Patterico's Pontifications

Like Fast & Furious, this fiasco does not please me at all. It makes me nauseous just to think about how this happened – it breaks the basic duties of trust and fidelity owed between the govt and its employees.

SPQR (cde90f) — 10/10/2012 @ 9:02 am

The EPA was already marked for legislation, layoffs and unappropriation.

DOJ needs to lose oversight of bureaus it uses to undermine justice.

The SEC not only does not deter crime they can’t even charge those fingered in a lineup.

The TSA is likely to be abolished.

State has jumped their positions in line into the teller’s lap.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/10/2012 @ 9:15 am

Is this the revised explanation from the State Department? How could we have foreseen this since the Benghazi attack is unprecedented.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/10/2012 @ 9:30 am

Unexpected, and unprecedented.

JD (7ddc11) — 10/10/2012 @ 9:45 am

Are we going to find out that the state dept. in Cairo did a preemptive apology about a video that supposedly was the cause of so much trouble and blamed for a premeditated terrorist attack in Libya later that day, when all along there was never any demonstration in Benghazi, just a direct paramilitary terrorist attack? Are we going to learn that there was actually no intel saying there would be unrest about the movie?

If one was into conspiracies you would almost think the start of the meme in Cairo was a deliberate misdirection of attention.

MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/10/2012 @ 9:49 am

Why did Ambassador Stevens go to Benghazi on September 10?

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/10/2012 @ 9:51 am

Nobody expects unprecedented man-caused disasters.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/10/2012 @ 9:52 am

You have a consulate in a country with factions known to be armed and hostile to the US after a rebellion where the central government does not have control over the entire country, and you want to spout about unexpected and unprecedented?

Let’s try this: Mogadishu

War-lords with their private armies largely uncontrolled in regions of a country with a failed, weak, or newly emerging central government.

It seems we can trust the president of Libya more than our own.

MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/10/2012 @ 9:56 am

Nobody expects unprecedented man-caused disasters.
Comment by daleyrocks — 10/10/2012 @ 9:52 am

Or work-place violence like at Fort Hood.

MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/10/2012 @ 9:57 am

“Let’s try this: Mogadishu”

MD Philly – Full credit to Bill Clinton for changing the status of the mission from humanitarian aid to peace keeping and kidnapping.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/10/2012 @ 10:01 am

The one thing you can expect in an area of anarchy and chaos is anarchy and chaos (unless you want to count that as two things).

MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/10/2012 @ 10:12 am

Speaking of Mogadishu, no one in the Obama admin has the integrity of Les Aspin.

SPQR (e5806f) — 10/10/2012 @ 10:21 am

Nothing to see here . . .
BRUSSELS (AP) — The United States has sent military troops to the Jordan-Syria border to bolster that country’s military capabilities in the event that violence escalates along its border with Syria, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said Wednesday.

Icy (a4b2f2) — 10/10/2012 @ 10:24 am

I said before this was the Moslem Brotherhood, not Al Qaeda. This is slight bit inaccurate maybe. Maybe only because there actually is no specific Al Qaeda organization in Egypt.

There are a number of Islamist groups in Egypt, but they are not really separate from each other.

Egyoptian Islamic Jihad is a splinter of the Moslem Brotherhood. Islamic Jihad merged with bin Laden’s organization to form Al Qaeda (officially in June, 2001, but really before) In the meantime, Egyptian Islamic Jihad has its own splinters.

A lot of these splinters are probably for protection, so that different subgroups can escape whatever will happen to others. The more peaceful or legal subgroups will escape the consequences for those who undertake more risky activity. They all morph into each other.

Sammy Finkelman (7c5705) — 10/10/2012 @ 10:27 am

daleyrocks:

Why did Ambassador Stevens go to Benghazi on September 10?

It appears he was there to meet with “a leading emergency physician from Massachusetts General Hospital, Dr. Thomas Burke, chief of the Boston hospital’s Division of Global Health and Human Rights” because Mass. General wanted to help the local hospital develop an emergency care infrastructure:

Just hours before Burke was scheduled to meet with John Christopher Stevens, the US ambassador to Libya, the US consulate was attacked. Stevens and three other Americans were killed, including Glen Doherty, a Winchester native and former Navy SEAL working for a private security company.

Burke’s colleagues had spoken with Stevens just 45 minutes before the attack, and Burke was on the phone with an embassy attaché when the shelling began.

“He yelled, ‘Oh my God, Oh [expletive],’ and then he hung up,” said Burke, who was in a hotel about a mile from the consulate when the attack began. “Then we heard these deep blasts. We didn’t know what was going on. Nobody knew if the whole city was being attacked.”

In addition, this report led many to doubt the initial reports that there had been protests at the Benghazi consulate before the attack.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/10/2012 @ 10:29 am

I said before this was the Moslem Brotherhood, not Al Qaeda.

We are talking about Libya, not Egypt. Carry on.

JD (4cf319) — 10/10/2012 @ 10:34 am

This entire debacle is sickening. If the State Dept issued strident travel warnings to American citizens regarding Libya on August 27, there is simply no acceptable reason why they would not have taken extra precautions to protect the one place they direct stranded Americans to take refuge in.

The Department of State warns U.S. citizens against all but essential travel to Libya. The incidence of violent crime, especially carjacking and robbery, has become a serious problem. In addition, political violence in the form of assassinations and vehicle bombs has increased in both Benghazi and Tripoli…In addition, political violence, including car bombings in Tripoli and assassinations of military officers and alleged former regime officials in Benghazi, has increased.

April 10, 2012 – A convoy carrying the head of the UN mission to Libya on a visit to Benghazi is attacked with an improvised bomb. The bomb misses its target by a few meters but leaves “a small hole in the road.”
May 22, 2012 – A rocket propelled grenade is fired at the compound of the Red Cross in Benghazi.
June 6, 2012 – A bomb is thrown at the gate outside the US Consulate in Benghazi. This is the same location where the deadly attack that killed four Americans took place on 9/11.
June 11, 2012 – A rocket propelled grenade is fired at a convoy carrying the British ambassador as he approaches his consulate in Benghazi. The ambassador is unharmed but two bodyguards are injured.
July 31, 2012 – Seven Red Crescent officials are kidnapped by a Benghazi militia.
September 2, 2012 – A bomb is placed in the car of a Libyan intelligence official. It explodes on one of the busiest streets in Benghazi, killing him.The Embassy’s ability to intervene in such cases remains limited, as these groups are neither sanctioned nor controlled by the Libyan government.

U.S. Embassy Tripoli resumed full consular services for U.S. citizens in Libya on August 27, 2012.

Dana (292dcf) — 10/10/2012 @ 10:37 am

“It appears he was there to meet with “a leading emergency physician from Massachusetts General Hospital, Dr. Thomas Burke”

DRJ – Thanks. Quotes from Dr. Burke have appeared from the beginning of this incident but do not reveal that was the purpose of the Ambassador’s trip, only that they were scheduled to meet while he was there. My question is more basic. Given what we are learning of the Ambassador’s concerns about the security situation, why Benghazi on September 11? Certainly it was not necessary to meet Dr. Burke on that date or necessarily even in Benghazi.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/10/2012 @ 10:38 am

DRJ – AMB. Stevens also met with Turkish diplomats shortly before the attack if I recall correctly.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/10/2012 @ 10:40 am

CSPAN is airing the hearings here. Jim Jordan – Ohio (R) is not letting up on the decision making for ignoring the requests for more security.

