Starting to get ugly. Amazing what happens when the truth comes out.

Yep. Just in time for Ryan to use these developments to club Joe Biden like a baby seal. Bidens's strong suit is his formidable knowledge and experience in foreign relations, and now even that is a weapon for Romney/Ryan.

I'm not saying that the Libyan mess was forseeable and preventable. But the way it was handled by the Obama administration could not have been more bumbling or incompetent. It's pathetic, absolutely pathetic, and not suprising when yu elect a guy who is most famous for voting "present' 99% of the time as a state senator.

The State Department is now saying that they never believed that the attack was a response to the film. Yet there is video proof of administration officials saying that. What do they take us for, exactly? That's what you get when your state dept is headed by a liar (Hilary) who falsely claimed that snipers were firing her at an airport somewhere. I don't know how a politician is ever taken seriously after that. But this is what we elected, so it's what we deserve.

Not good timing for Obama.

Not to mention the administration spent 70K to publish tv ads in Pakistan apologizing for the video. The State Department now confesses that there never was a protest outside the embassy before the attack. Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, went on umpteen different talk shows suggesting, in fact, that the movie did provoke the attack. Wonder how the guy that made the movie feels now...OHHHHH BOY!

Not only was it foreseeable it was absolutely preventable .
This is a direct result of America's appease our enemy's foreign policy
Even Spence and Zimmy will be outraged
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

...the tail is waggin' the dog, man!

:smash::fury::smash:

That's what you get when your state dept is headed by a liar (Hilary) who falsely claimed that snipers were firing her at an airport somewhere.

LOL, I forgot about that episode. Ya gotta laugh that was way too funny but
sadly true to form.

So with Biden saying the Administration wasn't told they needed more
security at the Embassy in Bengazi,;) Obama should have attended more
than 50% of his daily security briefings and read less of them, especially leading up to the 9/11 anniversary.

Where does the buck stop? :huh:

So with Biden saying the Administration wasn't told they needed more
security at the Embassy in Bengazi,;) Obama should have attended more
than 50% of his daily security briefings and read less of them, especially leading up to the 9/11 anniversary.

Where does the buck stop? :huh:
Now you appear to just be making things up.

-spence

Now you appear to just be making things up.

-spence

You imply they make it up on their own.

http://www.oshonews.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Parrot1.jpg

You imply they make it up on their own.

http://www.oshonews.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Parrot1.jpg

Kind of like making up a video related protest that spiraled into an Embassy attack? I guess the congressional hearings are all a bunch of malarkey
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Kind of like making up a video related protest that spiraled into an Embassy attack? I guess the congressional hearings are all a bunch of malarkey
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Actually that is absolutely nothing like what I just posted or implied, but carry on.

Now you appear to just be making things up.

-spence

Spence, please enligten me.

Spence enligten .

now, there's an oxymoron...sorry, couldn't resist:)

this Administration can't be honest about anything, the arrogance, disdain and bitterness being displayed is stunning, the two debates illustrated perfectly who these people are, at the top an extraordiantily arrogant and detached man who feels it beneath him to have to explain himself and his sidekick... a disrespectful, possibly deranged lunatic who apparently missed his President's lecture on civil discourse:uhuh: I can't recall a Presidential Ticket quite like this one...the mask crafted in 2008 has completely come off

we can't look to this administration for honesty or integrity on anything and they completely fail the "transparency" bar that they set for themselves...time for them to go:)

The problem is clearly a youtube video.:rolleyes:

Spence, please enligten me.

I've never seen any reporting that indicates Biden or Obama were aware of any security requests. Even in the investigation it appears the issue never got past the State Department.

Additionally, it appears that the additional security that was requested was actually for Tripoli and not even at the embassy.

The size of the requests don't appear to have been large enough to have stopped the attack regardless.

An interesting element here that appears to be under reported is that the Libyan government doesn't want a big American footprint on their soil. They've prohibited the use of private contractors and the State employees have to rely on their private security teams and the Libyan military for protection.

