Benghazi is the scandal that can’t catch a break …
First it was conveniently put on ice by the mainstream media in the months leading up to Barack Obama’s reelection as president, then when it finally emerged this spring it was quickly consumed by the Internal Revenue Service and domestic spying scandals.
Benghazi, of course, refers to the September 11, 2012 attack on a United States diplomatic outpost in Libya that killed four Americans – including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stephens. The Benghazi scandal refers to the failure of the Obama administration to protect its citizens when they were under attack – and its clumsy efforts to cover-up that failure (and the true nature of the attack).
“Three decades ago, a scandal like this would have been the end of an administration,” we wrote last October. “Think about it: Four Americans (including a U.S. Ambassador) were murdered by terrorists in Benghazi, Libya as an American President watched in a secure room halfway around the world – refusing to provide help.”
Oh … and then the president lied about what happened, undertaking a deliberate effort to deceive them into thinking the attack was the spontaneous outgrowth of protests in Libya as opposed to what it was: A premeditated terrorist attack.
This week comes another wrinkle in the Benghazi scandal, a report from Investors Business Daily which suggests intelligence reports related to al-Qaeda activity (and specific threats against American officials) were ignored in the months leading up to the attack.
“Months before the murder of a U.S. ambassador in Benghazi, American intelligence analysts documented a massive al-Qaeda rally a few miles from the ambassador’s residence,” reporters Susan Katz and Richard Miniter write. “At that rally, terror leaders called for the murder of American diplomats. In the face of these three reports, the State Department continued to deny requests for additional security for the U.S. ambassador in Libya.”
Why? Because Obama was on the campaign trail at the time telling Americans al-Qaeda was “decimated” and “on the run.”
What did Obama’s government provide, though? More than $200 million in aid to the Libyan government in the year-and-a-half leading up to the attack (none of which was spent on security).
“The president’s campaign wanted to focus on his foreign policy successes, killing Osama bin Laden and liberating Libya,” Katz and Miniter’s report conclude, even though the buried intelligence reports “called both of those accomplishments into question.”
Indeed … with deadly consequences.
So the scandal is Obama didn’t protect the embassy well enough even though money to pay for security was lowered by House Republicans?
“First it was conveniently put on ice by the mainstream media”
Lol, did you forget about 60 Minutes getting embarrassed and having to pull a story on this like last week? There was no scandal because there is no scandal here. It was a tragedy, there is a difference.
Same with old Buck’s Presidency – it ain’t a scandal, it is a fucking tragedy
The scandalous behavior is the denial stonewalling and the cover up after the fact. This was not an embassy, it was an “diplomatic” mission or “consulate” building. Think lightly fortified office building vice the fortified embassy building in Tripoli.
The CIA was using the facility as part of their gun running scheme. In fact, when the
terroristpeace loving Muslims, offended by a scandalous movie who just happened to have automatic weapons, grenades, mortars, vehicle mounted heavy machine guns and RPGs handy, attacked the CIA annex a block or so away, CIA special operators held them off until day light. The CIA compound was eventually reinforced by the non existent spec warriors in Tripoli who stole a plane and flew to Benghazi. They were eventually able to exfiltrate 36 to 40 Americans, including the spec warriors, some civilians and State Dept personnel.
If and when the full story ever comes out, it will make Iran Contra and Watergate look like amateur child’s play. Congress still has not been allowed to talk to the survivors and has been stonewalled by the White House, State Department and the CIA.
I served under 7 presidents while in uniform (Nixon,Ford,Reagan,Bush 1(the best one of all),Clinton,Bush 2 & Obama before I retired in 2010
Off the Bat:
I NEVER supported nor did I vote for Obama but if you are going to go this route Colonel, let’s backtrack some:
USS Liberty: 20 or so US sailors and civilians were killed by the IAF during the 1967 Six Day War. the whole fucking thing was covered up and the survivors as well as the families of the dead are still asking questions
Pat Tillman:The right wing “Chickenhawks” made him out to be a superman until it was disclosed that he was killed by his own Ranger unit in Afghanstan. They shut the fuck up on that one ASAP during Bush 2. No real hearings whatsoever. The Tillman family is still pissed off about that (and rightly so)…..NADA from the Bush 2/Chaney faction……
The female soldier from my home state of West Virginia: She was made out to be “Annie Okley” by the right wingnuts standing off swarms of ragheads until her ammo ran out and she was captured by the Iraqis. Later on it was discovered she never fired a shot and had scant training on her weapon (she hit her head on the steering wheel and was knocked unconscious). She was the darling of the right until a few years back. Again, no real investigation about what really happened. Again on Bush 2’s watch
The mutilation of several contractors (burnt remains hung on the bridge support beams for all to see and photograph while the Iraqis smacked the remains like some Mexican “Pinata”. Bush 2 vowed revenge = no action whatsoever. Sound familiar/See a trend developing?????
I pulled my share of time there, you claim to as well, so if you are going to pontificate (and you sure do write damn knowledgeable comments since your are an O-6 and all…) make sure you include the injustices listed above.
Looks like you forgot to include the above instances where the United States of America blew those tragedies off under past administrations but the families of the dead (or survivors of the “mishaps”) have not forgotten and cry out for answers that have never came.
