Conservative Conservative finds upsetting.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/23/richard-mourdock-abortion_n_2007482.html
Really, guys like him adn Akin should have their tongues pulled out of their mouth with a wrench for willfully going into a mind field knowing no matter what they say it will be bulletin board material.
So eager to talk about their “GOD BONAFIDE” they forget things like “Free Will” in explaining bad outcomes.
We want everyone in the media talking Benghazi and Economy, now this for 5 days with the Women’s vote at play. You can not map a better moron for the Democrat Party. Really pisses me off with everything that is at stake.
Rodney King's Spirit (9ce6d4) — 10/24/2012 @ 5:30 amReally not getting it, there was nothing wrong with communication, they just didn’t want to hear it;
http://www.popularmechanics.com/how-to/blog/5-lessons-of-benghazi-14003813?click=pm_latest
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/24/2012 @ 5:34 amI hate to throw water on this, but Reuters plus anonymous sources do not necessarily add up to facts.
Amphipolis (d3e04f) — 10/24/2012 @ 5:39 amI agree with Gazzer, estrogan, shipwrecked crew, and JVW. In addition, the second debate taught us that Mitt isn’t great at cross-examination. (He’s not bad but he isn’t great, either.) Cross-examination is a litigation skill and it’s usually learned with years of practice. Expecting Mitt to master a skill he’s never used, in a forum like a Presidential campaign, and when the moderators (judges) are against him is too big a risk.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/24/2012 @ 5:52 am___________________________________________
While QuDaffy Duck was not an ally, Obama decided he had to go and assisted the radical islamists by bombing the crap outa Libya, which allowed again, a takeover by radicals.
I have to add that France and Britain were the ones leading the call to take out Kadafi, while at the beginning of the confrontation Obama was criticized by a variety of people (including some on the right) for not being more assertive and allowing NATO to take the lead. Then, when it came to even a perfunctory recognition of the War Powers Act, he had the gall and arrogance to treat Congress like a non-entity.
It’s interesting that many liberals wanted the Butcher of Baghdad and Iraq to be responded to as one big gray area, while that reaction didn’t (and hasn’t) come up when it comes to Kadafi and Libya.
Mark (4de17c) — 10/24/2012 @ 6:18 amI am with peedoffamerican!
TexasMom2012 (cee89f) — 10/24/2012 @ 7:02 amAlthough to me Obama has been much worse than Carter. My first vote was for Reagan and already voted for Romney but I definitely see the comparison between 1980 and 2012. Especially when it comes to energy! And national stature! And vision for the future! Etc.
10. WH-Stuck on Schtoopid. Yeah like Friday nite news dumps, playing a totally false line might buy them weeks, but 2 months?
They were betting Dark Nixon could sweep to victory and with the Ministry of Truth guarding the gates put off a Special Investigator hire indefinitely.
Watergate broke June 17th, ‘What me worry?’.
One leetle difference, a dirty trick sneaking into a campaign office where no one left condoms draped on typewriters or spilled files in the streets dunna equate with a dead Ambassador.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/24/2012 @ 7:06 amRomney’s gaffe that we are building a road to greece is far more serious than Benghazi, the dereliction of duty, intellegance lapses, when did obama know, etc. Really, you cant build a road to greece, there is an ocean in the way.
joe (ea8609) — 10/24/2012 @ 7:09 amJust heard on Los Angeles radio (KFI) reporting about the emails. Finally, on-air they are acknowledging how quickly the WH, et al, knew about the attack and that it was not spontaneous mob violence about a video, but a real terrorist attack.
Up until Friday, they were still pedaling the WH spin on-air, and blaming wingnuts for pushing the story as a conspiracy cover-up.
Unfortunately, they are a bit too focused on it as the WH being foolish by lobbing softballs at the Romney camp to devour rather than just letting it be the justified exposure of a lying administration, but at least it’s finally getting some honest airplay on something other than Fox.
Dana (292dcf) — 10/24/2012 @ 7:19 amAmphibolis @ 39,
If you go here to Gretawire, you can see the original emails. Perhaps that will help convince you of the veracity of the report. Also, notice how many people these were sent to, this wasn’t kept to a very select few. A lot of personnel knew.
Dana (292dcf) — 10/24/2012 @ 7:24 amLuckily, Mitt Romney pressed President Obama on this hard last night, causing Obama to commit, in a high profile setting, to a version of events that increasingly appears inconsistent with the emerging facts.
He didn’t press him hard. Where did he do this?
He tried to, a little, in the second debate, and bungled it, not realizing that Obama’s definition of “act of terror” did not preclude there being (at least also) a quickly organized spontaneous demonstration at the scene. Romney got lost, and never raised the subject again, and didn’t say a word about this even when asked.