Dana (292dcf) — 10/10/2012 @ 10:50 am

If this had happened to a Japanese Ambassador, the Foreign Minister, and possibly the Prime Minister, would have resigned, if not Seppuku.

Barry goes golfing, and fundraising.

AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92) — 10/10/2012 @ 11:03 am

Interesting footnote here, daleyrocks.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/10/2012 @ 11:05 am

It will be worth watching some of the alphabet networks’ evening news coverage of these hearings, I think.

elissa (acdee1) — 10/10/2012 @ 11:07 am

Off topic, Command Sergeant Major Basil Plumley died today. Those who read Hal Moore / Joseph Galloway We Were Soldiers Once and Young will remember him as Galloway’s CSM. Four combat jumps with a glider artillery unit in WWII and one combat jump in Korea with the 187th. He was played in the film by Sam Elliot.

SPQR (32a911) — 10/10/2012 @ 11:08 am

The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday, October 2, 2012, on the front page, the name of the person linked to the attack in Benghazi. He’s from Egypt.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444549204578020373444418316.html

“Militant Link to Libya Attack / U.S. Tracks Egyptian Operative Freed From Prison in Wake of Arab Spring”

His name is Muhammad Jamal Abu Ahmad. (Abu Ahmad would be a nickname, “Father of Ahmad” not a last name)

The article says he was the head of the operational wind of Egyptian Islamic Jihad when Ayman al_Zawahiri headed it (although people in the organization who knew him say he was not among the leaders of Egyptian Islamic Jihad – but that would be true for someone operating more covertly)

When Mubarak’s government arranged a ceasefire with Islamic Jihad, he split off and rejected it. He was locked up around the year 2000 and would get into confrontations with guards.

The article does not give much more of his exact background, beyond the fact he was one of many prisoners freed last year.

After being freed, he began building a terror group which U.S. or other western officials have dubbed the “Jamal Group” They postulate he got in touch with Ayman al Zawahiri, through Zawahiri’s brother, Mohammed al Zawahiri, also freed last year, who has been peacefully protesting outside the U.S. Embassy in Cairo. (and was not himself part of the actual assault)

Muhammad Jamal Abu Ahmad is now believed to be in Libya, and there is also a training camp for Al Qaeda there. An associate of both him and Ayman Al Zawahiri, Murjan Salim, sends people there. Money comes from Al Qaeda in Yemen, and Al Qaeda’s smuggling system is used. There are limited contacts with jihadists in Europe..

The group linked to the attack in Benghazi is called Ansar al-Sharia. (They’ve been chased out of Benghazi now) This is also the name of a group formed in Tunisia in April 2011, and the name of a unit of al Qeada in the Arabian Peninsula.

U.S. officials working with Libyan investigating the attack in Benghazi believe some of the attackers came from Abu Ahmaed’s group and some came from Ansar al Sharia (or had local connections or presence already) and some came from Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb.

The only connection with Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb may be that some of the attackers came from there.

But I think this is linked to the attack in Cairo.

As I said, there is no Al Qaeda in Egypt. It’s all linked there to the Moslem Brotherhood, one way or another, sometimes as people who split off.

When they call for freeing Omar Abdul Rahman, the blind sheik, who headed the group that did the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, you know they are linked to Al Qaeda.

There’s no need for any Al Qaeda in Egypt.

.

Sammy Finkelman (7c5705) — 10/10/2012 @ 11:15 am

25. * operational wing, not wind. I thought I corrected that typo.

Sammy Finkelman (7c5705) — 10/10/2012 @ 11:17 am

I suppose if Down Low had admitted from the morning of 9/12 “Hey, I goofed”, it might have gone worse for him.

So are they going to do press conferences at all anymore?

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/10/2012 @ 11:17 am

Obama went on that extensive “World Apology Tour 2009,” where he bowed to dictators, and revealed new academic research regarding Islamic contributions to the modern world in his famous June 2009 “A New Beginning” speech in Cairo—a speech which influenced the Nobel committee to award him the Nobel Peace Prize in October 2009. In that speech, Obama ~~made up the Orwellian notion~~ implied that Western colonial powers have a history of denying rights to Muslims, that they would otherwise have had in their homeland.
Obama has even publicly disrespected Israeli PM Netanyahu on a number of occasions.

Wasn’t that enough appeasement for the Jihadists ?

Why do they still hate us ?

Elephant Stone (65d289) — 10/10/2012 @ 11:25 am

Why do they still hate us ?

Because we are who we are, and not them.

AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92) — 10/10/2012 @ 11:47 am

Comment by SPQR — 10/10/2012 @ 11:08 am

A Soldier’s Rest – finally!
32-Years of Service, and 15-years of service at the hospital at Fort Benning.
Well Done, Sergeant, we will miss you!

AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92) — 10/10/2012 @ 11:50 am

People died, Obama lied

Hawkins (1fc204) — 10/10/2012 @ 11:50 am

Market downturn gaining momentum this afternoon.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/10/2012 @ 11:53 am

Market downturn gaining momentum this afternoon.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/10/2012 @ 11:53 am

Rep. Kelly hammers home the absurdity that at approximately 8:30 pm, Dr. Burke and Christopher Stevens parted outside the embassy gates where the streets were quiet, bid each other farewell and within an hour of that, the terrorists watched the You Tube video, got riled up and made their attack. He was very exasperated with State’s inconsistencies.

He also neatly snuck in that he was glad someone pointed out that hope is not a strategy…

Dana (292dcf) — 10/10/2012 @ 12:25 pm

6. Comment by daleyrocks — 10/10/2012 @ 9:51 am

Why did Ambassador Stevens go to Benghazi on September 10?

That’s a very good question. I speculated there was a warning of an attack (as some newspapers reported – they never said Benghazi) at Tripoli, and he went for safety to Benghazi. And ir might have been a “meeting in Samarra” In any cased, who knew he was there?

All I have is this:

In his speech before the United Nations general Assembly

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/25/president-obamas-prepared-remarks-at-the-u-n-general-assembly

on Tuesday, September 25, 2012, two weeks after the attacks, President Obama said this:

…. Two weeks ago, he travelled to Benghazi to review plans to establish a new cultural center and modernize a hospital. That’s when America’s compound came under attack

I also read that he had just met with the Turkish ambassador.

BTW, FWIW, travelled (with 2 L’s) is really a British, not1 American spelling.

Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/10/2012 @ 12:35 pm

Comment by MD in Philly — 10/10/2012 @ 9:49 am

If one was into conspiracies you would almost think the start of the meme in Cairo was a deliberate misdirection of attention.

What do you mean, “almost think?”

Thw two attacks were in fact linked, and the first helped to mislead poeple into thinking that the second wasn’t too serious, and also that the video “caused” it – and especially the idea that it wasn’t planned long in advance.