Conflating the real situation with a talking point about Obama not attending briefings doesn't help either....

Because you're making it up.

-spence

and there you have it...the administration stance on just about every issue....we've evloved in 4 years from "Hope and Change"...to...."Everyone else is Lying...We're telling the Truth and Your are too Stupid to get it"....love it:uhuh:

and there you have it...the administration stance on just about every issue....
Well, that's what I heard from the investigation.

There's certainly a case to be made that our people in Libya felt they needed more protection, but that should be a policy discussion not a political one.

-spence

Now you appear to just be making things up.

-spence

Are you feeling OK Spence? Biden specifically said that "we weren't told" that anyone asked for extra security.

Someone is making things up Spence. As usual, it's you.

So with Biden saying the Administration wasn't told they needed more
security at the Embassy in Bengazi,;) Obama should have attended more
than 50% of his daily security briefings and read less of them, especially leading up to the 9/11 anniversary.

Where does the buck stop? :huh:

Spence, to answer your making things up complaint:
Did not "Giggles" say at the VP debate the Administration was not told of the need for more security?
Was it not confirmed by the White House that Obama only
attended 50% of his daily security briefings and read the others?

As President of the United States and Commander in Chief his FIRST duty is
to protect American citizens. He should have attended all the briefings to
listen, have input, and question. Security briefing meetings are meant for just that, not speed reading after the fact. How are you doing your most important job if you only show up to 1/2 of your meetings?
Your not.

Spence, you show up at 50% of your company meetings and then fail at your
job. Tell me, where would the buck stop?

May be a few things here you may not want to hear, but they were not made
up, or parroted, just my take on the whole situation.

What are your unbiased Canadian newspaper subscriptions saying about the matter. :huh: ;)

Pardon my ignorance but isn't the State Dept. part of the administration? If the State Dept. is this inept and if it's true that they aren't keeping the Pres. and VP in the loop on this kind of stuff whose fault is that exactly? And just exactly who is it that sets State Dept. policy with regard to embassy security anyway? Are we really supposed to believe the President has no say in these matters? Maybe he's too busy with his re-election to be bothered with such trivia.

Are you feeling OK Spence? Biden specifically said that "we weren't told" that anyone asked for extra security.

Someone is making things up Spence. As usual, it's you.
Read my post.

-spence

Spence, to answer your making things up complaint:
Did not "Giggles" say at the VP debate the Administration was not told of the need for more security?
The request was very specific, for an extension of a 16 person team based in Tripoli. My understanding is that the decision here is made at the deputy level, Clinton might not even have been aware of it.

I would assume that this would only go to the White House if it conflicted with already set policy or was deemed of grave importance. The request was denied as the policy was to continue to shift security to the Libyan government and limit US exposure.

People seem to be acting like Libya was going to blow up and Obama should have deployed a brigade of Marines.

That's really not the case. We're talking about a request for 16 people who wouldn't have been in a position to help defend the embassy staff even if they were approved.


Was it not confirmed by the White House that Obama only
attended 50% of his daily security briefings and read the others?
We've discussed this one to death. Obama has a different process than Bush did. That he's not always personally briefed doesn't mean he's now aware.

As President of the United States and Commander in Chief his FIRST duty is to protect American citizens. He should have attended all the briefings to listen, have input, and question. Security briefing meetings are meant for just that, not speed reading after the fact. How are you doing your most important job if you only show up to 1/2 of your meetings? Your not.

If the security issue never got beyond the deputies at State, how would having attended a briefing been any different than reading a brief?

The issue still wouldn't have been brought up and the same 4 Americans would have been killed.

-spence

I think a much more substantive topic is how does the US encourage democracy in Islamic countries without creating the same autocracies and monarchies that were a product of Cold War politics.

-spence

I've never seen any reporting that indicates Biden or Obama were aware of any security requests. Even in the investigation it appears the issue never got past the State Department.

Additionally, it appears that the additional security that was requested was actually for Tripoli and not even at the embassy.