But is appears to me you are “cherry-picking’ and have a hard on for the tragedy of Benghazi like Congressman Trey Gowdy who is a damn fine prosecutor but one lousy representative for the people of the 4th Congressional District of South Carolina (UNLESS you are a TEA party type; that is……..)
Hypocrisy abounds–IN FUCKING SPADES!!!
I was an IG and was involved in the investigation of parts of the “Annie Oakley” incident (Jessica Lynch). You have the facts basically right and indeed there was an attempt to make her out to be a hero. She was just one of the Soldiers captured – she happened to be the most picturesque of the group. However, there was a Congressional investigation, Lynch testified in April of ’07 and all of the facts were laid out.
As for Pat Tillman, the DoD IG investigated and wrote a 2,500 page report. Congress investigated but you’re right, nothing was done publicly. Some careers were ended but “Golden Boys” Abezaid and that POS McChrystal should have been relieved along with everyone in the chain of command from the platoon leader up. The senior officers who ordered the cover up should have served time.
The deal with the IAF and the Liberty goes down in the shrouded mist of WTF. There was obviously far more going on than has ever been revealed. The Liberty was a spy ship and I tend to believe she had stumbled into the IAF’s declared free fire zone and was originally legitimately mis-identified by the IAF. Johnson accepted the IAF’s apology and payoff leading me to believe we were culpable some how.
I was all of about 7 when the Liberty went down. I have expressed outrage about Tillman (officially)
I have probably paid better attention than most to the outfall of the Lynch story but it was well established that the story was vastly exaggerated within a year or so.
You’ve got me beat by a couple of presidents (how’d you miss Carter?)
Active duty: 82nd. Airborne 1971 – 1974
Air Guard: 1988 – 2010
Took a 14 year hiatus when I got out in 1974 (swore I’d never wear green baggy shit ever again – went to college under the old GI bill, started a career,got married, etc.).
Never thought I’d go back in, Took a look at a few roll over retirement plans and figured I’d bulk up on a retirement safety net plus I had one last shot as an Air Crew Dog.
How was I to know there would be 3 fucking wars????
My point being that politicians utilize a tragedy and “cherry pick” their issues such as this without really caring. It looks good on the boob-tube. If this had happened during the Reagan term (like the Beirut total fuck -up that I forgot to include – I get pissed every time I think about how that old fool got off easy) and Gowdy HAD been a congressman then, the pale faced dude would not even sneeze over it.
Belated Veterans Day salute to you and all posters on FITS who are veterans. Sometimes you and I disagree but we have one vital thing in common.
Welcome back home BTW.
I’m still in the box, 152 and a wake up (not that I’m counting). Not much else to do after the duty day other than PT and trash talking on FITS.
I’m not sure which makes me question your sanity more – jumping out of “perfectly good airplanes” – or staying in them…
As a graduate of “Recondo” school (October 1972/Roster#549) I scoff at “sanity”
Been on both sides of the fence, jumping out of C-130’s,C-141’s,Caribou (C-7 I think…) & UH-!H’s. Flew on C-130’s for 17 years watching ’em get big-eyed just before they jumped out the door. Guess I did the same……
When I was a paratrooper, I didn’t see/realize that the few minutes we stood in the door was a result of the Loadmasters spending 2-3 hours rigging up the plane. All I thought they did was open the fucking paratroop doors & kick out the jump platform.
Miss flying/crewing every damn day……….I can’t believe I got payed to do it.
Take it easy over there and stay safe. I wouldn’t trust a fucking one of those bastards. In ’02 Afghanistan was the “Wild West” no real rules to speak of. 03-04 was kind of hairy for C-130 crews in Iraq, 05 not so bad.
Best to you and the men & women in harm’s way. If your family needs help with anything don’t hesitate to let me know. I know how hard it is on the family back home. Especially if they are Reserve/Guard families. The support structure of a military base is not there. People just don’t realize the isolation families of Reserve/Guard members have to endure..
it’s different now, they know we are on borrowed time. Just finished reading “The Great Gamble” concerning the Soviet Invasion. Damn good book. A lot of similarities concerning how to deal with the Afghans and the Soviet Pull-out. Flew into a lot of old Soviet airfields and flew over the whole country. Easy country to get mired up in.
Again best to you and the men & women serving over there and hurry home.
We had a saying when I was there in ’02: “If you’re asleep, you’re not there”!!!
And in the understatement of the day category, Afghanistan – “Easy country to get mired up in.”
Do you think the next guys who get the bright idea to invade Afghanistan will pay attention to the “successes” of Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Timur, the Mughal Empire, the Russian Tsars, the British Empire, the Soviet Union, and the US/NATO?
We have had more than a year of investigations and reports. Six different Congressional committees. More than 30 hearings and staff briefings. More than 25,000 pages of documents provided to Congress. An FBI investigation — including interviews with the surviving personnel just days after the attack, the transcripts of which have been provided to Congress. The bipartisan Accountability Review Board (ARB) investigation — which also had full access to all surviving personnel — and their classified and unclassified reports to Congress. Even the conservative Washington Times reported in June that there was no “stand down” ordered in regard to Benghazi. The Republican-led House Armed Services Oversight Committee — based on the testimony of the military and others actually involved — made an unusual public statement after a classified hearing and confirmed there was no “stand down.”