I mean the video became an issue just that day.

They are still thinking that way. That maybe it was planned, but there was a sudden decision to go ahead.

Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/10/2012 @ 12:46 pm

From Hot Air” quoting ABC:

ABC News has learned that Eric Nordstrom, the former Regional Security Officer at the U.S. Embassy in Libya…Nordstrom was worried -he did not know how much the Americans could rely on members of a local Libyan militia in Benghazi that provided security — the “17th of February Martyrs Brigade.” Mostly merchants and shopkeepers before the war, they seemed eager, but they hadn’t much experience and other than a daily $30 stipend for food from the U.S. Embassy, they hadn’t been paid in months.

They were maybe waiting for the start of the new fiscal year, October 1.

Barack Obama wanted to show some fiscal discipline.

Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/10/2012 @ 12:51 pm

This just in:

House Panel Delves Into Libya Attack That Killed Envoy

The hearing focused on security preparations and security requests.

Mr. Issa began the hearing by referring to a briefing for reporters held Tuesday night by the State Department at which a spokesman discussed for the first time the details of the Benghazi attack. “Yesterday, the State Department began the process of coming clean,” he said.

The account provided by a State Department official, whom the agency declined to identify, differed from the initial Obama administration reports in some important respects…..Seeking to defend the State Department against charges of lax security, the official suggested to reporters that it could not have been anticipated. “The lethality and the number of armed people is unprecedented. There had been no attack like that anywhere in Libya — Tripoli, Benghazi or elsewhere — in the time we had been there,” he said. “It would be very, very hard to find a precedent for an attack like that in recent diplomatic history.”

Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/10/2012 @ 1:01 pm

A complete surprise attack – like the planes crashing into the World Trade Center.

But wait, in 1998, there were attacks on 2 U.S. embassies in Africa..

The real thing maybe is this: The same mistake was made that President Reagan made in Beirut in 1983. They knew more protection was needed, but they were planning to put it in….later.

This was a temporary consulate.

Greater security might have given some warning and a chance to escape. And the last two people might not have been killed. They were killed a few hours later. (the safe house was probably a mostly CIA safe house – a second rented property, not known to the Libyans guarding the embassy, but somehow known to the attackers.)

Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/10/2012 @ 1:07 pm

The Administration statements actually started with a rather strong pre-supposition this was a terrorist attack, and then got stronger and stronger on the idea that this came out of a protest related to the video. That was a not actually the first thing that they said.

I believe this is an intelligence failure – some piece of disinformation came in that they regarded as reliable that caused them to say.

This is not a political conspiracy. David Petraeus is part of it. He had not been absorbed by the Borg. This was an extremely serious intelligence failure. Somebody was trusted who shouldn’t have been. Some foreign intelligence agency, maybe, was trusted that shouldn’t have been. It is vital to walk back the cat. This was a not political gamesmanship – as political gamesmanship, this was extremely stupid political gamesmanship. Only an “extremely reliable” source could have caused the CIA to go so much against the obvious.

From the New York Times of Friday, September 28, 2012:

Administration Statements on the Attack in Benghazi

The Wall Street Journal in its weekend edition (Sept 29, 30, also had an article mentioning some changes, which is a bit different on the web:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444712904578024684208469470.html?mod=WSJ_article_comments#articleTabs%3Dcomments

Libya Attack Was ‘Organized,’ U.S. Says Revised Intelligence Assessment Counters Some Initial Reports That Siege Was Spontaneous; Says Information Is ‘Evolving’

Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/10/2012 @ 1:22 pm

How could we have foreseen this since the Benghazi attack is unprecedented.

There’s a word for a ground assault on one of our embassies.

The word is PRECEDENTED.

It happened before.

So I’m curious. How come Dubya’s the idiot. For not seeing 9/11, something that never happened before, coming?

Because you know what’s unprecedented? Airliners into the WTC, that’s what.

Meanwhile, our “smart” diplomats think it’s a smart move to call what’s entirely predictable
“unprecedented.”

I swear to the Almighty, I did not think I would live to see this kind of s**t.

Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/10/2012 @ 1:39 pm

“Why do they still hate us ?”

ES – Not enough NASA outreach?

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/10/2012 @ 1:44 pm

Yes, attacking U.S. Embassies is so unprecedented that Hollywood made a movie about it:

55 Days In Peking

AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92) — 10/10/2012 @ 2:06 pm

40. Something went wrong with the New York times link there.

Here is agood link:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/09/27/world/africa/administration-statements-on-the-attack-in-benghazi.html

It wasn’t till Sunday September 16 that they were flatly saying this wasn’t premidated.

Only a trusted source with lots of detailed false information could have caused them to overrule the obvious – that there was not a sudden decision to attack..

Mistakes (or successful disinformation) like that has happened in the history of intelligence, so that an intelligence agency completely disregards the obvious.

It took them till Sept 28 or soi to say this was premididated and even then they said and maybe keep on saying that the attackers decided to take advantage of something else.

Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/10/2012 @ 2:08 pm

Official State testimony today was they had the “correct” level of security at the consulate.

Despite changing sentiment, that Undecided number seems rather stable:

http://riehlworldview.com/2012/10/ibdtipp-post-debate-poll-romney-up-5-49-to-44-gaining-on-all-fronts.html

IMHO, some of Down Low’s undervote is leaking into ‘Willard ain’t quite Booosh’.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/10/2012 @ 2:16 pm

43. That 1963 movie was in French, made in Canada.

What they can say is that they didn’t anticipate being attacked by a military force.

Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/10/2012 @ 2:27 pm

The initial reports of the al qaeda rpg attack were unofficial offical reports.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/13/us-usa-libya-attack-idUSBRE88B1C620120913

By the time Rice had been plumped the You Tube video was out:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/09/video-shows-terrorists-with-rocket-propelled-grenades-at-us-consulate-in-libya/

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/10/2012 @ 2:30 pm

55 Days in Peking was in French? I believe you’ve confused yourself Finkelman, isnt that the Charleton Heston pic?

Regardless, the rest of your speculation is just windy speculation.

SPQR (b7271c) — 10/10/2012 @ 2:35 pm

Booooosh![Tourette facial tic]

Illy Illman (721840) — 10/10/2012 @ 2:49 pm

From PJM on the monday SF meetup:

“Protesters swirled around the entrance to the Bill Graham Auditorium, tormenting the ticket-holders waiting in line to see Obama and radical socialist musician Michael Franti. What made this particular protest unique was that its participants spanned the entire spectrum of American politics, from conservatives to leftists, from marijuana advocates to the NRA, from the Tea Party to Code Pink, from Occupy San Francisco to “Porn Stars for Romney” to PETA, and everyone in between. Who can unite them all? Only Obama!”

Well, alright, he’s kept one campaign promise.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/10/2012 @ 2:56 pm

Ms. Rice, meet Mr. Melman.

“In an unusual display of disunity, State Department officials have disowned remarks by one of their top officials, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice, regarding her explanation of the deadly terrorist assault on U.S. diplomats in Libya in September. Not only did they say Rice’s characterization of those attacks as “spontaneous” was wrong, but also, they said that assessment was never the conclusion of the State Department at any point in time.”