The size of the requests don't appear to have been large enough to have stopped the attack regardless.

An interesting element here that appears to be under reported is that the Libyan government doesn't want a big American footprint on their soil. They've prohibited the use of private contractors and the State employees have to rely on their private security teams and the Libyan military for protection.

Conflating the real situation with a talking point about Obama not attending briefings doesn't help either....

Because you're making it up.

-spence

"I've never seen any reporting that indicates Biden or Obama were aware of any security requests. Even in the investigation it appears the issue never got past the State Department."

Spence, in the aftefrmath of Hurricane Katrina, remember how everyone blamed Bush for the slow federal response? Well, I bet none o fthe people at the Superdome called Bush personally. Yet somehow people felt justified in blaming Bush, and they were obviously correct to do so. The buck truly does stop with Obama/Biden.

Along the same lines, Obama wasn't with Seal Team 6 when they killed Bin Laden, but Obama likes to take credit for that.

You want to give Obama credit for every good thing that happens, and no blame for the bad things. Can't have it both ways.

Spence, in the aftefrmath of Hurricane Katrina, remember how everyone blamed Bush for the slow federal response? Well, I bet none o fthe people at the Superdome called Bush personally. Yet somehow people felt justified in blaming Bush, and they were obviously correct to do so. The buck truly does stop with Obama/Biden.
They blamed Bush because he personally appointed someone with zero direct experience to head FEMA. Heck of a job Brownie...

Along the same lines, Obama wasn't with Seal Team 6 when they killed Bin Laden, but Obama likes to take credit for that.
Big difference, Obama personally made the call and took accountability for the outcome good or bad.

You want to give Obama credit for every good thing that happens, and no blame for the bad things. Can't have it both ways.
One was a reactive situation, the other was a proactive situation. They are very different and complex in different ways.

-spence

They blamed Bush because he personally appointed someone with zero direct experience to head FEMA. Heck of a job Brownie...


Big difference, Obama personally made the call and took accountability for the outcome good or bad.


One was a reactive situation, the other was a proactive situation. They are very different and complex in different ways.

-spence

Keep moving those goalposts Spence, until it looks as though your man-crush has scored a goal.

If Bush is to be blamed for appointing Mr Brown to head FEMA, what do you say about Obama picking everyone's Krazy Unkle Joe as Vice President? Afetr repeatedly making an ass out of himself at the debate, you dismissed it as Biden being his bombastive self. Fine. When Palin put her foot in her mouth every day in 2008, did you so casually dismiss that as Palin being her folksy self? Or did you make the claim that her behavior made her unfit.

When Joe is an idiot, he's just being Joe. When Palin is an idiot, she's truly an idiot.

Unbelievable hypocrisy. You just keep those goalposts on a dolly so you can roll them wherever you need to.

Big difference, Obama personally made the call and took accountability for the outcome good or bad.

-spence

not exactly...


At the urging of Valerie Jarrett, President Barack Obama canceled the operation to kill Osama bin Laden on three separate occasions before finally approving the May 2, 2011 Navy SEAL mission, according to an explosive new book scheduled for release August 21.

In ”Leading From Behind: The Reluctant President and the Advisors Who Decide for Him,“ Richard Miniter writes that Obama canceled the “kill” mission in January 2011, again in February, and a third time in March. Obama’s close adviser Valerie Jarrett isn't that "General Jarrett?" :rotf2: persuaded him to hold off each time, according to the book.

Miniter, a two-time New York Times best-selling author, cites an unnamed source with Joint Special Operations Command who had direct knowledge of the operation and its planning.

Obama administration officials also said after the raid that the president had delayed giving the order to kill the arch-terrorist the day before the operation was carried out, in what turned out to be his fourth moment of indecision. At the time, the White House blamed the delay on unfavorable weather conditions near bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.

But when Miniter obtained that day’s weather reports from the U.S. Air Force Combat Meteorological Center, he said, they showed ideal conditions for the SEALs to carry out their orders.

.......................