With all the other partisan accusations now crumbling, Republicans are trying to claim that the presence of the CIA and JSOC in Libya was somehow scandalous. The fact is that, as widely reported in the news at the time, the President signed a presidential finding authorizing — with oversight by Congressional Republicans and Democrats — support of the rebels in their successful effort to overthrow the Qaddafi dictatorship. President Reagan, if you recall, called Qaddafi — who has been linked to the terrorist deaths of hundreds of Americans — the “Mad Dog of the Mideast” and ordered multiple unsuccessful attempts to assassinate him.
The ARB has NOT interviewed all of the survivors – in fact they’re still issuing subpoenas and dealing with the administrations attempt to subvert them.
The ARB already presented their report — classified and unclassified versions — to Congress. They interviewed more than 100 people and had full access to the Benghazi survivors — just as the team of FBI investigators and lab technicians did at Ramstein Air Force Base just days after the attacks. The transcripts of these interviews were also provided to Congress. This was confirmed by the bipartisan leadership of the ARB, Ambassador Pickering, President George H.W. Bush’s U.N. envoy, and Gen. Mullen, the top U.S. general under President George W. Bush. “We had unfettered access to State Department personnel and documents. There were no limitations,” Mullen said. “We received the full cooperation of all witnesses and every State Department office. We interviewed everyone we thought it was necessary to interview. We operated independently and were given freedom to pursue the investigation as we deemed necessary.”Congress also has had direct contact with the survivors. Deputy CIA Director Mike Morell — along with CIA officers who were at the agency’s Benghazi base on the night of the attack — testified at a classified hearing before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence back in May.
So you’re saying that those calls for help by the security detail never happened?
So now the story is we didn’t have enough money to provide security? Where’s all the billions for the military going?
Hey Jackie – embassies fall under the Secretary of State budget line – the military falls under the DoD line. Generally, embassies treat us military types like doormen or wait staff. The Marines on the embassy staff are largely for show although they do have weapons/combat gear. The Military attaché’s serve one of two purposes (sometime both at the same time) they are either spies or their advocates with our allies. That makes them even bigger pariahs to the “Foggy Bottom” types.
Didn’t the Democratic Senate have to approve that too?
One of the most embarrassing moments in United States history with the flimsiest childish video excuse. But the dereliction of duty on the part of CoC is also the most frightening moment in US history. He was nowhere to be found, unaccounted for during the almost the entire crisis. But hey, he played spades with Reggie Love during the Ben Laden raid. Now we arm and fund and support Al Qaeda. We betray our enemies on the regular. Hilary Clinton will be forced to face her enormous failure in her campaign. IF we have a candidate running against her that will actually challenge her, instead of ‘standing down’ as Romney and Palin were forced to.
I wish this outrage by the Republicans over this issue was matched by the outrage over Bush and Cheney lying us into the Iraq War. I wish there were hearings scheduled over who lied, when they lied, and why they lied us into the Iraq War. You know, that thing that will cost us trillions of dollars. And thousands of US lives. And thousands and thousands of Iraqi civilians’ lives. Where is the outrage over that?
You’re like 11 years too late brah. Move on.
While I don’t totally disagree/agree with you, a lot of the current crop of Dems (including I believe Hillary! and Jean Kerre’) also voted to go ahead with that adventure. Plenty of liars all around.
So your defense is, “Well, look what this guy did?”
Great big ole fail for you.
Its not a matter of a defense. Its just pointing out the Fake News Channel’s and Republican’s selective assessment of what constitutes a scandal, and what we should all be outraged about. . If we are going to publicly investigate and assess blame for intelligence failures and attacks on US citizens lets at least do it on a First In First Out basis.
1. On Jan. 22, 2002, five policemen were killed and 16 people injured in the eastern Indian city of Calcutta when members of Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami attacked the U.S. consulate there. The state department had received warnings of anti-American activity by this group in the weeks leading up to the attack.
2. On June 14, 2002 a suicide Car-Bomb exploded outside the U.S. Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan. Twelve people died and 51 were seriously injured. The Taliban claimed responsibility. Two hired guards, a Marine, and five Pakistani staff members were among the injured in the attack that cam days after a visit by Donald Rumsfeld.
3. On Oct. 12, 2002 a string bombs exploded in Bali. The US consulate in Indonesia was attacked in conjunction with the ‘Bali bombings’. In total seven Americans and 202 non-Americans were killed.
4. On Feb. 28, 2003 Gunmen rode up on a motorbike to the U.S. consulate’s security checkpoints in Karachi, Pakistan and killed two Pakistani police officers. One gunman arrested by was found to have several rounds of ammunition prepared for what could have been a far more devastating attack.
5. On May 12, 2003 36 People including 9 Americans died when terrorists stormed U.S. state department compounds in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The State Department was warned of a potential strike against Americans days before the attack. Yet, somehow, gunmen managed to infiltrated the Al Hamra Oasis Village and two others killing resulting in the 36 deaths and leaving160 wounded.
6. On July 30, 2004 Islamist Attacked the U.S. Embassy in Tashkent, Uzbekistan.
Two Uzbek security guards died in the bombing. The Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan claimed responsibility of the bombing.
7. On Dec. 6, 2004 Five Staff and Four Security Guard died when gunman fought their way into the U.S. consulate Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
8. On March 2, 2006, the US Consulate in Karachi was attacked for a third time.
U.S. Diplomat David Foy was specifically targeted in the attack. He was one of four people killed.