In the third debate, Obama said that “despite this tragedy” there were tens of thousands (is that number correct?) of Libyans marching and saying that America is our friend, and we stand with them, and all that Romney said was that “it’s wonderful” that “despite this terrible tragedy” we seem to be making progress in Libya.
But there was Egypt, which is much bigger and more important than Libya. And Mali. And Syria. And Iran. But then Bob Schieffer cut him off.
Later, he said Al Qaeda was in 10 or 12 different countries.
Mitt Romney said we needed a “comprehensive/comprehensive and robust” strategy to help the world of Islam/the Muslim world/the Middle East/these nations “reject” “violent/this kind of” extremism on their own.
There were a few other variations, like “help move the world away from terror and Islamic extremism.” One time he mentioned “and other part of the world”. One time, instead of “help” he said “get….to be able to.”
And he was particularly impressed by a plan put together by “a group of Arab scholars” organized by the United Nations!!!
The only person who raised the issue of whether there was an intelligence failure, or an attempt to mislead, was CBS News correspondent and Face the Nation host Bob Schieffer, right at the beginning.
Mitt Romney was given an opportunity to speak at length about this, and ducked the question.
Sammy Finkelman (a1f34f) — 10/24/2012 @ 7:25 am____________________________________________
He didn’t press him hard. Where did he do this?
Sammy, I think this website’s owner was being sarcastic.
Mark (4de17c) — 10/24/2012 @ 7:30 amReally, Sammy? Sheesh.
SPQR (644d79) — 10/24/2012 @ 7:34 amI don’t have access to the relevant communications received by the WH concerning Bengazi. You know who does? No Such Agency and CIA. Blaming your intelligence sources is not always wise. Lying about what you knew and when you knew is really stupid.
Bar Sinister (664312) — 10/24/2012 @ 7:38 am_____________________________________________
Although to me Obama has been much worse than Carter.
Carter was and is the epitome of an absurd, blame-America-first leftist. But Obama isn’t only a horrible leftist, he also comes with a very disreputable, shady, scroungy background and life history. In effect, he’s Jimmy Carter to the 10th degree. He’s a Carter of the current era, a Carter of the MTV generation, when things are more dumbed down than ever before.
The very fact that Carter said not too long ago that he could live with Romney being in the White House implies that even Carter must be cringing at aspects of Obama.
Mark (4de17c) — 10/24/2012 @ 7:38 amMore than just those two.
JOINT REPORTING SYSTEM SITUATION MONITORING MANUAL
Everybody in DC knew. And unlike me, they can’t keep a secret.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 8:26 amGeHe did speak about the “unraveling of Middle East policy” which was how the question ended, but nothing about anything learned from this example.
What Mitt Romney should have said maybe was:
But then Mitt Romney is no expert on foreign policy – or anything.
Sammy Finkelman (a1f34f) — 10/24/2012 @ 8:29 amWhoops!
LONDON (AP) – The child abuse scandal that has enveloped one of Britain’s most respected news organizations is now hitting one of America’s, as the incoming president of The New York Times is on the defensive about his final days as head of the BBC. Mark Thompson was in charge of the BBC in late 2011 when the broadcaster shelved what would have been a bombshell investigation alleging that the late Jimmy Savile, one of its biggest stars, was a serial sex offender.
— All the news that’s fit to suppress.
Icy (548427) — 10/24/2012 @ 8:34 am“He didn’t press him hard. Where did he do this?”
Comment by Mark — 10/24/2012 @ 7:30 am
Sammy, I think this website’s owner was being sarcastic.
I didn’t read the first comment.
BTW, people should stop making excuses for Mitt Romney. He just didn’t understand the subject, and decided to say nothing.
3. Comment by happyfeet — 10/23/2012 @ 8:32 pm
If mitt can’t stand up to Obama how can we trust him to stand up to the terrorists
Not being able to stand up to and argue competently with a moderately good lawyer, is not the same thing as not being able to stand up to terrorists. Mitt Romney was afraid to tangle with him on some issues, maybe confused himself, and stuck to what he thought he was sure about.
People didn’t realize, I guess, that Barack Obama was such a good lawyer. (in a bad sense)
And this is his first major case!
Sammy Finkelman (a1f34f) — 10/24/2012 @ 8:40 amSammy… don’t ever change!
Colonel Haiku (54c225) — 10/24/2012 @ 8:41 am0bama… oh yes, he’s teh Great Deceiver… dissembling comes natural to him.
Colonel Haiku (54c225) — 10/24/2012 @ 8:42 amWTF is that Sammy?
SPQR (644d79) — 10/24/2012 @ 8:43 amI tend to agree with Sammy, not necessarily for the same reasons. I watched the debate. It’s damn hard to argue with a sitting President about the details of foreign policy. Romney hunkered down.
nk (875f57) — 10/24/2012 @ 8:49 am“Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli.”