Hey girl, didn’t you just see what happened to Ambassador Stevens?

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/10/2012 @ 3:04 pm

I liked The Sand Pebbles better.

Leave Sammy alone. He does not attack anybody. Nobody says you need to read his comments.

nk (875f57) — 10/10/2012 @ 3:23 pm

‘Shirley sh couldn’t be serious’

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/10/state-dept-rep-we-had-the-correct-number-of-security-assets-in-benghazi/

narciso (ee31f1) — 10/10/2012 @ 3:28 pm

nk, usually I don’t read his comments. MEGO.

SPQR (b7271c) — 10/10/2012 @ 3:32 pm

Comment by narciso — 10/10/2012 @ 3:28 pm

Issa let her know that he did not think she had the correct answer. Good for Issa.

MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/10/2012 @ 4:04 pm

MEGO me too, SPQr, but it’s not Sammy.

nk (875f57) — 10/10/2012 @ 4:06 pm

Oh drat, that squirrely kid is up to his hijinks again.

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/10/10/second-dnc-voter-fraud-video-hits-house-judiciary-chairman-calls-for-firings/

Hopkins is a densely populated Mpls urban suburb, middle-middle class, round ball power. Kimmy’s ex hails from there.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/10/2012 @ 4:14 pm

Ms. Rice, meet Mr. Melman

Larry “Bud” Melman? He could’ve told a more believable story on those Sunday news shows and he’s dead.

Colonel Haiku (899594) — 10/10/2012 @ 4:39 pm

daleyrocks,

“not enough NASA outreach ?”

Ha, ha, well played. I knew I was missing something from my little list.
When she was still alive, Obama ought to have sent Sally Ride (in a burqua) on a tour of the Hamas Rocket Factory.

Can you imagine that tour ?
“How far does this particular rocket travel ? Can it make it as far as the moon ?”

No, it only needs to travel as far as Jerusalem…or Haifa, depending upon our objective.

Elephant Stone (65d289) — 10/10/2012 @ 4:49 pm

58. ATF unit leader Melman. Yeah, back when Letterman had a comedy show, Melman was a stitch.

Mentally-challenged affirmative action placement tries to make his boss proud:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/10/10/Obama-intel-director-enough-already-libya

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/10/2012 @ 4:52 pm

Bachmann vindicated by Mexican standoff between State, WH and “Intelligence” community:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/10/10/Libya-Coverup-Vindicates-Bachmann

Yet tell it to that bag of limp wristed weenies called the MN GOP.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/10/2012 @ 4:59 pm

Flow My Tears …

nk (875f57) — 10/10/2012 @ 5:06 pm

______________________________________________

It took them till Sept 28 or soi to say this was premididated and even then they said and maybe keep on saying that the attackers decided to take advantage of something else.

That illustrates either the crass dishonesty or grotesque stupidity of the Obama administration. And I don’t know what’s worse.

Whatever the case, the absurd reality at the core of all of this is that the lunacy of political correctness run amok has infiltrated not just the current White House — naturally (since it is Leftwing Central) — but also apparently the FBI, CIA and the US military. That alone makes me question the basic judgment and wisdom of various people throughout the whole system.

Mark (6d5e0d) — 10/10/2012 @ 5:44 pm

Comment by gary gulrud — 10/10/2012 @ 3:04 pm

“In an unusual display of disunity, State Department officials have disowned remarks by one of their top officials, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice, regarding her explanation of the deadly terrorist assault on U.S. diplomats in Libya in September. Not only did they say Rice’s characterization of those attacks as “spontaneous” was wrong, but also, they said that assessment was never the conclusion of the State Department at any point in time.”

The Ambassador to the United Nations is a Cabinet level position, and reports, or can report, directly to the President (or the NSC)

http://usun.state.gov/leadership/c31461.htm

Ambassador Susan E. Rice is the U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations and a member of President Obama’s Cabinet.

When she went on the Sunday morning interview shows on September 16, she was probably not acting as a subordinate of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

She was reporting what people in the White House were telling her, and that was because some people, in charge of intelligence, were taken in. Not politics. David Petreaus said a very similar thing behind closed doors, to a House committee.

Something went very very wrong with U.S. intelligence. That’s the problem, and it needs to be investigated, and corrected.

Something BIG is wrong.

Sammy Finkelman (7c5705) — 10/10/2012 @ 6:15 pm

She was reporting what people in the White House were telling her, and that was because some people, in charge of intelligence, were taken in. Not politics. David Petreaus said a very similar thing behind closed doors, to a House committee.

Something went very very wrong with U.S. intelligence. That’s the problem, and it needs to be investigated, and corrected.

Something BIG is wrong.

Comment by Sammy Finkelman — 10/10/2012 @ 6:15 pm

Dude, you are officially high. Nothing went wrong with this nation’s intel level. It went wrong at the decision making level.

Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/10/2012 @ 7:04 pm

And 20,000 surface to air missiles missing?

Thanks, Obama!

Patricia (e1d89d) — 10/10/2012 @ 7:08 pm

Benghazi, Big Bird, and the Collapse of a Con…

“With ABC’s “confirmation” that there were no protests of any kind outside of the consulate when the terrorists attacked, the focus should be on the president’s deceptive statement at the Univision forum in Florida two weeks ago. Had he truly been that out of touch with events and so disconncted from a terrorist attack on our ambassador and his security team that he did not know what he was talking about, or was he simply lying and hoping it would last through the election, a sort of Nixonian “limited modified hang-out?”

Certainly we should also be re-examining why the presient jetted off to Vegas for a fundraiser hours after the attack. Recall the feigned outrage at George W. Bush’s use of images of 9/11 in his re-election campaign –nearly three years after the events of that awful day?

President Obama flew off to Vegas after a terrorist attack to pass the cup for his campaign and he did so either without being briefed on a terrorist attack or knowing that a terrorist attack had been successfully carried out. Then he and senior members of his administration attempted to conceal the nature of the events in order to protect his campaign. Extraordinary. I ask the old question: If W had been caught doing this….

The Benghazi cover-up is juxtaposed with the Big Bird fiasco which followed the president’s on-camera debacle before 70 million Americans like night follows day. The president and his senior advisors are so tone-deaf as to what is facing the country and so clueless as to the real concerns of voters that they have spent a week trying to work out the timing of the president’s lame jokes about Big Bird. Having been mocked by their own team –again– the Obamians are getting angry and defensive.

Politico’s Mike Allen summarizes the state of panic inside the Beltway in his “Playbook” email this AM:

MORNING MINDMELD: The media narrative has turned in dramatic – and, for Obama, dangerous — ways. Talk to top Democrats, and suddenly it’s Obama who has suspect personal and political skills — and a vague, uninspiring agenda. It’s Romney who has his groove, is drawing bigger crowds, feeling love from his base, and seeing a nice bump in the polls. Ask any professional Democrat’s private take on the president, and it’s usually mixed, if not downbeat. Many will be quick to criticize if the turbulence continues. And just ask Mitt Romney what happens when prominent members of your own party go on the record to bash you.”

read it all: http://www.hughhewitt.com/blog/g/263e2091-687b-4799-99a8-5e38251ea82c

Colonel Haiku (ea27a4) — 10/10/2012 @ 7:27 pm

66. And 20,000 surface to air missiles missing?

Thanks, Obama!