9. On Sept. 12, 2006: Four terrorists stormed the U.S. compound in Damascus, Syria and fired on Syrian security officers guarding the U.S. embassy. Four Syrian guards charged with defending the compound were killed.
10. On March 18, 2008, a mortar was fired into U.S. Embassy in Sana’a, Yemen killing 19 people and injuring 16. This was the second attempt at a similar mortar attack on the embassy. The first one missed the embassy and hit a girls’ school next door.
11. On July 9, 2008, three Turkish policemen were killed when four gunman attacked the U.S. Consulate in Istanbul, Turkey.
12. On Sept. 17, 2008 16 People including 2 Americans were killed in yet another attack on the U.S. Embassy in Sana’a, Yemen.
And while we are at it can we finally get an official determination on why Ronald Reagan callously allowed those 200 Marines to be killed in Beirut.
Of those twelve listed, in which ones were the ambassodors killed? in which ones was there no US response after notification there was a problem? In which ones did the administration erroneeously blame a video for the attack?
You need to catch up. Even the conservative Washington Times reported in June that the Republican-led House Armed Services Oversight Committee found that there was no “stand down” in response to the Benghazi attacks.
And the link between the Benghazi attacks and the anti-Islam propaganda video — which had just been translated to Arabic and widely televised in the region — did not originate with the White House. Multiple intelligence reports, eyewitness reports, statements from Libyan officials and news reports — including interviews with the armed militants and unarmed protesters at the scene — had the already well-armed militants taking action in response to the regional unrest incited by the video.
The Obama Administration was very clear, despite these reports that have not been disproved, that it made no difference what their motives were: There was no excuse for the violence against our people. None.
You sir, are a DEMOCRATS.
Sorry. Facts are neither Democrattic or Republican.
although in this instance I might modify it a litle:
drop the personal
Your EXTREME partisan political thinking clouds your judgment terribly . . .
Hardly, I have no huge love for Republicans any more either. – just haven’t had time to come up with an acronym yet.
I am liking you the more you post . . . you have now redeemed yourself with me! :) Looking forward to the Republican acronym . . . please don’t disappoint! :)
Took a tour in the SOC to spell one of my battle captains:
They are to Republicans. Republicans don’t trust facts. Its better to just say what you believe and say its true. Romney said, “I won’t be dictated to by fact checkers.” For example, all of the “facts: the “Colonel” gave are based on what? An investigation by Faux News, Rush, Beck, or Drudge. Or is he relying on the press, he says are incompetent when they report facts he dose not like.
Republicans and teabaggers just make it up as they go along.
All of the “facts” I gave you are just that facts – you can delve into the “facts” for yourself or you can believe the BS spread by the spin meisters, the White House and Fitsnews readers.
I usually provide citations when refuting erroneous “facts” but I was being lazy last night and didn’t do it. Pick the item(s) where you think I wrong and I will provide you with ample information and citations to make up you own mind or if you’re feeling froggy feel free to (try) to refute any point I made.
I haven’t heard Rush or Beck in months – Drudge simply links other stories, many of which I read but few of which I place a lot of faith in own their on face. I watch far more Al Jazeera and BBC than I do Fox.
You can have your own opinion but you can’t have your own facts
You are repeating the LIE.
Show me something to prove your accusation! If you even can…
#1 – No terrorist penetrated the consulate and most Americans had already been ordered out
#2 – No Americans were killed and car bombs explode all over Pakistan all the time
#3 – Not accurate – the Americans were killed in a tourist area – the bomb caused almost no damage at the Embassy, among the dead were 88 Australians, 38 Indonesians, 27 Britons, 7 Americans and 6 Swedish citizens
#4 – See #2 – happens all the time over here
#5 – the majority of the dead, including 9 US Citizens, 7 Saudis, 4 Egyptians, 3 Filipinos, 2 Jordanians, 2 Brits, I Irishman, a Swiss and an Australian were killed in compounds leased by private businesses – not the Embassy. The Embassy had sent out warnings prior to the attack
#6 – 2 Embassies were attacked that day and no Embassy personnel were injured, perpetrators were either killed on site or caught and tried.
#7 – No Americans were killed, the perpetrators were caught and convicted
#8 – The Karachi Mission had actually been attacked 44 times in 50 years – David Foy failed to follow the prescribed security precautions and was killed by a car bomb with a NEW of 20 tons parked in the Marriott across the street. Foy was believed to be the target of the bomb, see #2
#9 – No US citizens were killed, damn shame about the Syrian security detail. Maybe next time they’ll shoot first.
#10 – No Americans were killed and half of the reported 19 dead were the attackers
#11 – 3 of the 6 killed were the attackers, no American were injured and in fact were unaware of the incident till well after it was over. The perpetrators were caught, tried and sentenced
#12 – The two Americans killed were outside the Embassy and were not associated with the Embassy, they’d married Yemenis and had come down to get visas – no embassy personnel were injured
You left off # 13 – September 11, 2012, US consulate in Benghazi Libya stormed, Ambassador captured, sodomized, dragged through the street and killed along with 3 other Embassy staff members. Attackers rifle the consulate then burn it. Nobody has been held responsible for it.