This was disinformation (from Ansar al Shariah)
There was no intention to attack the embassy in Tripoli, but only to murder the Ambassador, and the whole attack in Egypt only took place to disguise the motive, and hide the planning, for the attack in Benghazi.
The Ambassador was probably interfering with the shipment of military weapons from the Benghazi area (where Quadafi had had lots of stockpiles) to jihadists in Syria via Turkey.
The Ambassador was probably asking a lot of questions as to who would get the weapons and what kind of weapons they would be. U.S. policy was against sending anything that could later on be used against civilian airliners.
Th Ambassador just had too much on the ball. So, he was targeted.
If he had survived the attack, the nonsensical intelligence that came from the CIA would not have been distributed for so long.
Sammy Finkelman (a1f34f) — 10/24/2012 @ 8:55 amPresident “Horses and Bayonets” Obama does understand the subject.
I swear Ace reads my comments.
It appears to me Romney has a pretty good handle on the subject, Sammy.
And while we’re on the subject of who does or does not understand the subject, I think it’s high time to bring up Biden again.
Lying about what everyone in DC knew within minutes was happening in Benghazi wasn’t the only bright idea this administration came up with lately.
Claiming, as Biden did in his debate, that the service chiefs were the ones who came up with the A-stan timeline wasn’t real sharp. Claiming, as Biden did in his debate, that the service chiefs never asked for whatever spending the Obama admin cut from the budget wasn’t a good move either.
I don’t know where the Bamster got the idea that screwing people over and then lying and saying it was their idea was a brilliant move. You’d have thought he would have wised up after those oil experts wrote op-eds to say, no it wasn’t, after President Kardashian tried to say the Gulf oil drilling moratorium was their idea. Not his.
I guess some people can’t learn.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 8:58 amHillary Clinton just scolded crazy wingnuts for not seeing the whole picture – meh, what are a few emails between friends, anyway…
Interesting that she even felt the need to respond.
Dana (292dcf) — 10/24/2012 @ 9:07 amSammy @60,
Clearly you’ve got it all figured out.
Were you ever a Naval reservist? You sound exactly like the guy the reserves once sent us who helpfully opined that a pilot should have used more “top rudder” when he took it upon himself to critique an OK 3 wire.
The pilot being the squadron CO.
We let that guy answer phones for 2 weeks. We made it up to him in his eval, though. We wrote he had become “the recognized command expert in world wide communications.”
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 9:10 amSteve57 – I may be a little fuzzy and have the hands reversed and stuff, but does the signal arms extended, left fist vertical at 90 degrees into outstretched palm of right hand, pull vigorously downward, repeat motion, bring back any memories with respect to Sammy’s comments?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/24/2012 @ 9:35 amIn light of Hillary’s scold at #62, it would appear the powers that be are doubling-down on making sure they don’t take the fall for this.
It’s not simply Fox News reporting on this now, it’s CNN, CBS, and Reuters. Of course the usual suspects are silent but that there are national networks now focused on it, the job to get the story straight becomes that much more difficult.
The big question is, who leaked the emails in the first place? There were a lot of personnel on the Send list…
Jay Carney spoke this morning and clearly the WH is in full spin mode,
Dana (292dcf) — 10/24/2012 @ 9:35 amPull left hand down.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/24/2012 @ 9:37 amSeems like colorizing of intelligence was done at DNI.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/24/2012 @ 9:38 amAlso, notice the placement of the Jay Carney Benghazi statement link at Politico (halfway down the page) versus the placement of the “Rape Comments” (front and center)…
This dovetails with Patrick’s post this morning re the LAT’s placement of the Benghazi emails and Rape comments….these people are so predictable.
Dana (292dcf) — 10/24/2012 @ 9:40 amWhen I say that about Ambassador Stevens being targeted because he was so good, I think if the following quotation:
“Be not righteous overmuch; neither make thyself overwise; why shouldest thou destroy thyself?”
– Ecclesiastes 7:16.
Of course then King Solomon goes on to say:
“Be not overmuch wicked, neither be thou foolish; why shouldest thou die before thy time?”
– Ecclesiastes 7:17
It seems like the second one is a greater danger than the first.
The second one can stand on its own and is more understandable than the first. The first one sounds like a cautionary warning against fighting evil too much. Although the Gemorah in Yoma 22a understands it as a false righteousness.
Sammy Finkelman (a1f34f) — 10/24/2012 @ 9:41 amI, to, am absolutely OUTRAGED that the President of the United States did not immediately get on national television to report these TWEETS AND FACEBOOK POSTS.
Not Likely (dfc226) — 10/24/2012 @ 9:42 amNot Likely,
Why would the president have needed to report Tweets and Facebook posts?
All he needs, and has needed to do is tell the truth.
Dana (292dcf) — 10/24/2012 @ 9:44 amThe troll brigade is back.