Former U.S. Attorney Michael Mukasey told the Fox News Channel that the Navy SEAL mission to kill Osama bin Laden was preceded by “a highly lawyered memo” from CIA Director Leon Panetta — one designed to insulate President Barack Obama if the operation failed.


...................

we're talking about a guy that is shameless in taking credit for things that go right and whose three favorite words are I, Me and My....... and who is very quick to blame others when things go wrong or when he wants to deflect criticism...claiming that he "took accountability for the outcome good or bad"...is Joe Biden funny= comically sad and disturbing

not exactly...

From the author of a book that talks about how 24 is realistic. :rotf2:

Whats next? Dr Seuss for foreign policy advisor?

Spence, you show up at 50% of your company meetings and then fail at your
job. Tell me, where would the buck stop?

What are your unbiased Canadian newspaper subscriptions saying about the matter. :huh: ;)


Spence I love when you explain your points with the words,
"assume", "seem",and "my understanding", like those are facts. :)
However, you never seem to answer all the questions, like the ones above. :huh:

As Comander in Chief it's his job to be informed. Ignorance is no defense.

So another question, what is your "understanding", "assumption" or "seem to you" where the Buck should Stop. :huh:

Spence I love when you explain your points with the words,
"assume", "seem",and "my understanding", like those are facts. :)
However, you never seem to answer all the questions, like the ones above. :huh:
What didn't I answer?

As Comander in Chief it's his job to be informed. Ignorance is no defense.
POTUS doesn't know everything...you rely on the apparatus to inform based on priorities you've set.

We still have tens of thousands of troops deployed and here we're talking about 16 security agents.

So another question, what is your "understanding", "assumption" or "seem to you" where the Buck should Stop. :huh:

Ultimately the president gets to take credit or blame for just about anything regardless of their influence.

But the primary reason this is a big story has more to do with the election and far less to do with bigger policy.

-spence

From the author of a book that talks about how 24 is realistic. :rotf2:

Whats next? Dr Seuss for foreign policy advisor?

Even better is the text Scott pasted, it appears to assert that Obama's indecision led to many aborted attempts, then mentions the good weather on the last.

This would almost -- I mean if Obama wasn't such an idiotic fraudulent probably sleeps in a burka sort of guy -- suggest that there were reasons for possibly calling earlier attempts?

Seriously, is anyone thinking in this forum?

-spence

If Bush is to be blamed for appointing Mr Brown to head FEMA, what do you say about Obama picking everyone's Krazy Unkle Joe as Vice President? Afetr repeatedly making an ass out of himself at the debate, you dismissed it as Biden being his bombastive self. Fine. When Palin put her foot in her mouth every day in 2008, did you so casually dismiss that as Palin being her folksy self? Or did you make the claim that her behavior made her unfit.
Biden may have been over the top but he brought a lot of substance to the debate. Agree or disagree I can't see how anybody would assert he doesn't know his stuff.

Palin couldn't even name a newspaper she had recently read.

Your comparisons are nearing non sequitur calibre. I thought I told you, ScottW is NOT a good role model :hihi:

-spence

Seriously, is anyone thinking in this forum?

-spence

yes, which is why you've been struggling for weeks now with your various assertions, I don't believe that many are "thinking" that Obama would have taken any accountability for the Osama raid going badly or anything else going badly for that matter....this has been demonstrated repeatedly, and you would have repeated whatever story they came up with ad nauseum, that much we do know:)

is Valerie Jarrett a weatherman too?

yes, which is why you've been struggling for weeks now with your various assertions, I don't believe that many are "thinking" that Obama would have taken any accountability for the Osama raid going badly or anything else going badly for that matter....this has been demonstrated repeatedly, and you would have repeated whatever story they came up with ad nauseum, that much we do know:)
Had the Bin Laden raid gone awry, and it almost did, Obama wouldn't have been able to escape the $h!t storm.

And you know this.

-spence

They blamed Bush because he personally appointed someone with zero direct experience to head FEMA. Heck of a job Brownie...