There have been 36 Embassy attack in the last 80 years – half of which occurred in between 1920 and 1999. 9 Occurred during Bush’s eight years.
A quarter of the 36 attacks have occurred during the 5 years of the President who said “I Would Like To Think That With My Election…You’re Starting To See Some Restoration Of America’s Standing In The World.” “I would like to think that with my election and the — the early decisions that we’ve made, that you’re starting to see some restoration of America’s standing in the world. And although as you know, I always mistrust polls, international polls seem to indicate that you’re seeing people more hopeful about America’s leadership.”
In regards to #13 posted by The Colonel, I encourage folks to Google “fake photo of Ambassador Stevens” and decide for yourself whether you believe the photo is real and whether Ambassador Stevens was sodomized and dragged through the streets. After doing a little bit of reading and researching, I do not believe a word of it.
Funny – I googled it and found multiple reputable locations touting the photo including one that had a slightly more difficult to fake video.
Here’s the NPAA’s take onthe photo(the National Press Photographers Association is the photo journalist professional organization):
They have no doubt the photo is legit.
Colonel – that is the NPPA’s take on the REAL photo – not the fake photo of Ambassador Stevens being sodomized and dragged naked . . . you just lost all of your credibility in my book.
I gave you the link to the only photo I know about.
I hope that did not happen to him – I really, truly do not think that the story is accurate – but am open to any new info – thanks.
Never happened. Stevens and Smith died from smoke inhalation in the fire set within the first 15 minutes of the attack. They were separated from the Diplomatic Services Security (DSS) force in the intense smoke and heat. Three response teams comprised of CIA Global Response Staff (GRS) paramilitary soldiers and Pentagon Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) commandos took part in the Benghazi rescue and evacuation operation. The first responded within 25 minutes, recovered Smith’s body and made multiple attempts to recover Stevens’ body.
Surviving personnel were evacuated to the CIA annex. While it would endanger them for the government to confirm, video shows a group of Western dressed Libyans — likely at the direction of US forces — specifically going to the safe haven, finding Stevens body, putting him in a car and bringing him directly to the Benghazi Medical Center.
For all the wild conspiracy theories, the reality is that Ambassador Stevens and Sean Smith would have been alive in the safe room awaiting rescue by our forces had there have been an oxygen tank in the safe room…
Disagree with your assessments that the ambassador would have been alive had he stayed in the building and that an “organized effort” moved the body.
No one knows where Ambassador Stevens body was from the last time he was seen alive about 2200 until his unidentified body is found sometime after 0200 (some reports indicate it was as late as 0400 when he was found at a local hospital).
Many, perhaps most Libyans are “…western dressed…”, particularly when hanging around riots – the only real traditional dress item routinely worn is a hijab by most women.
The entire Consulate was ransacked, the attack started around 2200 and the 6 man CIA “security force” from the annex didn’t arrive until for around 30 minutes they could not find Stevens but were able to locate Sean Smith, the IO who he had been hiding with Stevens. The team went back to the annex with all the Embassy folks they could find (the missing 30 employees of lore). The Main security team from Tripoli doesn’t arrive until 0130 and the annex is still under attack, the Consulate will not be cleared until well after day break.
A safe room would not have withstood a concerted effort by attackers armed with RPGs, explosives and heavy machine guns regardless of the “air supply” (Oxygen is highly flammable and toxic to humans by itself – it only amounts to 20% of the air we breathe by volume)
You know what they say about assuming…
There shouldn’t be this outrage over either one. They were both intelligence failures. Everyone believed that Sadam had weapons of mass destruction, and he admitted this himself, “I do not have weapons of mass destruction, but I will use them against you if I am attacked.” The American, English, French, and Germans all agreed that Iraq had WMDs. Yes the French agreed as too, they didn’t want to go to war but did in fact agree that Iraq had the weapons. This was an intelligence failure. Maybe not as WMDs turned up in Syria so maybe that’s where they were hiddem. So to the initial reports about the Bengazi attack were also based on an intelligence failure. As soon as the true story came out it was released. I’m no fan of Obama, but this is being blown out of proportion. Lets leave lying out of the discussion here, lying is deliberately telling false information when you know it’s false. That didn’t happen as we went to war with Iraq and it didn’t happen here either.
The tragedy is that then Sec. of State Clinton will likely become President H. Clinton.
Just curious FITS, what in your article is fact versus what you want to believe? It was truly a tragedy, but as long as there is a different set of rules for each administration (how many diplomats were killed during the excellent leadership of G W Bush that received any attention) we will continue do nothing as a country. If there were criminal acts by the Obama administration in Benghazi, then how do describe the actions created by the fantasies of Bush and Cheney, which has resulted in thousands of dead American soldiers.
The extremists (which includes you) are more concerned about forcing their warped and hypocritical idealogy and beliefs down the throats of the vast majority of Americans. You do this by gerrymandering districts, giving half-truths or lies about everything you don’t like and constantly force feeding the people with this BS. You are quick to label someone as UnAmerican becuase they don’t have the same beliefs as you.
You need to realize that this isn’t a game. This isn’t Carolina- Clemson or Auburn-Alabam football. This isn’t about winning or losing, this is about governing.
Your outrage is so 2002-2008. It’s now 2013. Move on.