Comment by Patricia — 10/10/2012 @ 7:08 pm

Just saying. Poor operational decisions can’t always be blamed on poor intel.

But bad intel is convenient scapegoat for bad decisions.

As we are witnessing.

Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/10/2012 @ 7:29 pm

Operation Hot Mic…

http://youtu.be/-Czo5Vf8KZs

Colonel Haiku (ea27a4) — 10/10/2012 @ 7:32 pm

Yes, the forgot Powell’s Dictum: you break it, you own it.

Patricia (e1d89d) — 10/10/2012 @ 7:50 pm

64. Good point about UN Ambassador being a Cabinet position and that Rice was plainly given her orders from the WH, read Jarrett.

Ditto for half-wit Clapper, a potemkin spook.

The CIA regulars have no intention of playing WH scapegoat. Moreover, State has reconsidered any attempt to do so. They prefer to take a severe paddling to serving time.

Meanwhile the affirmative action hires at WH are hoping for their lucky stars to align. Hugo still owns the Caracas Hilton. Make your reservations.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/10/2012 @ 7:52 pm

“Something BIG is wrong.”

Sammy – Agreed. He’s incapable of taking responsibility for anything and running for reelection.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/10/2012 @ 7:52 pm

Cost tonight, Trende yesterday are placing a bet that O & R are each locking in 47% of the electorate in a death waltz to the end of the music. Cost gives Johnson et al. 1%, the remainder undecided.

The thinking is this is how the elections since 2000 have shaken out and nothing really has changed.

But I’d hazard 1.) only half the electorate will show at the polls and Dims are neither scared nor emboldened and 2.) Down Low is going to suffer an undervote larger than Willard.

Events are stacked against the incumbent even if rumor and innuendo are stacked against the challenger. There are more than enough events, stories, disappointments, etc., for the Obots to hear one or two and suffer misgivings.

Finally, Romany seems to have caught the clue that he needs to finish with a flurry.

No worries.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/10/2012 @ 8:07 pm

I guess it’s funny in a way. Under Bush, intelligence failure was a bug — an indication of abject depravity of elected government.

Under Obama, intelligence failure is a feature — excuses of any accountability for the death of innocent Americans.

What a disgusting indictment of my chosen profession. I really don’t know how these media bastions of “truth” sleep at night.

Ag80 (b2c81f) — 10/10/2012 @ 8:30 pm

This should put paid to any thoughts 0bama might still have harboured of replacing Slow Joe with the Wicked Witch of Westchester. Her career is surely over now.

Milhouse (15b6fd) — 10/10/2012 @ 8:39 pm

The ABC propaganda machine continues with another fluff piece on Michelle. The media is so far in the tank it has no bottom.

Ag80 (b2c81f) — 10/10/2012 @ 8:41 pm

“Under Obama, intelligence failure is a feature — excuses of any accountability for the death of innocent Americans.”

Ag80 – Intelligence had it nailed as a terrorist attack within the first 24 hours. No failure. Intelligence also issued reports of the growing Al Qaeda presence in Libya in August. Again, no failure. The White House and/or State Department decided to add on the ridiculous spin about the protest and the video.

You have two cover ups – The first, why the Administration deliberately lied about what happened when they knew it was a terrorist attack and that there was no protest very shortly after the event.

The second cover up relates to why repeated requests from our Libyan corps for heightened security were denied. Obama’s desire to have our presence in the country blend in rather than to protect our people was a disaster. Those were deliberate decisions which do not require a foreign investigation. They were made in Washington.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/10/2012 @ 8:56 pm

daley: That’s why it’s a feature, not a bug.

Do you see anyone blaming the administration for this failure?

Intelligence may have been right, but the narrative rules.

Ag80 (b2c81f) — 10/10/2012 @ 9:18 pm

__________________________________________

She was reporting what people in the White House were telling her, and that was because some people, in charge of intelligence, were taken in. Not politics.

Sammy, resist that little liberal voice in the back of your mind. It tends to be unreliable and rather nonsensical. It’s the part of your thought processes that is making you believe that people “were taken in,” but not by politics but something else. Anyone who falls for that might be interested in buying a bridge in Brooklyn and some swampland in Florida.

Rationalizing away the core of the Benghazi tragedy makes me think of those so-called Obamatrons who claim that huge federal grants given to Solyndra were based on great insight and knowledge by top government officials. Naive and gullible people may buy that line. Only thing is that even lower-level employees at Solyndra reportedly were skeptical of what the company was all about, and even they didn’t think it would survive.

Mark (6d5e0d) — 10/10/2012 @ 9:27 pm

Ag80 – My bad. Got it.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/10/2012 @ 9:31 pm

I think they will ultimately blame Clapper. Isn’t that why they keep him around? He hardly knows his name.

And where is the illustrious Sara Powers these days? Hiding with Rice? She’s the brilliant czar who pushed to oust Ghadaffi and then immediately decamp.

Patricia (e1d89d) — 10/10/2012 @ 10:19 pm

And where is the illustrious Sara Powers these days?

Who? Do you mean Samantha Power?

Milhouse (15b6fd) — 10/10/2012 @ 11:02 pm

A summary;

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/10/10/opening-salvos-at-house-libya-hearing.html

narciso (ee31f1) — 10/11/2012 @ 6:10 am

Clapper, of “the Muslim Brotherhood is largely secular” fame?

By a country mile, this guy should be the very first person to receive a pink slip from Romney — even before “Man-Caused Disaster” Napolitano.

Icy (d35969) — 10/11/2012 @ 6:28 am

I couldn’t believe it when I heard this clip:
Yet State Department official Charlene Lamb — who refused the manpower requests — testified yesterday that “we had the correct number of assets in Benghazi on the night of 9/11.”

That is on the same level of cluelessness as Obama thinking he had won the debate (if that is indeed true).

Had she said something like “according to our assessment, we thought we had the correct number of security personnel in Benghazi” I can understand the comment and then can calmly ask what went into that thinking. But in light of the events, there is no way in Hades that she can say they “had the correct number of assets”, unless their criteria is not based on the safety of our personnel. Second, I realize “assets” is professional speak in military/security terms, but in light of their deaths in public testimony it would be nice to acknowledge that people died, not that assets were lost.

I remember reading that during the Lewinsky aftermath Nixon said something about “didn’t they learn anything” and “did he go through everything for nothing”, I guess referring to the idea that the coverup is likely worse than the original infraction, and fess up ASAP and move on.
But I guess if one thinks they have a complicit press, instead of independent (if not downright oppositional), then it is tempting one can get away with a coverup. In many ways Clinton did get away with the coverup, and I am sure that if some have their way so will Obama.

MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/11/2012 @ 6:28 am

Everything’s fine . . .
SANAA, Yemen (AP) – A masked gunman assassinated a Yemeni security official who worked for the U.S. Embassy in a drive-by shooting near his home in the capital Sanaa on Thursday, officials said. Yemeni officials said the killing bore the hallmarks of an attack by the al-Qaida offshoot in Yemen, but it was too early to determine whether the group was behind it.

Icy (d35969) — 10/11/2012 @ 7:07 am

MD in Philly – The System Worked!

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/11/2012 @ 8:38 am

The idea that since Petraus repeated the White House’s “rioting over the video got out of hand” excuse, that there must have been some sooper-sekrit intel behind it is simply circular logic at best.

Use Occam’s Razor, Sammy, it would shorten up your comments considerably.

SPQR (768505) — 10/11/2012 @ 8:48 am

Right, Samantha Power.

Patricia (e1d89d) — 10/11/2012 @ 9:03 am

Comment by Steve57 — 10/10/2012 @ 7:04 pm

Nothing went wrong with this nation’s intel level. It went wrong at the decision making level.

Both of these things went wrong, but the intelligence went really wrong after the fact.

Of course somebody had to make a decision as to what constituted good intelligence.

Sammy Finkelman (88f52d) — 10/11/2012 @ 9:32 am

Sammy, you have no direct evidence of any “wrong” intelligence being the basis for the false claims by the administration.

SPQR (768505) — 10/11/2012 @ 9:41 am

There was no intelligence failure here. None. It’s just an excuse used by those who have just been handed their a**. And who were supposed to act on the intelligence.

You have a lot of whistleblowers crawling out of State and DoD precisely because the are not falling on their swords to back up this lie.

Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/11/2012 @ 9:54 am

Comment by Colonel Haiku — 10/10/2012 @ 7:27 pm

Had he truly been that out of touch with events and so disconncted from a terrorist attack on our ambassador and his security team that he did not know what he was talking about, or was he simply lying and hoping it would last through the election, a sort of Nixonian “limited modified hang-out?

The second possibility is impossible, because for that nobody would have to have had both an interest in and an ability to find out what had happened.

The reason they went with that story is because they thought it was true!

And it is not that they didn’t hear the other version – that it was a planned terrorist attack – they did hear it – and they wanted to get out the true story – what they thought was the true story – because they thought it would help them politically. They didn’t want to wait, and besides, they knew, if a story is not corrected when it’s hot, many people will continue to believe the old version.

They wanted everyone to know it was not premeditated.

President Obama flew off to Vegas after a terrorist attack to pass the cup for his campaign and he did so either without being briefed on a terrorist attack or knowing that a terrorist attack had been successfully carried out.

Back in Washington, they didn’t know for sure what had happened. As time went on, they got information that assured them it had not been planned in advance to coincide with Sept. 11. The information was wrong, but they didn’t know it.

Hewitt: It’s Romney who has his groove, is drawing bigger crowds, feeling love from his base, and seeing a nice bump in the polls.

Obama down to 53% in California, and saying don’t believe the polls. Giving up on Florida, maybe, North Carolina for sure.

Sammy Finkelman (3bb022) — 10/11/2012 @ 10:36 am

88. Comment by SPQR — 10/11/2012 @ 8:48 am

Use Occam’s Razor, Sammy, it would shorten up your comments considerably.

I am using Occam’s Razor, but sometimes it requires a lot of explanation.

It’s not just David Petraeus, it’s also Patrick Kennedy, a career civil servant.

Something has to explain the curious comments about the attack, that “rioting over the video got out of hand” and when they were made, days later, getting stronger as time went on, and the people who said it, not all political people.

And that can only be that there must have been some sooper-sekrit intel behind it.

Sooper secret because nobody has said a word about it. This must be highly classified. Intel because everybody has pretty much said so, and it didn’t come from the State Department (or anywhere else that we know) and it’s untrue. It’s so at odds with the truth, it can only be foreign intel.

It can only be intel, or the White House made it up. But David Petraeus would not have believed it just based on something the White House told him – being Director of the CIA, he would not accept something as being too secret for him to know – and even if didn’t believe it, he would not have testified to Congress that way, so it must have been genuine intel, which he knew the content of. Q.E. D.

And the source of the information could only have been Saudi Arabia, because it was both trusted and false. Or false in part.

But what Prince Bandar didn’t count on, is that the Administration would want to go so public with its conclusions, and as a result they began to realize it was false.

Sammy Finkelman (3bb022) — 10/11/2012 @ 11:16 am

Sammy, quit. Just quit. As for #93 they went with it not because they thought it was true but because it served their purpose.

If you are the troll I now suspect you of being you will compose another wall-O-text comment to drive this off the front page.

Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/11/2012 @ 11:26 am

91. Comment by SPQR — 10/11/2012 @ 9:41 am

Sammy, you have no direct evidence of any “wrong” intelligence being the basis for the false claims by the administration.

I have that too. It’s not just Occam’s Razor (or at least it would be Occam’s Razor to Sherlock Holmes)

State Department denies concluding film sparked consulate attack in Benghazi – Fox News Oct 10, 2012

[Susan Rice] has since denied trying to mislead Congress, and a concurrent CIA memo that was obtained by The Associated Press cited intelligence suggesting the demonstrations in Benghazi “were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo” and “evolved into a direct assault” on the diplomatic posts by “extremists.”

Sammy Finkelman (3bb022) — 10/11/2012 @ 11:41 am

I am watching the hearing live. Rep. Issa says “this side of the dias” and Mr Cummings hears “Aisle” and takes umbridge with his own mistake , thereby polarizing the proceedings. the first speaker also says “both sides of the aisle”. How disappointing.

felipe (70ff7e) — 10/11/2012 @ 12:19 pm

“And that can only be that there must have been some sooper-sekrit intel behind it.”

Sammy – Put your thinking cap back on. There are other alternatives. We saw them in Fast and Furious.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/11/2012 @ 12:26 pm

Sammy– you do know that we live in the age of cell phones, satellite communication and data transmision, right? We don’t have to rely on a scout, or a pony express guy to ride three days from the battlefield or uprising to the teletype office in order to let Washington know what is happening.

elissa (2746ba) — 10/11/2012 @ 12:37 pm

Before I forget, I want to thank Dana for the link! Thank you my dear.

felipe (70ff7e) — 10/11/2012 @ 12:45 pm

Sammy,

More here about that CIA memo, which was actually post-attack talking points that the Administration cherry-picked to reach its desired result:

The intelligence that helped inform those talking points—and what the U.S. public would ultimately be told—came in part from an intercept of a phone call between one of the alleged attackers and a middle manager from al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), the group’s north African affiliate, according to U.S. officials familiar with the intercept. In the call, the alleged attacker said the locals went forward with the attack only after watching the riots that same day at the U.S. embassy in Cairo.

However, the intercept was one of several monitored communications during and after the attacks between members of a local militia called Ansar al-Sharia and AQIM, which, taken together, suggest the assault was in fact a premeditated terrorist attack, according to U.S. intelligence and counter-terrorism officials not authorized to talk to the press.