Big difference, Obama personally made the call and took accountability for the outcome good or bad.


One was a reactive situation, the other was a proactive situation. They are very different and complex in different ways.

-spence

"One was a reactive situation, the other was a proactive situation."

I'm assuming you say Libya was a 'proactive situation'. And in that case, as usual, you are wrong on the facts. The state department (Obama's state dept) decided to pull 2 full security teams out of Libya (12 men each, I believe). The guy in charge of security at the embassy asked the state dept to reconsider, and he pointed to all the recent, documented cases of violence and threats. The state dept (Obama's state dept) was not convinced. You can make a very strong case that 4 superb Americans paid for that stupidity with their lives.

Then, the reaction. Five days afetr the attack, the state dept, the ambassador to the UN, and Jay Carney (Obama's press secretary) said there was no evidence it was anything other than a spontaneous outburst. So I guess Obama believes that protesting students typically carry RPGs, mortars, and mortar tubes in their backpacks?

Had the Bin Laden raid gone awry, and it almost did, Obama wouldn't have been able to escape the $h!t storm.

And you know this.

-spence

I wouldn't put ANYTHING past him, them or you :uhuh:

I'm assuming you say Libya was a 'proactive situation'. And in that case, as usual, you are wrong on the facts. The state department (Obama's state dept) decided to pull 2 full security teams out of Libya (12 men each, I believe). The guy in charge of security at the embassy asked the state dept to reconsider, and he pointed to all the recent, documented cases of violence and threats. The state dept (Obama's state dept) was not convinced. You can make a very strong case that 4 superb Americans paid for that stupidity with their lives.
No, the Embassy attack would be a reactive situation.

If you bothered to read my posts above I mentioned the restrictions on US security and the policy likely guiding the actions. We were trying to draw down a US presence, not maintain or escalate it.

If this was stupidity or not I'm not sure we know, but if so it would look like a mid-level deputy made a bad call.

Then, the reaction. Five days afetr the attack, the state dept, the ambassador to the UN, and Jay Carney (Obama's press secretary) said there was no evidence it was anything other than a spontaneous outburst. So I guess Obama believes that protesting students typically carry RPGs, mortars, and mortar tubes in their backpacks?

I'm not sure they really knew what the heck had happened to be honest. Look at how long it took the FBI to even get onsite. I do think they could have handled the messaging better early on, be less specific until the facts were more clear etc...

-spence

I wouldn't put ANYTHING past him, them or you :uhuh:
You've made a lot of posts today without any substance.

Because I'm a nice guy...I'm willing to accept less volume if you can improve your quality.

-spence

You've made a lot of posts today without any substance.

Because I'm a nice guy...I'm willing to accept less volume if you can improve your quality.

-spence

you keep proving my point...everyone else is stupid, lying or misinformed..you are always right...at least you think so:uhuh:

everyone else is stupid, lying or misinformed.. .

Are they?

-spence

Are they?

-spence

anyone that disagrees with you particular spin apparently ...you, of course, are very impressive...:)

anyone that disagrees with you particular spin apparently ...you, of course, are very impressive...:)

See, you could have saved up those last three posts and made just one good one.

-spence

Even better is the text Scott pasted, it appears to assert that Obama's indecision led to many aborted attempts, then mentions the good weather on the last.

This would almost -- I mean if Obama wasn't such an idiotic fraudulent probably sleeps in a burka sort of guy -- suggest that there were reasons for possibly calling earlier attempts?

Seriously, is anyone thinking in this forum?

-spence

Now now, its obvious that Obama is a horrible idiotic half muslim half swahili nazi sympathizer with aryan-chinese roots. I mean its not like tactical missions have a hundred advisors and a thousand ways to go wrong and run on probability of success.

What didn't I answer?




-spence

"What are your unbiased Canadian newspaper subscritions saying about the matter" ? :huh: :devil: :)

No, the Embassy attack would be a reactive situation.

If you bothered to read my posts above I mentioned the restrictions on US security and the policy likely guiding the actions. We were trying to draw down a US presence, not maintain or escalate it.