Yes, that’s where he’s getting his talking points from. No thought…just regurgitation.
Twas the “nights” before the 2016 election and all through the “Fitsnews house” every creature was stirring, even the ears of the mice. Wil Folk’s Readers stockings were hung by the computers with care, In hopes that St TRUTH soon would be there.
The Democrats were nestled all snug in their beds, While visions of sugar-plums danced in Republican’s heads. And mamma Folks in her ‘kerchief, and Wil in his cap, Had just settled our brains for a long winter’s nap. When out in the office there arose such a clatter, Wil sprang from the bed to see what was the election matter.Away to the computer he flew like a flash, Tore away at his keyboard and threw up the Rand Paul email stash.
“We Came, We SAW…….and Hillary KILLED our Ambassador. ” the subject declared. A little grin began to appear just like that “Grinch-y” dear.
Slow day with the third wife, Newt Gingrinch?
Ah yes Grasshopper, many political moons have yet to show themselves once their pants are down. Wise Grasshopper knows that Family Values find peaceful muster once they realize Newt is supposed to be deceptive. A third wife is just as demanding as 72 virgins in Babylon. Take heed Grasshopper for a terrorist is active even on slow daze. Benghazi is proof that Secretary Hillary Clinton was in complete “haze”. Go now Grasshopper and reveal the Family Values identity.
I must be a blind as a old cliched Kung Fu reference, but keep trying to blow it up like shit like this hasn’t been going on for decades in the great land of political folly. Of recent note, 13 attacks under Bush went down without a peep. Fact is: if you put your ass in another country, your country may or may not be able to defend you. I snatched that fucking peable long time ago.
Can we charge Bush for killing our people in Iraq?
As you continue to spread misinformation about the Benghazi attacks long after the facts have painted a different picture, we are left to assume you are exploiting this tragedy for political purposes. For instance, there was no “video” feed that the President watched during the attacks. Two U.S. Predator drones were launched and — arriving after the attack that killed Ambassador Stevens and Sean Smith — provided overhead images used by the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) operators below to map out escape routes in the Benghazi rescue and evacuation operation that saved nearly 40 Americans.
Secondly, the facts are clear that statements claiming the President “refused to provide help,” are false and outrageous. The President was visiting wounded veterans at Walter Reed Medical Center in Bethesda when the attack unfolded. He was briefed by his National Security Advisor and then proceeded to meet with the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. They later testified that the President ordered the immediate deployment of all necessary forces and that White House was fully engaged with the Military Command Center for the duration of the attacks. A White House photo documented the President continuing to meet with members of the a National Security Council well into the evening. At 10 pm, the President conferred with Secretary Clinton who had just conferences with the CIA director and she had also been in direct contact with Gregory Hicks in Libya. By the time the President moved from the Oval Office to the White House Residence after midnight, the attacks were over and all surviving personnel — nearly 40 Americans — were being escorted to the airport by CIA Global Response Staff (GRS) paramilitary soldiers and Pentagon JSOC commandos, as well as February 17 Brigade forces, Libyan Shield fighters, and Libyan Military Intelligence soldiers who had responded in more than 50 vehicles.
Finally, you spread the partisan disinformation about the anti-Islam propaganda video — which had just been translated to Arabic and widely televised in the region — and the resulting widespread unrest throughout the Mideast.
The President, Secretary of State, Ambassador Rice and multiple Administration officials made one point crystal clear: It made no difference what motivated the attacking militants. There was no excuse for the violence against our people. None.
And, of course, intelligence and news reports were the foundation for the public statements from the Obama Administration. Ambassador Rice described the attack as being perpetrated by well-armed extremists. On September 16, 2012, Rice told Bob Schieffer on Face the Nation, “Whether they were al-Qaida affiliates, whether they were Libyan-based extremists or al-Qaida itself I think is one of the things we’ll have to determine.”
Bloomberg reported on October 12, 2012 that the intelligence was entirely consistent with the Administration accounts and they still stand as the most accurate assessment of the attacks:
“The senior intelligence official said the analysts’ judgment was based in part on monitoring of some of the Benghazi attackers, which showed they had been watching the Cairo protests live on television and talking about them before they assaulted the [outpost].”
“We believe the timing of the attack was influenced by events in Cairo,” the senior official said, reaffirming the Cairo-Benghazi link. He said that judgment is repeated in a new report prepared this week for the House intelligence committee.”
“Here’s how the senior official described the jumble of events in Benghazi that day: “The attackers were disorganized; some seemed more interested in looting. Some who claimed to have participated joined the attack as it began or after it was under way. There is no evidence of rehearsals, they never got into the safe room .?.?.never took any hostages, didn’t bring explosives to blow the safe room door, and didn’t use a car bomb to blow the gates.”
“It was a flash mob with weapons,” is how the senior official described the attackers. The mob included members of the Ansar al-Sharia militia, about four members of al-Qaeda in the Maghreb, and members of the Egypt-based Muhammad Jamal network, along with other unarmed looters.”
Not only has it long been disproven that the Administration was “lying” about or “covering up” the link between the attacks and the video protests, there was not even any motive for the Administration to do so. While the Administration could rightly take credit for getting bin Laden and decimating the core leadership of al Qaeda, the President never hung a “Mission Accomplished” banner in regard to the war on terror. In fact, President Obama did just the opposite when he addressed the American people on the night bin Laden was killed, reminding us that the work was not over and that the terrorists would continue to target Americans.