JD (8a1df4) — 10/24/2012 @ 9:46 amEpic. Fail.
In addition to not getting on TV and reporting Tweets and Facebook posts, he could have also avoided getting on TV and lying about a YouTube video.
How hard would that have been?
Umm k?
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 9:48 amSeriously. What are the relative rankings in the realm of social media and when does it rise to the level the Preezy needs to report it?
Facebook? Twitter? Myspace? Craigslist? YouTube?
I mean, when the Preezy can break away from important Preezy biz like appearing on Letterman, The View, or weighing in ever-so-vital-national-crisis that is the Mariah Carey/Nikki Minaj feud.
Hey, wanna know something? If the Preezy wanted to get in the middle of a fight, guess what? He had six hours to do it in Benghazi.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 9:54 amAll those years in the nav and I was under the false impression the opreps I sent out were so, you know, national command authority could do something. React. In a timely manner.
Naw. It’s so Tiger Beat can huddle with Axelrod and Jarret and work on their messaging.
When things go right President Kill List is Johnny-on-the-spot. He’s down in the Situation Room for the photo op.
When things go south it’s always somebody else’s fault.
Thank GAWD no SEALs got killed on the OBL raid. Just look at how much damage two ex-SEALs, plus one Ambassador and a DoS information officer, are doing to the Preezy’s campaign narrative.
If some inconsiderate SEAL managed to get himself killed raiding into Abbottabad he could have seriously impacted the Preezy’s future.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 10:04 amSteve has a good point.
Dustin (73fead) — 10/24/2012 @ 10:09 amSo is there any practical impediment to Dog resigning and having Bite Me pardon him?
Obviously no one will accuse Bite Me of knowing anything.
And can the pardon be overturned?
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/24/2012 @ 10:59 amThe President did not get on television and lie, he was repeating exactly what State dept was saying at the time.
Epic. Fail.
Not Likely (3efcc2) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:06 amNot Likely, odd. Hillary denies that State said that.
SPQR (768505) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:08 amI realize Obamabots like Not Likely will pound away at the notion Obama shouldn’t have announced to the nation what he was seeing on his Twitter feed, and ignore the fact he should have also shut up about YouTube.
Other people seem to have the good sense to know when to shut up, if not our Boy President (like if the fact that the more he talked about ObamaCare the less popular he made it didn’t make a dent, this would.)
Mitt’s ‘quiet on Benghazi’ strategy is smart
And in other news from the less-is-more department of understatement:
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) said Wednesday that newly obtained emails that provided real-time updates about the attacks on the American Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, make it “really difficult” to understand how White Officials initially concluded the violence was the result of a spontaneous protest.
Keep talking, Barry. Just keep talking.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:09 amI don’t get it, SPQR. How does lying in the teeth of the obvious get elevated to strategy?
Mark Steyn nailed it when he described one of the keys to maintaining the leftard faith as “invincible ignorance.”
Ok,
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:15 amDebbie Wasserman SchultzNot Likely, we did not see what we just saw. Have it your way.And all the O campaign and media and White House had to do was manage to keep it under wraps a few more days. A feeew moooore daaaaays.
elissa (381c32) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:18 am78. Well if it were the truth you can forgive us for a predisposition to believing otherwise of a lying sack of sh*t.
He is going down Nov. 6th and it will not be close enough to need resolution by the courts.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:20 amI’m sorry you guys live in an echo chamber but the CIA confirmed they were sending talking points to State indicating a tie to the video.
Not Likely (3efcc2) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:21 amSo far here is the proposed “correct” activity being presented here:
1. Ignore the CIA.
Not Likely (3efcc2) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:23 am2. Report breathlessly about Tweets.
There was no effin protest, “not likely”. Period. Full stop. And they knew it.
JD (8a1df4) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:27 am84. At this point in time suthor of the “talking points” contained in a CIA report is not confirmed.
There is at least a suspicion about that they originated with prosimian Clapper.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:27 amLitigation is going to be stacked up in Federal Courts like cordwood.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:39 amOur commenter friend Not Likely apparently is satisfied with pretty much everything involving the communications and information chain around the Benghazi attack– as well as the weeks long confuzzlement surrounding key details of the horrific murders of Americans there. Good to know. If nothing else, it proves that the White House well understands the incurious nature and gullibility of its base and target market.
elissa (381c32) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:40 amI’m not satisfied, clearly there was confusion. Confusion is not the best result out our intelligence agencies.
But I will not pretend that confusion = cover-up. There’s absolutely zero evidence of that. All of this hyperbolic caterwauling is nothing more than election year spin. Every single one of you knows that. It’s an attempt at a “gotcha” moment and nothing more.
Because your goal is a “gotcha” and not actually determining what happened, you are willing to do absolutely absurd things like say that the administration should have been behind a podium sharing live tweets from terrorists as actionable and accurate intelligence.
