Benghazi Declassified

[i'va biggen]

That will screw up the wingers day. Especially the part where Stevens rejected Ham's offer of security forces.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

That will screw up the wingers day. Especially the part where Stevens rejected Ham's offer of security forces.

July 9, 2012: Amb. Stevens sends a cable requesting continued help from military Site Security Team (SST) and State Dept. MSD (Mobile Security Deployment team) through mid-Sept. 2012, saying that benchmarks for a drawdown have not been met. The teams are not extended.

Early August: State Dept. removes the last of three 6-man State Dept. security teams and a 16-man military SST team from Libya.

August 2, 2012: Ambassador Stevens sends a cable to D.C. requesting "protective detail bodyguard postions" -- saying the added guards "will fill the vaccum of security personnel currently at post... who will be leaving with the next month and will not be replaced." He called "the security condition in Libya ... unpredictable, volatile and violent."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/benghazi...tack-unfolded/



One person familiar with the events said Stevens might have rejected the offers because there was an understanding within the State Department that officials in Libya ought not to request more security, in part because of concerns about the political fallout of seeking a larger military presence in a country that was still being touted as a foreign policy success.

“The embassy [Stevens] was told through back channels to not make direct requests for security,” an official familiar with the case, who agreed to discuss the case only anonymously because of the sensitivity of the subject, told McClatchy.



http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/05/14/191235/amb-stevens-twice-said-no-to-military.html

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

That will screw up the wingers day. Especially the part where Stevens rejected Ham's offer of security forces.

nah, the morons will come up with some sort of spin trying to cover their ass ...


oh wait !

[timpage]

It never changes and it doesn't make any difference what the facts are....they are bound and determined to quack about this until the cows come home. They think it's the best way to prevent Hillary from becoming President.

It's just like them repeating over and over again that Obama wasn't born in the US, that Obama isn't an American, that Obama was born in Kenya....and Obama didn't call the attack on Benghazi a terrorist act. He did. The very next day. And members of his administration labeled it as such repeatedly in the days following the event.

But, the whackjobs don't let little things like facts interfere with their distorted and bizarre view of the world....

>>>>> On September 12, the day after the attack that killed four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, Obama said in comments in the Rose Garden that he had learned about the attack on the consulate the night before.

"Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe," he said. "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done."




On September 13, at a campaign event in Las Vegas, Obama vowed to bring the killers to justice. He then added, "No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America."
Other administration officials, however, said in subsequent days that they were unaware of any credible intelligence suggesting that the attack had been planned in advance.
On September 13, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland, said authorities "are very cautious about drawing any conclusions with regard to who the perpetrators were, what their motivations were, (and) whether it was premeditated" until they had completed an investigation.
On September 16, Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, said, "We do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned."
On September 19, Matthew Olsen, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, told the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee that the ambassador and three other Americans "were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy."
White House spokesman Jay Carney sought to clear up any confusion on September 20.
"It is, I think, self-evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack. Our embassy was attacked violently, and the result was four deaths of American officials."
On September 25, on ABC's "The View," interviewer Joy Behar asked Obama about a remark made by his secretary of state. "I heard Hillary Clinton say it was an act of terrorism. Is it? What do you say?"
To that, Obama responded, "We're still doing an investigation. There's no doubt that (with) the kind of weapons that were used, the ongoing assault, that it wasn't just a mob action. We don't have all the information yet, so we're still gathering it. But what's clear is that around the world there's still a lot of threats out there." Obama added that "extremist militias" were suspected to have been involved.

Two days later, Carney responded bluntly to a question about why Obama had not labeled the incident a terrorist attack.
"I think you're misunderstanding something here," Carney said. "I'm the president's spokesman. When the head of the National Counterterrorism Center, Matt Olsen, in open testimony in Congress, answered a question by saying yes, by the definitions we go by -- this is me paraphrasing -- this was a terrorist attack -- I echoed that, because this president, this administration, everybody looks to the intelligence community for the assessments on this. And it has been since I said so, the president's position that this was a terrorist attack."