Again, the link between the Benghazi attacks and the anti-Islam propaganda video did not originate with the Obama Administration. The early news reports, including interviews with protesters and militants at the scene, described how the already well-armed members of the attacking militia were prompted to act after viewing on TV the protests in Cairo over the anti-Islam propaganda video:
— Washington Post: Stevens arrived Monday from the embassy in Tripoli. “A friend who spent Monday and Tuesday with him said Stevens held meetings with nongovernmental organizations and militia leaders on both days. When the friend dropped Stevens off at the consulate Tuesday afternoon, he said, nothing appeared to be amiss – beyond the protesters.”
“The first protesters had showed up around noon. Wanis al-Sharif, the deputy Libyan interior minister, said in an interview that the demonstrators were angered by a low-budget American film that portrayed the prophet Muhammad in a blasphemous manner. As the day wore on, Sharif said, the anger escalated and people with weapons infiltrated the crowd.”
“By late Tuesday evening,” heavily armed militants “joined protesters outside the consulate who were demonstrating against an American movie that they believed denigrated the prophet Muhammad. They said, `We are Muslims defending the prophet. We are defending Islam,’?” Libyan television journalist Firas Abdelhakim said in an interview.” (September 12, 2012)
— CNN quoted Libyan officials describing that “an “angry crowd” marched on the U.S. compound Tuesday, furious about an American-produced online film considered offensive to Muslims.” (September 12, 2012)
— The Daily Telegraph: One eyewitness told “how an armed group infiltrated the ordinary protesters and sounded a warning. They told those nearby to stay back, that they had guns.” (September 12, 2012)
— The New York Times: The Times, which had two journalists on the ground the night of the attack, also reported on demonstrators on the scene who were motivated by the anti-Islam film. “A group of armed assailants mixed with unarmed demonstrators gathered at the small compound that housed a temporary American diplomatic mission” in Benghazi. “Interviewed at the scene on Tuesday night, many attackers and those who backed them said they were determined to defend their faith from the video’s insults,” the Times reported. (September 12, 2012)
— AP reported that, “A lawyer passing by the scene said he saw the militants gathering around 20 youths from nearby to chant against the film. Within an hour or so, the assault began, guns blazing as the militants blasted into the compound.” “One of the Benghazi outpost’s private Libyan guards said masked militants grabbed him and beat him, one of them calling him “an infidel protecting infidels who insulted the prophet.” (October 27, 2012)
— CBS/AP reported that “Wanis al-Sharef, a Libyan Interior Ministry official in Benghazi, said the four Americans were killed when the angry mob, which gathered to protest a U.S.-made film that ridicules Islam’s Prophet Muhammad, fired guns and burned down the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.” (September 12, 2012)
— Reuters, which also had reporters in Benghazi, reported that “the attackers were part of a mob blaming America for a film they said insulted the Prophet Mohammad.” The article quoted 17-year-old Haman, who took part in the attack, as saying: “The protesters were running around the compound just looking for Americans, [and] they just wanted to find an American so they could catch one.” “Hamam said Ansar al-Sharia cars arrived at the start of the protest but left once fighting started.” (September 12, 2012)
— Reuters reporter on NPR: “Almost Everybody Here Believes That It Was A Reaction To The Movie.” NPR’s Morning Edition, the network interviewed Hadeel Al-Shalchi of Reuters, who “had been talking with authorities and protestors.” (September 13, 2012)
— Al Jazeera: Attackers Were Responding To News Of “American Movie Insulting The Prophet Mohammed.” Al Jazeera producer Suleiman El Dressi reported from Benghazi that “a group of people calling themselves as “Islamic law supporters” heard the news that there will be an American movie insulting the Prophet Mohammed. Once they heard this news they came out of their military garrison and they went into the street calling [unintelligible] to gather and go ahead and attack the American consulate in Benghazi.” (September 12, 2012)
— AP reported a day after the Benghazi attack, an unidentified Ansar al-Shariah spokesman said the militia was not involved “as an organization” — leaving open the possibility members were involved. He praised the attack as a popular “uprising” sparked by the anti-Islam film, further propagating the image of a mob attack against the [outpost]. (September 12, 2012)
— New York Times: “Libyans Who Witnessed the Assault And Know The Attackers Say They Cited The Video.” The New York Times reported having spoken with “fighters involved in the assault,” who told the paper “in interviews during the battle that they were moved to attack the mission by anger over a 14-minute, American-made video that depicted the Prophet Muhammad, Islam’s founder, as a villainous, homosexual and child-molesting buffoon.” “Interviewed at the scene on Tuesday night, many attackers and those who backed them said they were determined to defend their faith from the video’s insults,” the Times reported. “Their attack followed by just a few hours the storming of the compound surrounding the United States Embassy in Cairo by an unarmed mob protesting the same video.” (September 12, 2012 and October 16, 2012)
Where does one start other than someone needs a psychotherapist.
Pretty obvious where you start when the actual facts don’t support you phony scandal mongering: character assault instead of engaging in a civil debate on these important issues.
Nice try Jim, I didn’t support a phony anything, just noted that anyone copying and pasting as much as you may need some help expressing himself.