If this was stupidity or not I'm not sure we know, but if so it would look like a mid-level deputy made a bad call.



I'm not sure they really knew what the heck had happened to be honest. Look at how long it took the FBI to even get onsite. I do think they could have handled the messaging better early on, be less specific until the facts were more clear etc...

-spence

"We were trying to draw down a US presence, not maintain or escalate it."

We did not "try" to reduce the US presence, we did reduce the presence. The resukts speak for themselves, 4 dead.

Spence, do you really think that removing 24 security team members from an ebmassy is going to make these people like us more.

Peace through strength.

God, do you ever get one right, even by accident? Spence, when you have large numbers of armed people trying to kill diplomats, what's the benefit of pulling out the security, but leaving the diplomats behind?

I do think they could have handled the messaging better early on, be less specific until the facts were more clear etc... -spence

That's one of the more honest things you have posted here. But it's more than a one-time bungle. This administration has, time and time again, refused to label something as a "terrorist attack" when it is clearly just that.

Spence, I have been there, I have interrogated these people, and I have witnesses over 100 interogations. When Obama goes on TV and denies, for example, thatthe Ft Hood massacre was a terrorist attack, it makes him look weak and stupid in the eyes of the enemy. That emboldens them.

we've come a long way from Churchill's "we'll fight them on the beaches" speech...The peoblem is, this enemy is even more determined than the Nazis Churchill referred to, as the Nazis didn't have voluntary suicide bombers.

It's a weak, mixed message Spence. And that's exactly what you do not want to convey in a time of war. Hell, this administration won't even use the phrase 'war on terror', and there's no earthly reason to justify that. I hear liberals refer to the "so-called war on terror" all the time.

Why would anyone deny we are at war with terrororists? Why do liberals want to do that? Can you shed any light on that? We're not rounding up Muslims and putting them in refugee camps, Bush made that clear within hours of the 09/11 attacks.

I don't get it.

"What are your unbiased Canadian newspaper subscritions saying about the matter" ? :huh: :devil: :)

Don't usually read them but here's the first thing that came up from their biggest newspaper...

U.S. officials turned down requests for more security at Libya consulate - thestar.com (http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1268954--security-weak-at-libyan-embassy-where-ambassador-was-killed-u-s-military-source)

Seems pretty objective to me.

-spence

We did not "try" to reduce the US presence, we did reduce the presence. The resukts speak for themselves, 4 dead.

Spence, do you really think that removing 24 security team members from an ebmassy is going to make these people like us more.
A fine example of Monday morning quarterbacking if there ever was one.

God, do you ever get one right, even by accident? Spence, when you have large numbers of armed people trying to kill diplomats, what's the benefit of pulling out the security, but leaving the diplomats behind?

Well, that's not really what appears to have happened.

Here's a pretty interesting write up from the WP.

In Libya, security was lax before attack that killed U.S. ambassador, officials say - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/in-libya-security-was-lax-prior-to-deadly-attack/2012/09/29/a56ffca0-0992-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_story.html)

It appears the Benghazi building was nothing more than an outpost and not even hardened well like a formal embassy. Chris Stevens was personally pushing an American presence and had a lot of experience and contacts in the area which likely gave him a false sense of comfort. The guy would go running on the street with minimal security...

Libya is certainly still a dangerous place, but it's also fair to assume he's putting himself in harms way for what he believed in.

How many Americans are in similar positions all over the world? One would think there's probably quite a few. Diplomats to unfortunately fall victim to violence from time to time.

But Benghazi happened right before the election...

-spence

A fine example of Monday morning quarterbacking if there ever was one.



Well, that's not really what appears to have happened.

Here's a pretty interesting write up from the WP.

In Libya, security was lax before attack that killed U.S. ambassador, officials say - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/in-libya-security-was-lax-prior-to-deadly-attack/2012/09/29/a56ffca0-0992-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_story.html)

It appears the Benghazi building was nothing more than an outpost and not even hardened well like a formal embassy. Chris Stevens was personally pushing an American presence and had a lot of experience and contacts in the area which likely gave him a false sense of comfort. The guy would go running on the street with minimal security...