Not Likely (3efcc2) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:47 amThe more Not Likely talks the better I like it. First rules of holes, son. If you find yourself in one, stop digging.
Fortunately for the country, Barry can’t learn that lesson. Or any other lesson.
He’s capable of doing a decent job of narration. That’s it. You can’t even call his teleprompted gigs acting. He’s not an actor. (Although professional narrators can and must join the Screen Actors Guild if they want gigs that the contract fences off as a union job.)
Barry missed his niche. He should have been reading scripts for documentaries on the Discovery channel. Somebody, probably Ayers and Axelrod, thought he should be President. Which filled the poor guy’s head with delusions of grandeur. Now he thinks he’s some great con artist. He can convince China and Russia to see things his way on the subject of Iran. He can convince the GOP to accept his terms on budget negotiations. He can convince the public that ObamaCare is a great idea. He can convince the electorate to give him a second term because he really hasn’t been President for the last four years, and it’s all somebody else’s fault.
Now, he’s certain he can convince the public that the State Department said there was a riot over a video.
When it wasn’t state. It was Embassy Cairo. Talking about what was happening in Egypt. Not Libya.
And the only Libyan reference to “protests” came from an intercept of what Ansar al Sharia was saying about events in Cairo. In the same intercept in which they mentioned going ahead with the planned attack on the consulate.
Keep digging, Not Likely.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:48 amThey really want to distract from the fact that they lied. And the fact they declined security for the Consulate that was repeatedly requested. And failed to secure the Consukate in the face of known and ongoing threats. But, YouTube! And STFU racists.
JD (8a1df4) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:49 amThere was no confusion. The “fog of war” fiction is just that. And no one in intel is going to own that.
That’s what these leaks are about, junior. Exposing the “fog of war” lie.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:50 am“Now, he’s certain he can convince the public that the State Department said there was a riot over a video.”
I don’t have to convince anybody, that’s a fact. Do you not recall being SO SO ANGRY at Susan Rice just a few weeks ago?
Get your head on straight son.
Not Likely (3efcc2) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:51 am“There was no confusion.”
Gee, thanks internet commenter who knows more than the entire United States intelligence community.
You’re making fools of yourselves on this issue.
Not Likely (3efcc2) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:52 am“There’s absolutely zero evidence of that.”
The House has been asking for communications like the emails leaked.
Reminds me of the appeal for clemency by one accused of patricide. “Your honor, have mercy on me, an orphan.”
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:55 am‘six of one, half a dozen of the other;
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jeffrey-meyer/2012/10/24/nbc-news-ignores-emails-showing-white-house-knew-libya-attack-was-ter
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/24/2012 @ 12:05 pm95. As is well known, there is significant pushback from the CIA against the notion that the ‘protest against the video’ meme originated with them.
And just as those sources are anonymous so are the aforementioned talking points.
Nothing is known about who what where when why? No one is taking responsibility.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/24/2012 @ 12:15 pmSo many trees, so little information;
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/10/24/ap-tunisian-officials-make-arrest-in-benghazi-consulate-terror-attack/
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/24/2012 @ 12:19 pmI need to modify one of my earlier statements.
President Bin Laden is Dead and GM is Alive’s final fallback position will be “people don’t vote over national security.”
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 12:20 pm“the CIA confirmed they were sending talking points to State indicating a tie to the video.”
Not Likely – You have a link for that?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/24/2012 @ 12:21 pmHope! (that’s true.) Change! (the subject.)
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 12:21 pm“Gee, thanks internet commenter who knows more than the entire United States intelligence community.”
Not Likely – You’re making a valiant effort at it.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/24/2012 @ 12:23 pmIntel doesn’t do talking points. Campaign strategists do talking points.
Susan Rice, lying to Bob Scheiffer.
Jay Carney, lying to the WH press corps.
Barack Obama, lying to the UN General Assembly.
All these liars were lying days after they had no excuse to believe this crap they were peddling.
Lies, tangled webs, rope to hang yourself. It’s all there.
This is why Axelrod goes on TV looking like death warmed over.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 12:34 pmNot Likely, nobody believes the spin. Its the intel community that is leaking the reality – that the White House is cherry picking out items – from a mass of reports that had no protest only an Al Queda assault. The White House outright lied to the American people for weeks.
That’s the reality.
SPQR (768505) — 10/24/2012 @ 12:39 pmThanks for playing, NL, you don’t even get a copy of the home game;
http://news.yahoo.com/hillary-clinton-u-doesnt-rely-facebook-intelligence-190701408.html
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/24/2012 @ 12:44 pmNot just intel.
It’s one thing for the Preezy to speculate just how awful it would be, for him and his career, if some SEALs managed to get themselves captured or killed on a mission he authorizes.