[Yssup Rider]

why the fuck do you fellas keep feeding these Benghazi broken record trolls?

[LexusLover]

So, it wasn't some folks pissed off about a video .... or were they texting? That'll get ya shot!!!!

[bambino]

What difference does it make now? Those poor Basterds are buried.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by timpage

It never changes and it doesn't make any difference what the facts are....they are bound and determined to quack about this until the cows come home. They think it's the best way to prevent Hillary from becoming President.

It's just like them repeating over and over again that Obama wasn't born in the US, that Obama isn't an American, that Obama was born in Kenya....and Obama didn't call the attack on Benghazi a terrorist act. He did. The very next day. And members of his administration labeled it as such repeatedly in the days following the event.

But, the whackjobs don't let little things like facts interfere with their distorted and bizarre view of the world....

>>>>> On September 12, the day after the attack that killed four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, Obama said in comments in the Rose Garden that he had learned about the attack on the consulate the night before.

"Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe," he said. "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done."

On September 13, at a campaign event in Las Vegas, Obama vowed to bring the killers to justice. He then added, "No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America."
Other administration officials, however, said in subsequent days that they were unaware of any credible intelligence suggesting that the attack had been planned in advance.

On September 13, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland, said authorities "are very cautious about drawing any conclusions with regard to who the perpetrators were, what their motivations were, (and) whether it was premeditated" until they had completed an investigation.

On September 16 [five days after the attack], Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, said, "We do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned."

And you left this part out Little Timmy-tard “Our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous – not a premeditated – response to what had transpired in Cairo,” Rice told me this morning on “This Week.”

“In Cairo, as you know, a few hours earlier, there was a violent protest that was undertaken in reaction to this very offensive video that was disseminated,” Rice said, referring to protests in Egypt Tuesday over a film that depicts the Prophet Muhammad as a fraud. ABC NEWS

On September 19 [a week after the attack], Matthew Olsen, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, told the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee that the ambassador and three other Americans "were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy."
White House spokesman Jay Carney sought to clear up any confusion on September 20.
"It is, I think, self-evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack. Our embassy was attacked violently, and the result was four deaths of American officials."

On September 25[two weeks after the attack: see the Washington Post article and Ramirez's cartoon below], on ABC's "The View," interviewer Joy Behar asked Obama about a remark made by his secretary of state. "I heard Hillary Clinton say it was an act of terrorism. Is it? What do you say?"

To that, Obama responded, "We're still doing an investigation. There's no doubt that (with) the kind of weapons that were used, the ongoing assault, that it wasn't just a mob action. We don't have all the information yet, so we're still gathering it. But what's clear is that around the world there's still a lot of threats out there." Obama added that "extremist militias" were suspected to have been involved.

Two days later, Carney responded bluntly to a question about why Obama had not labeled the incident a terrorist attack.
"I think you're misunderstanding something here," Carney said. "I'm the president's spokesman. When the head of the National Counterterrorism Center, Matt Olsen, in open testimony in Congress, answered a question by saying yes, by the definitions we go by -- this is me paraphrasing -- this was a terrorist attack -- I echoed that, because this president, this administration, everybody looks to the intelligence community for the assessments on this. And it has been since I said so, the president's position that this was a terrorist attack."

The Facts

Immediately after the attack, the president three times used the phrase “act of terror” in public statements:

“No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.”
— Obama, Rose Garden, Sept. 12

“We want to send a message all around the world — anybody who would do us harm: No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America.”
— Obama, campaign event in Las Vegas, Sept. 13

“I want people around the world to hear me: To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished. It will not dim the light of the values that we proudly present to the rest of the world. No act of violence shakes the resolve of the United States of America.”
— Obama, campaign event in Golden, Colo., Sept. 13

Here’s how we assessed those words back in October:

Note that in all three cases, the language is not as strong as Obama asserted in the debate. Obama declared that he said “that this was an act of terror.” But actually the president spoke in vague terms, usually wrapped in a patriotic fervor. One could presume he was speaking of the incident in Libya, but he did not affirmatively state that the American ambassador died because of an “act of terror.”