No, that is not what you just noted. You are telling me I need a psychotherapist instead of providing even one fact that contradicts my writing. This is a serious issue. Lives have been lost. And you seem content throwing out schoolyard attacks instead of having a serious fact-based discussion.
Your writings. SMH
— Washington Post: Stevens arrived Monday from the embassy in
Tripoli. “A friend who spent Monday and Tuesday with him said Stevens
held meetings with nongovernmental organizations and militia leaders on
both days. When the friend dropped Stevens off at the consulate Tuesday
afternoon, he said, nothing appeared to be amiss – beyond the
“The first protesters had showed up around noon. Wanis al-Sharif, the
deputy Libyan interior minister, said in an interview that the
demonstrators were angered by a low-budget American film that portrayed
the prophet Muhammad in a blasphemous manner. As the day wore on, Sharif
said, the anger escalated and people with weapons infiltrated the
“By late Tuesday evening,” heavily armed militants “joined protesters
outside the consulate who were demonstrating against an American movie
that they believed denigrated the prophet Muhammad. They said, `We are
Muslims defending the prophet. We are defending Islam,’?” Libyan
television journalist Firas Abdelhakim said in an interview.” (September
— CNN quoted Libyan officials describing that “an “angry crowd”
marched on the U.S. compound Tuesday, furious about an American-produced
online film considered offensive to Muslims.” (September 12, 2012)
— The Daily Telegraph: One eyewitness told “how an armed group
infiltrated the ordinary protesters and sounded a warning. They told
those nearby to stay back, that they had guns.” (September 12, 2012)
— The New York Times: The Times, which had two journalists on the
ground the night of the attack, also reported on demonstrators on the
scene who were motivated by the anti-Islam film. “A group of armed
assailants mixed with unarmed demonstrators gathered at the small
compound that housed a temporary American diplomatic mission” in
Benghazi. “Interviewed at the scene on Tuesday night, many attackers and
those who backed them said they were determined to defend their faith
from the video’s insults,” the Times reported. (September 12, 2012)
— AP reported that, “A lawyer passing by the scene said he saw the
militants gathering around 20 youths from nearby to chant against the
film. Within an hour or so, the assault began, guns blazing as the
militants blasted into the compound.” “One of the Benghazi outpost’s
private Libyan guards said masked militants grabbed him and beat him,
one of them calling him “an infidel protecting infidels who insulted the
prophet.” (October 27, 2012)
— CBS/AP reported that “Wanis al-Sharef, a Libyan Interior Ministry
official in Benghazi, said the four Americans were killed when the angry
mob, which gathered to protest a U.S.-made film that ridicules Islam’s
Prophet Muhammad, fired guns and burned down the U.S. consulate in
Benghazi.” (September 12, 2012)
— Reuters, which also had reporters in Benghazi, reported that “the
attackers were part of a mob blaming America for a film they said
insulted the Prophet Mohammad.” The article quoted 17-year-old Haman,
who took part in the attack, as saying: “The protesters were running
around the compound just looking for Americans, [and] they just wanted
to find an American so they could catch one.” “Hamam said Ansar
al-Sharia cars arrived at the start of the protest but left once
fighting started.” (September 12, 2012)
— Reuters reporter on NPR: “Almost Everybody Here Believes That It
Was A Reaction To The Movie.” NPR’s Morning Edition, the network
interviewed Hadeel Al-Shalchi of Reuters, who “had been talking with
authorities and protestors.” (September 13, 2012)
— Al Jazeera: Attackers Were Responding To News Of “American Movie
Insulting The Prophet Mohammed.” Al Jazeera producer Suleiman El Dressi
reported from Benghazi that “a group of people calling themselves as
“Islamic law supporters” heard the news that there will be an American
movie insulting the Prophet Mohammed. Once they heard this news they
came out of their military garrison and they went into the street
calling [unintelligible] to gather and go ahead and attack the American
consulate in Benghazi.” (September 12, 2012)
— AP reported a day after the Benghazi attack, an unidentified Ansar
al-Shariah spokesman said the militia was not involved “as an
organization” — leaving open the possibility members were involved. He
praised the attack as a popular “uprising” sparked by the anti-Islam
film, further propagating the image of a mob attack against the
[outpost]. (September 12, 2012)
— New York Times: “Libyans Who Witnessed the Assault And Know The
Attackers Say They Cited The Video.” The New York Times reported having
spoken with “fighters involved in the assault,” who told the paper “in
interviews during the battle that they were moved to attack the mission
by anger over a 14-minute, American-made video that depicted the Prophet
Muhammad, Islam’s founder, as a villainous, homosexual and
child-molesting buffoon.” “Interviewed at the scene on Tuesday night,
many attackers and those who backed them said they were determined to
defend their faith from the video’s insults,” the Times reported. “Their
attack followed by just a few hours the storming of the compound
surrounding the United States Embassy in Cairo by an unarmed mob
protesting the same video.” (September 12, 2012 and October 16, 2012)
Finally, you have posted some accurate information with news reports linking the Benghazi attacks to the anti-Islam propaganda video. Keep spreading the word!
LOL You need a therapist.
Where are the WMD?
White House Admits WMD Error
…just in case you missed it.
It was a video…you can keep your plan, period…WMDs…I did not have sex…and the list goes on and on and on and on.