In one of the calls, for example, members of Ansar al-Sharia bragged about their successful attack against the American consulate and the U.S. ambassador.

It’s unclear why the talking points said the attacks were spontaneous and why they didn’t mention the possibility of al Qaeda involvement, given the content of the intercepts and the organizations the speakers were affiliated with. One U.S. intelligence officer said the widely distributed assessment was an example of “cherry picking,” or choosing one piece of intelligence and ignoring other pieces, to support a preferred thesis.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/11/2012 @ 12:53 pm

I don’t know why I like Sammy. His long comments totally make my retinas tired. Maybe cause he’s polite in the face of gratuitous ad hominem? You dob’t (sic) have to read him.

nk (875f57) — 10/11/2012 @ 1:20 pm

Sorry, felipe.

Wagon Train, Rawhide, Marshal Dillon, Gunsmoke, and Bonanza are on.

A wink is as good as a nod…?

nk (875f57) — 10/11/2012 @ 1:24 pm

War song. Safe. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpZ3jPMM5Ac

nk (875f57) — 10/11/2012 @ 1:30 pm

I like Sammy too. I think he knows it.

elissa (2746ba) — 10/11/2012 @ 1:32 pm

Obama deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter told CNN:

The entire reason that this (Libya…)has become the political topic that it is, is because of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. It’s a big part of their stump speech. And it’s reckless and irresponsible what they’re doing.

She’s a real piece of work. And the inherent dishonesty in her response, while never considering,

Some might argue that it’s reckless and irresponsible to ignore an embassy’s requests for enhanced security, to blame a highly-orchestrated terrorist attack on a spontaneous outbreak of violence elicited by a YouTube video, or to mislead the American people about the events that led to the deaths of four American citizens…

In Cutter’s and the Administration’s world, people who think that would clearly be wrong.

Dana (292dcf) — 10/11/2012 @ 1:35 pm

Dana – I think she is suggesting that absent their criticism, it would not be an important issue, because the admin and their partners in the MFM would simply ignore it.

JD (9ace9f) — 10/11/2012 @ 1:43 pm

JD, but of course. S.O.P.

Dana (292dcf) — 10/11/2012 @ 1:45 pm

Here’s Cutter on tape discussing it. My question is, does she even know when she’s lying anymore or has she long since past the threshold of being able to tell?

Dana (292dcf) — 10/11/2012 @ 1:49 pm

As I said several days ago on another thread Dana, (and as I recall you concurred) the administration has few–verrrry few remaining supporters/believers with respect to the government’s handling and communication on the 9/11/12 atrocity. What was allowed to happen and then how they responded to it afterward has hurt the WH badly with both voters and the worldwide media. Cutter is a terrible spokeperson. It’s hard to believe they are still trying to salvage something out of the unsalvageable.

elissa (2746ba) — 10/11/2012 @ 1:49 pm

Sammy, when you pile unsupported assertion atop unsupported supposition, you are not employing Occam’s Razor. Plain and simple.

In this case, the cherry-picked line did not support the admin’s claims. They are hiding behind it when the contemporaneous intel showed a premediated attack.

SPQR (adc2e1) — 10/11/2012 @ 1:52 pm

Yes, elissa. Mostly I think Obama is irritated and annoyed that Benghazi happened so close to the election, and that his opponents care so much about getting to the truth of what happened: How dare they.

Dana (292dcf) — 10/11/2012 @ 2:31 pm

Didn’t they tell her, he did the timeline

http://www.therightscoop.com/bret-baier-interviews-a-testy-stephanie-cutter-over-blaming-romney-for-making-benghazi-an-issue/

narciso (ee31f1) — 10/11/2012 @ 4:04 pm

I guess they don’t know the first rule about holes (stop digging).

The default fall-back is to call concern over Benghazi a political maneuver?!? An ambassador is killed, it becomes clear the original story was all wrong, and nay questioning is political?

Liberal projection never ceases to provide more things to gape over. Just like the person who told Issa they “had the correct number of assets”, tunnel vision due to focus on the functioning of the Borg.

Just keep changing stories all, especially before Congressman Issa under oath.

MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/11/2012 @ 4:31 pm

94. Sooper secret because nobody has said a word about it. This must be highly classified. Intel because everybody has pretty much said so, and it didn’t come from the State Department (or anywhere else that we know) and it’s untrue. It’s so at odds with the truth, it can only be foreign intel.

It can only be intel, or the White House made it up. But David Petraeus would not have believed it just based on something the White House told him – being Director of the CIA, he would not accept something as being too secret for him to know – and even if didn’t believe it, he would not have testified to Congress that way, so it must have been genuine intel, which he knew the content of. Q.E. D.

And the source of the information could only have been Saudi Arabia, because it was both trusted and false. Or false in part.

But what Prince Bandar didn’t count on, is that the Administration would want to go so public with its conclusions, and as a result they began to realize it was false.

Comment by Sammy Finkelman — 10/11/2012 @ 11:16 am

It’s so soooper sekrit, what’s going on in the street outside an embassy.

You can’t see it without a satellite, so soooper sekrit it is.

Hi-tech, that’s what u need.

Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/11/2012 @ 4:58 pm

Foreign allies. That’s what u need. “Hey, stick your head out the window and tell me what you see.”

Doing the job no American will do.

Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/11/2012 @ 5:00 pm

It’s so at odds with the truth, it can only be foreign intel.

(Sammy, earlier)

Hey, you know what else foreign intel said, Sammy?

“Get the hell out of Dodge.”

That’s what all our buds did, including the Brits, when it came to closing their consulates in Benghazi.

So you’re back to square one. It’s not the freakin’ intel that’s the problem.

Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/11/2012 @ 5:03 pm

It’s so at odds with the truth, it can only be foreign intel.

I guess if that’s the standard foreign intel is also responsible for the unemployment report and Obama’s debate performance.

Steve57 (c8ac21) — 10/11/2012 @ 5:04 pm

Comment by Steve57 — 10/11/2012 @ 4:58 pm

It’s so soooper sekrit, what’s going on in the street outside an embassy.

You can’t see it without a satellite, so soooper sekrit it is.

No, what sooper sekrit is information that contradicts what everyone can tell.

Hi-tech, that’s what u need.

Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/12/2012 @ 1:46 pm

101. Comment by DRJ — 10/11/2012 @ 12:53 pm

Sammy,

More here about that CIA memo, which was actually post-attack talking points that the Administration cherry-picked to reach its desired result:

You then quote from the October 1 Daily Beast.

The Daily Beast heard part of = 1 item of intelligence that supported that conclusion.

Part of = there was more.

This is like when the U.S. makes public satellite photographs proving something. That’s never the whole of the information. The real information comes from elsewhere.

There was more.

THEY’RE….NOT….LYING

Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/12/2012 @ 1:57 pm

October 1 Daily Beast:

The intelligence that helped inform those talking points—and what the U.S. public would ultimately be told—came in part

“came in part” = There was more.