It doesn’t register with the federal careerist crowd. But this Benghazi business? More than a few bureaucrats have finally figured out that Tiger Beat would be happy to send them out on a limb, then saw it off behind him. Like he did to Chris Stevens.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 12:46 pmHere’s a thought; maybe if Hillary! and King Putt relied on State Department emails and reports from US and allied government agencies instead of Egyptian TV and YouTube four Americans wouldn’t have been killed in Benghazi.
Just something that occurred to me.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 12:53 pmThe mistake they made with Susan Rice was a major one and ultimately a devastating one. Sending her (the exact same person from the admin) out to all 5 shows that Sunday morning with an obviously scripted message that she was not allowed to deviate from no matter what the interviewer asked, was a huge tell.
elissa (381c32) — 10/24/2012 @ 1:00 pmelissa, these are the world’s worst poker players. Everything the Obama admin does is a tell.
Literally (and I’m using the word correctly, not in the Biden sense which he believes means “figuratively). The NYT had an article in the recent past which mentioned that Obama is convinced that he’s a great poker player. When actually he’s really bad at it, but as in so many other myriad areas of his incompetence he’s not competent enough to recognize it.
And I can believe that because Bob Woodward in his book “The Price of Politics” quotes Obama as saying to Eric Cantor during budget negotiations, “don’t call my bluff.”
Earlier I mentioned the first rule of holes. Well, here’s the first rule of bluffing:
Don’t announce that you’re bluffing.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 1:16 pmAlso ‘the first rule of fight club is you don’t talk about fight club’ that applies to the drone strikes,
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/24/2012 @ 1:19 pmComment by gary gulrud — 10/24/2012 @ 11:27 am
There is at least a suspicion about that they originated with prosimian Clapper.
It’s conceivable. at least in principle, that he was pushing the CIA, or somebody, to such a conclusion, but there have been no leaks to such effect.
According to the Wikipedia article about him in 2003, Clapper “attempted to explain the absence of WMDs in Iraq by asserting that the weapons materials were “unquestionably” shipped out of Iraq to Syria and other countries just before the American invasion” which he stated also was a “personal assessment.” (they had no confirmation of that idea)
Does that sound like a partisan Democrat??
That sounds like maybe somebody who doesn’t know what’s going on.
He’s also known for not knowing, in an interview on December 20, 2010 with Diane Sawyer that twelve alleged would-be terrorists had been arrested in Great Britain earlier in the day.
And in February, 2011, he told a House Intelligence Committee hearing that:
“The term ‘Muslim Brotherhood’…is an umbrella term for a variety of movements, in the case of Egypt, a very heterogeneous group, largely secular, which has eschewed violence and has decried Al Qaeda as a perversion of Islam,” … “They have pursued social ends, a betterment of the political order in Egypt, et cetera…..In other countries, there are also chapters or franchises of the Muslim Brotherhood, but there is no overarching agenda, particularly in pursuit of violence, at least internationally.” [7]
Footnote 7. Gerstein, Josh (2011-02-10). “DNI Clapper retreats from ‘secular’ claim on Muslim Brotherhood – Josh Gerstein”. Politico.Com. Retrieved 2011-03-13.
Is he loyal to his bosses, now Obama?
In March 2011, says Wikipedia, at the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services he commented on the 2011 Libyan civil war that “over the longer term” Gaddafi “will prevail” which was loudly questioned by the White House. In the same hearing he neglected to list Iran and North Korea among the nuclear powers that might pose a threat to the United States and got questioned about it.
On September 28, he was the one who authorized the release of a public statement saying that intelligence analysts who at first believed that the attacks were part of a spontaneous protest had revised their initial assessments “to reflect new information indicating that it was a deliberate and organized terrorist attack carried out by extremists.”
….In the immediate aftermath, there was information that led us to assess that the attack began spontaneously following protests earlier that day at our embassy in Cairo. We provided that initial assessment to Executive Branch officials and members of Congress, who used that information to discuss the attack publicly and provide updates as they became available.
Throughout our investigation we continued to emphasize that information gathered was preliminary and evolving. As we learned more about the attack, we revised our initial assessment to reflect new information indicating that it was a deliberate and organized terrorist attack carried out by extremists. It remains unclear if any group or person exercised overall command and control of the attack, and if extremist group leaders directed their members to participate. However, we do assess that some of those involved were linked to groups affiliated with, or sympathetic to al-Qa’ida. We continue to make progress, but there remain many unanswered questions. As more information becomes available our analysis will continue to evolve and we will obtain a more complete understanding of the circumstances surrounding the terrorist attack.
No, it doesn’t sound like he’s the evil mastermind but rather he’s a victim of the bad intelligence. He sounds like an idiot. there is good evidence that he is, indeed, an idiot.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/24/2012 @ 1:33 pm55. BTW, people should stop making excuses for Mitt Romney. He just didn’t understand the subject, and decided to say nothing.