Some readers may think we are dancing on the head of pin here. The Fact Checker spent nine years as diplomatic correspondent for The Washington Post, and such nuances of phrasing are often very important. A president does not simply utter virtually the same phrase three times in two days about a major international incident without careful thought about the implications of each word.

The Fact Checker noted last week that this was an attack on what essentially was a secret CIA operation, which included rounding up weapons from the very people who may have attacked the facility.

Perhaps Obama, in his mind, thought this then was really “an act of war,” not a traditional terrorist attack, but he had not wanted to say that publicly. Or perhaps, as Republicans suggest, he did not want to spoil his campaign theme that terror groups such as al-Qaeda were on the run by conceding a terrorist attack had occurred on the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.

Whatever the reason, when given repeated opportunities to forthrightly declare this was an “act of terrorism,” the president ducked the question.

For instance, on Sept. 12, immediately after the Rose Garden statement the day after the attack, Obama sat down with Steve Kroft of 60 Minutes and acknowledged he purposely avoided the using the word “terrorism:”

KROFT: “Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word ‘terrorism’ in connection with the Libya attack.”

OBAMA: “Right.”

KROFT: “Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?”

OBAMA: “Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...31f9_blog.html









BTW, Little Timmy-tard, you still haven't cited where anyone in the intelligence field or the military reported on September 11 that the attack was prompted by a video.

Originally Posted by CJ7

nah, the morons will come up with some sort of spin trying to cover their ass ...


oh wait !

[JCM800]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

BTW, Little Timmy-tard, you still haven't cited where anyone in the intelligence field or the military reported on September 11 that the attack was prompted by a video.

trying out a new font IB? ...what happened to the other one?

well, new font ...but same dipshit.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by JCM800

trying out a new font IB? ...what happened to the other one?

well, new font ...but same dipshit.

Show where Little Timmy-tard cited an intelligence agent or military officer reported on 11-12 September that a video caused the attack in Benghazi, 1-800-JCM-DATO: the lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM's soiled breechclout.

BTW, 1-800-JCM-DATO: the lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM's soiled breechclout, that's not a new font, but your question shows how ignorant your non-observant ass is.

[JCM800]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

BTW, 1-800-JCM-DATO: the lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM's soiled breechclout, that's not a new font, but your question shows how ignorant your non-observant ass is.

back to the old font already I see ...well, that didn't last.

was it a one time trial or something?

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Show where Little Timmy-tard cited an intelligence agent or military officer reported on 11-12 September that a video caused the attack in Benghazi, 1-800-JCM-DATO: the lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM's soiled breechclout.

you mean you can't find it?

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by JCM800

back to the old font already I see ...well, that didn't last.

was it a one time trial or something?

If you're going to cover Little Timmy-tard's ass like the soiled breechclout you are, 1-800-JCM-DATO: the lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM's soiled breechclout, do it right and show where Little Timmy-tard cited an intelligence agent or military officer reported on 11-12 September that a video caused the attack in Benghazi.

[JCM800]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

If you're going to cover Little Timmy-tard's ass like the soiled breechclout you are, 1-800-JCM-DATO: the lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM's soiled breechclout, do it right and show where Little Timmy-tard cited an intelligence agent or military officer reported on 11-12 September that a video caused the attack in Benghazi.

are you saying that you need help finding it?

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by JCM800

are you saying that you need help finding it?

You're still flapping in the wind like the soiled breechclout you are, 1-800-JCM-DATO: the lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM's soiled breechclout, now show where Little Timmy-tard cited an intelligence agent or military officer reported on 11-12 September that a video caused the attack in Benghazi.

[JCM800]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

You're still flapping in the wind like the soiled breechclout you are, 1-800-JCM-DATO: the lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM's soiled breechclout, now show where Little Timmy-tard cited an intelligence agent or military officer reported on 11-12 September that a video caused the attack in Benghazi.

I might help you out, maybe ...but only if you ask me using that other font you were trying out earlier.