Libya is certainly still a dangerous place, but it's also fair to assume he's putting himself in harms way for what he believed in.

How many Americans are in similar positions all over the world? One would think there's probably quite a few. Diplomats to unfortunately fall victim to violence from time to time.

But Benghazi happened right before the election...

-spence

"A fine example of Monday morning quarterbacking if there ever was one."

You're so thoughtless. Spence, the head of embassy security in the region, cited dozens of threats and acts of violence against westerners, in the weeks leading up to 09/11/12. That's precisely why he said that those teams needed to remain in place.

"which likely gave him a false sense of comfort"

OK. Sp a lefty rag can no read the mind of a deam ambassador, and even worse, they're saying that the ambassador, and not the incompetent ass that you are in love with, is to blame. That's just great.

"it's also fair to assume he's putting himself in harms way for what he believed in."

Correct. And precisely because he puts himself in harm's way, the Obama administration has the responsibility of not placing him in unnecessary danger. The guy who knows more about this than anyone at the Washington Post, is the head of security who begged for for more security. I guess he is just a Muslim-bashing knuckle-draggingm war monger?

"Diplomats to unfortunately fall victim to violence from time to time"

And that's why they deserve to have security apparatus that's at least equal to (if not overwhelmingly superior to) any credible threat.

You liberal kooks just don't get the notion of 'responsibility', it's just not in your vernacular.

That you would suggest that Stevens recklessly contributed to his own death is beyond repugnant. I almost typed that 'you're better than that', but you're not. You have no shame, there is no level to which you will not sink to protect your true love.

Nothing you say, nothing, passes the common sense test.

A fine example of Monday morning quarterbacking if there ever was one.


It appears the Benghazi building was nothing more than an outpost and not even hardened well like a formal embassy. Chris Stevens was personally pushing an American presence and had a lot of experience and contacts in the area which likely gave him a false sense of comfort. The guy would go running on the street with minimal security...

Libya is certainly still a dangerous place, but it's also fair to assume he's putting himself in harms way for what he believed in.

How many Americans are in similar positions all over the world? One would think there's probably quite a few. Diplomats to unfortunately fall victim to violence from time to time.not since Carter, what a coincidence :confused:


U.S. diplomats killed abroad - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-diplomats-killed-abroad/2012/09/12/5e32fe58-fd41-11e1-8adc-499661afe377_graphic.html)


-spence

that's interesting, charge Monday Morning Quarter Backing and then proceed to blame the dead guy....how low can you go?:uhuh:

Denying the Libya Scandal - National Review Online (http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/330318)

I'm listening to political talk radio in the truck today (as I do most every day) they are saying Bill Clinton is pissed about this situation possibly being dumped on Hillary as a scapegoat and Bill is lining up legal representation.

I'm listening to political talk radio in the truck today (as I do most every day) they are saying Bill Clinton is pissed about this situation possibly being dumped on Hillary as a scapegoat and Bill is lining up legal representation.

you had to expect this showdown eventually on some matter...should be fantastic...Obama throws everyone under the bus, Clinton's had to figure they'd get run over at some point:uhuh:

went across the pond for this...contracting out the security of our Ambassadors to foreign private firms...wow?...at a time when a "terrorist attack on US consulate in Benghazi was 'a matter of time'"

double WOW

British firm secured Benghazi consulate contract with little experience - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/9607958/British-firm-secured-Benghazi-consulate-contract-with-little-experience.html)

Congress told terrorist attack on US consulate in Benghazi was 'a matter of time' - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/9600305/Congress-told-terrorist-attack-on-US-consulate-in-Benghazi-was-a-matter-of-time.html)\