Comment by Sammy Finkelman — 10/24/2012 @
61. Comment by Steve57 — 10/24/2012 @ 8:58 am
President “Horses and Bayonets” Obama does understand the subject.
That’s a different subject: the size of the Navy.
What Obama did was point out that saying he was going to have less ships than in 1917 was not a good argument: You could say the same thing about horses.
Mitt Romney was better on that one, but didn’t quite understand that subject either. Because the prior doctrine had been, not 2 wars, but 1 1/2 wars. We’d gone down to 1 1/2 wars from 2 wars some time ago.
Now Barack Obama was reducing this to one war, and figuring it was only the Chinese armed forces a that needed to be deterred.
Of course none of that will take effect till about 2019. Obama has started a couple of things that have not had any adverse impact yet, but are scheduled to: Most of Obamacare, high marginal tax rates, and a reduction in the size of the U.S. military, mainly for budgetary reasons.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/24/2012 @ 1:44 pmAn interview with NATO analyst Dr. Jill Decker from Dec 2007:
Syria’s Bio-Warfare Threat: an interview with Dr. Jill Dekker
This interview is interesting and significant because the good doctor is not shilling for Bush. Also it took place far enough in the past that it wasn’t intended to provide justification for action on the current festivities in Syra.
Speaking of which, you do realize that we have special forces in Jordan, training the Jordanians to secure (or react to the use of) Syrian WMDs. The news reports talk mostly about their chemical weapons, but the Syrian bio-weapons program is more dangerous. It actually formed a serious counterweight to the Israeli nuclear weapons program.
Bye the bye, best case it’ll take 75k troops to secure these weapons sites. By best case, I mean if there are no hostilities. If the rebels are still going at the government or each other when these sites fall into jihadi hands it’ll take a lot more than that.
Keep in mind we’re not talking about a huge amount of material. As the doctor observes, one gram of chrystalline botulinium can kill one million people. And Syria’s bio-weapon program was designed to do just that; not for battlefield applications.
So sleep well tonight, knowing that.
The idea that Hussein couldn’t or wouldn’t have transferred these weapons to Syria is absurd (he flew his air force to Iran during the build up to Desert Storm).
I agree Clapper sounds like an idiot. Whether he is or not I have no firsthand knowledge. He appears to me to be of a type you find in intel. If a commander, in this case the CinC, needs an excuse for poor decision-making, Clapper’s willing to go along with the intel-failure story.
I believe he tried walking something of a tightrope. He was quick with the limited mea culpa. But apparently the intel community isn’t going along and isn’t willing to take even the part of the blame Clapper tried to sign them up for.
But if he is an idiot not even good intelligence can keep him from being victimized. You can give an idiot all the good intel you’ve got, and they won’t be able to use it.
Idiots don’t need bad intel to be idiots.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 2:02 pmEditing Bolsters Obama’s Role in SEALs Film
There’s a movie “SEAL Team Six: The Raid of Osama bin Laden” that’s going to be shown on the Ntional Geographic Channel on Sunday, November 4, 2012, and released on Netflix the next day.
The backer is Harvey Weinstein, a longtime Democratic contributor and one of Obama’s most vigorous backers, who bought the rights for it last May at the Cannes film festival. (He tells the New York Times he’s not such a big Democrat – he also supported Pataki and Bloomberg)
The film has lately been recut to add more of Obama (they say to give it a stronger sense of reality) A producer who worked on Fahrenheit 9/11 and Sicko is involved (Meghan O’Hara)
The chief executive of the National Geographic Network says his company had insisted on removing a scene that showed Mitt Romney appearing to oppose the raid.
Scenes with Obama include the annual White House Correspondent’s Dinner the day before the raid (to show he maintained secrecy?) another that shows him on a long lonely walk (presumably deliberating) and another that has him declaring after it is over that “Justice has been done.”
Sammy Finkelman (a1f34f) — 10/24/2012 @ 2:23 pmSpeaking of Syria:
GAFFNEY: The real reason behind Benghazigate
As daleyrocks presciently observed, we don’t know why Stevens was in Benghazi. After noting that we do know the Ambassador’s street story for being there, and that he did have meetings scheduled, I agreed that the publicly stated reasons for this trip was undoubtedly not the real reason.
But, whatever the real purpose, it was a really stupid idea.
If this story has any validity, then these leaks aren’t just intended to prove that intel didn’t drop the ball before the assault on the Benghazi consulate. But because they also recognize this for the stupid idea that it really is and they’re blowing the admin’s cover.
This story does make a certain amount of sense. Every other western nation shut down their consulates in Benghazi but us. And Benghazi is sort of wild west. It’s not in the central government’s control. If you wanted to conduct business you didn’t want to conduct in broad daylight in Tripoli, Benghazi would be the place.