This item is a separate leak. It is presumably not mentioned in the widely circulated memo.

from an intercept of a phone call between one of the alleged attackers and a middle manager from al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), the group’s north African affiliate, according to U.S. officials familiar with the intercept. In the call, the alleged attacker said the locals went forward with the attack only after watching the riots that same day at the U.S. embassy in Cairo.

Now why did this happen? Because al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb was not involved in the planning for the attack on the consulate. This is the cover story.

However, the intercept was one of several monitored communications during and after the attacks between members of a local militia called Ansar al-Sharia and AQIM, which, taken together, suggest the assault was in fact a premeditated terrorist attack, according to U.S. intelligence and counter-terrorism officials not authorized to talk to the press.

In one of the calls, for example, members of Ansar al-Sharia bragged about their successful attack against the American consulate and the U.S. ambassador.

So they didn’t all always stick to that cover story.

It’s unclear why the talking points said the attacks were spontaneous

Because there was other intel that said it was.

Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/12/2012 @ 1:58 pm

99. Comment by elissa — 10/11/2012 @ 12:37 pm

Sammy– you do know that we live in the age of cell phones, satellite communication and data transmision, right? We don’t have to rely on a scout, or a pony express guy to ride three days from the battlefield or uprising to the teletype office in order to let Washington know what is happening.

They actually were out of contact for a while, but still, there were western reporters on the ground.

Official Washington, though likes to get its information independetly.

There were their own poeple, when they got to talk to them, but this was done by low level people..

In the meantime something came along that purported to tell them what had happened.

There really was sooper sekrit foreign intelligence that supported the “spontaneous demonstration” theory.

That’s really the only explantion for what’s been going on here.

No way would they have doubled down on it if that wasn’t true. No way would they have gone on a limb so uch in the first place if that wasn’t true.

They had contradictory information.

Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/12/2012 @ 2:05 pm

45. Comment by gary gulrud — 10/10/2012 @ 2:16 pm

Official State testimony today was they had the “correct” level of security at the consulate.

Of course. They don’t make mistakes. NOT!

Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/12/2012 @ 2:07 pm

They were right in theory.

Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/12/2012 @ 2:08 pm

Suppposedly.

Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/12/2012 @ 2:08 pm

111. Comment by SPQR — 10/11/2012 @ 1:52 pm

Sammy, when you pile unsupported assertion atop unsupported supposition, you are not employing Occam’s Razor. Plain and simple.

It gets more problematical. But sometimes chess problems can forecast many moves.

In this case, the cherry-picked line did not support the admin’s claims.

The cherry picked item did. Of course, it is also understandable as a cover story that hides the planning.

They are hiding behind it when the contemporaneous intel showed a premediated attack.

There is something else. Too many of the wrong people would have to be lying for there not to have been some sooper sekrit intelligence – more than just one phone call – that told the administration this was spontaneous.

Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/12/2012 @ 2:13 pm

120. Allowing the hearer to come to a false conclusion via selectively reporting the facts as one has them.

I try this on my wife all the time. Never works.

More the worse, she calls it lying.

gary gulrud (0e3cb3) — 10/12/2012 @ 2:14 pm

Because people don’t believe them they are not asking the right questions:

If a doctor misdiagnoses something badly, do you keep on using him withouyt question?

Why hasn’t there beenm a shake-up at the CIA?

I mean the CIA basically told them something that amounted to saying 2+2=7.

Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/12/2012 @ 2:14 pm

122 is delusional. That is really not the only explanation.

JD (9ace9f) — 10/12/2012 @ 2:45 pm

Too bad President Bush couldn’t have use the “we received bad intelligence” defense regarding Iraq!

Illy Illman (721840) — 10/12/2012 @ 2:55 pm

The entire foreign-policy of this government; indeed, the entire polity of this government, is built on a lie:
Obama is the brightest, most-competent leader in the entire world!

He is anything but!
His economics policy is a disaster.
His “they will like us because of my apologies” foreign-policy is in a shambles.
He passes out our money to losers, and shuts down entire segments of the economy that are winners.
He pulls protection from an Ambassador serving in a virtual War-Zone, yet has a Presidential Advisor with a 24/7 Secret Service detail (I realize that the crime-rate in DC is bad, but come on now – I have yet to read in the WaPo that the police in DC have arrested gang-bangers in possession of RPG’s).
It has gotten to the point that if the WaPo Fact-Checker gives a presidential utterance just a single Pinnochio, it might almost be the truth.

It is time to end this nightmare.

AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92) — 10/12/2012 @ 3:04 pm

The Iraq-Intell was correct, particularly the part about Yellow-cake.
WMD was found, and what wasn’t is what they are currently worried about in the Syrian situation.

AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92) — 10/12/2012 @ 3:06 pm

Wait a second. Is there are argument that the administration was not lying about what happened in Benghazi?

MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/12/2012 @ 3:34 pm

Everything, Doc, that we have been told by the Administration about the events in Benghazi has been the absolute truth –
no matter how self-contradictory it has been.
Our Dear Leader wouldn’t lie to us now, would he?

AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92) — 10/12/2012 @ 3:59 pm

According the Drudge, there was a marine detachment protecting an embassy on 911- in Barbados.

Choom was just in Miami again recently. I’ve read that Florida is now a lost cause to the libs and Pa. is not a sure thing. But so much dem money is being spent on negative ads against Allen West that he is now down 9 points. Libtards really do loathe black conservatives. Haven’t been following the nearby district race that Debbie Wasserman-Schultz represents, but I gather she is a shoo-in. Which just goes to show that liberal Jews are clueless when it comes to judging things like honesty.

Calypso Louis Farrakhan (e799d8) — 10/12/2012 @ 4:14 pm

If Allen West is not reelected he should get a significant position in the Administration- maybe Czar of Florida.

One polling company has pulled out of Virgina, NC, and Florida saying they are all going to Romney and no need to follow them anymore.

MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/12/2012 @ 4:38 pm

Here’s some reassurance;

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/08/allen-west-poll_n_1949527.html

narciso (ee31f1) — 10/12/2012 @ 4:48 pm

In case you are curious why the State Dept could not afford to hire real security for Benghazi instead of outsourcing it to Libyan militia …

The State Dept purchase of a Chevy Volt for $47,500 for use at a U.S. embassy in Norway. The sticker price for a 2013 model year is $39,145.

The State Department also paid over $108,000 for another contract, dated May of this year, for a Volt-specific charging station at our embassy in Vienna, Austria.

SPQR (768505) — 10/12/2012 @ 5:30 pm

state dept security budget increased 120% over the last 5 years per Jason Chaffetz…

Colonel Haiku (ab4afd) — 10/12/2012 @ 6:01 pm

Comment by Illy Illman — 10/12/2012 @ 2:55 pm

Too bad President Bush couldn’t have use the “we received bad intelligence” defense regarding Iraq!

He did!

But the Democrats professed not to believe him, or just ignored the issue, or accused him of manipulating the intelligence – and then there was the squirrel Valerie Plame.

Sammy Finkelman (3bb022) — 10/15/2012 @ 11:06 am

10/10/2012

Benghazi Hearings Today

140 Responses to “Benghazi Hearings Today”

Favorite Sites

Links

Patterico Sells Out