And he did meet a “senior Turkish diplomat” in Benghazi.
Gunmen attacked the consulate around 9:40 p.m., after Stevens retired to his room at the complex following an evening meeting with a Turkish diplomat, two senior State Department officials told reporters this week.
Turkey does kinda sorta have an interest in things Syrian these days.
And whatever the US ambassador and this Turkish diplomat were doing in Benghazi, it didn’t involve relations with Libya. Or, I must reaffirm, opening an “American space” or facilitating professional development via the Mass. General Hospital at the the Benghazi Medical Center.
It’s also hard to believe he was in town to provide consular services to all those American tourists I’m sure are flocking to the region.
It doesn’t make sense that you’d get an ambassador involved in something like this. But then stupid seems to be the default mode of this admin. This is exactly the kind of dumbass thing I’d expect from President 57 states and his klown kar full of staff.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 2:27 pmFinklemandia is a strange land.
JD (8a1df4) — 10/24/2012 @ 2:32 pmaaaaah, my eyes, my eyes …
SPQR (768505) — 10/24/2012 @ 2:38 pmTrue. But I think I’d prefer Finkelmandia to this Obamanation.
That SEAL movie? In the course of cooperating with the film makers the admin revealed the identities of the operators involved. And the special operators are not happy about that at all.
It seems what really ticked them off was the administration’s claim that, while yes they did disclose identities, they asked the film makers to not tell anybody else about it.
Right. You sign up to go out on clandestine missions, secure in the knowledge the President and his wrecking crew will only tell Hollywood about you.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 2:39 pmNO PROBLEM!!
The media will continue to transmit, in a high profile setting, a version of events that is unquestionably inconsistent with known facts.
Problem solved for Mr. O.
============================
2012: The year we Hope to Change “The One” to “The Last One”…
Smock Puppet, 10th Dan Snark Master and Aviary Enthusiast (8e2a3d) — 10/24/2012 @ 8:27 pmYou mean something like this;
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443684104578066631931377740.html?mod=WSJ_hppMIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsSecond
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/24/2012 @ 8:47 pm________________________________________
Finklemandia is a strange land.
It is.
It’s a place where pieces of liberalism roll and swirl around the brains of its populace — which isn’t uncommon in the human species — sometimes overtaking their attempts to be impartial or “just the facts, ma’am” type of observers.
Mark (4de17c) — 10/24/2012 @ 9:04 pmIt’s not a crazier place than here;
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-veteran-john-brennan-has-transformed-us-counterterrorism-policy/2012/10/24/318b8eec-1c7c-11e2-ad90-ba5920e56eb3_print.html
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/24/2012 @ 9:42 pmThe Russian Chief of Staff General Makarov announced today that somebody has provided MANPADS to the Syrian rebels, including Stingers. He pretends to be mystified as to who might have been involved in getting these weapons to the rebels.
Of course, there’s been scattered reporting for months that the rebels had acquired these weapons.
And the odd thing is that al Reuters article I linked to makes the Libya/Turkey connection.
Of course, the Obama admin is denying it..
Of course, we’ve seen what their denials are worth following the Benghazi assault.
The language is very precise and lawyerly. Basically, non-denial denials that we’re facilitating the rebel acquisition of MANPADs. Just that we’re not sending them Stingers.
All in all, it looks like that Benghazi debacle involves a lot more that the Obama administration is refusing to admit.
I’m getting the feeling that the Obama admin really doesn’t want to see the Russian evidence.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 10:01 pmActually the linkages among the Turks, Libyans, and Syrian rebels have been in the news for quite a while.
Libya’s new rulers offer weapons to Syrian rebels
We get similar non-denial denials from the Libyans we get from Obumble’s crew.
Compare that to Panetta earlier today when the Russian story broke:
Yup. Officially there is none of this.
Officially it’s amateur night every night in the Obama WH. Which leads me to believe that unofficially there is lots of this. And then the same geniuses who dreamed this up seem to be pinning their hopes on the MFM letting them do their unconvincing SGT Schultz act long enough to run down the election clock.
I believe the Russians have some cards to play, and they’re serving notice that they’ll play them if the west does anything to irritate them in Syria. And if we don’t put Turkey back on a leash and keep them from forcing down any more planes carrying Russian weapons to Assad.
Two can play the “let’s try to embarrass the other side over it’s arms shipments to Syria” game.
Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/24/2012 @ 10:22 pmWhen an elected official, particularly the Nation’s Highest Elected Official, dumps on his oath-of-office to “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States” so badly as this “man” has done, you have to question whether of not he IS actually a Muslim and all of this is just part-and-parcel of the policy of deceit that is an accepted action of making war against the infidel.
AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (2bb434) — 10/24/2012 @ 11:18 pm