I was just reading a story indicating that the intelligence community and State have, for sometime, been very frustrated with the Administration and their lack of focus and interest in these matters, the continued veto of previous attempts on OBL by Obama via Valerie Jarrett caused Panetta to assume authority and move ahead in that matter, bringing in O at the last possible moment having penned a legal out for the Pres., leaving him out of the loop , which was why he was dragged off the golf course suddenly and sat off to the side in a chair looking like a kid that had tagged along as the adults(even Biden) sat at the table in the situation room in that now infamous picture... of course he's been spiking the golf club ever since which is par for the course, pardon the puns....guess it's possible that he was completely unaware of what was going on and probably "focused like a laser" on that Nickelodeon interview

that's interesting, charge Monday Morning Quarter Backing and then proceed to blame the dead guy....how low can you go?:uhuh:

Denying the Libya Scandal - National Review Online (http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/330318)

God damn right. Not only is the paper (and Spence) blaming the dead guy, they are doing it in a way that necessarily means they can read his mind. And conveniently, their explanation (blaming the dead guy) absolves Obama of any responsibility.

It's repugnant.

Don't usually read them but here's the first thing that came up from their biggest newspaper...

U.S. officials turned down requests for more security at Libya consulate - thestar.com (http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1268954--security-weak-at-libyan-embassy-where-ambassador-was-killed-u-s-military-source)

Seems pretty objective to me.

-spence

I agree Spence, it "seems" :D objective.

... of course he's been spiking the golf club ever since which is par for the course,

He only played 100 rounds of golf in his first 3 and1/2 years. :(

Maybe his morning T time interfered with Intel Meetings. :huh:

Nobody is blaming Stevens, but his apparent comfort with the situation is certainly an important piece of information in what appears to be a complex situation.

Now Rep. Issa is calling for increased security after the House slashed the overall budget. I wonder if that's part of his investigation? Romney I'll remind you jumped to blame the Administration for Egypt before he even had his facts right.

These guys are chomping at the bit to paint this as Obama's 9/11.

Shameful.

-spence

Nobody is blaming Stevens, but his apparent comfort with the situation is certainly an important piece of information in what appears to be a complex situation.

Now Rep. Issa is calling for increased security after the House slashed the overall budget. I wonder if that's part of his investigation? Romney I'll remind you jumped to blame the Administration for Egypt before he even had his facts right.

These guys are chomping at the bit to paint this as Obama's 9/11.

Shameful.

-spence

It is, and should be, Obama's 09/11.

Bush got blamed for the subprime mortgage crisis, and though he never personally bought a house he couldn't afford, nor did he invent the fishy derivitives that leveraged all the worthless paper. But he gets the blame, and to some extent at least, that's fair. Because the buck stops with him.

Your hero would do well to remember that.

Biden said "we" weren't told about requests for increased security. Not true.

The US Ambassador to the UN said on 5 (five!) Sunday morning shows that there was no evidence to suggest this was anything to other than a spontaneous demonstratuion against the video. Tha's absolutely, 100% not true.

Here are the facts...there was violence and threats against Western agencies in the weeks leading up to the attack. Against the wishes of the man in charge of security in that region, security was reduced. there was no demonstration at the embassy preceding the attack. There was no demonstration, none whatsoever, at the embassy preceding the attack.

Ther feds (of which Obama is the head) blew the obvious need for heightened security. They continued to say it was a reaction to the video LONG after no one could possibly believe that.

And Biden says at the debate that we'll know when Iran is close to getting a nuke? For a week, this administration clung to the false story that there was an anti-video protest at the embassy that spurred the attack. They stuck to that story long after everyone knew it was garbage. So now, how are they now so skilled that they know exactly what's happening behind closed doors in Iran?

Biden specifically said it was our intelligence officials who believed the attack was a spontaneous protest over the video. If our intelligence officials believed that long afetr everyone else knew it was a lie, then why should I trust those same intelligence officials to know what's hapening behind closed doors in Iran?

This absolutely will be his 09/11, with a big difference. Bush came out of 09/11 looking very favorably to most Americans. In this case, Americans are waking up to the fact that the Obama administration was either incredibly ignorant, or willfully dishinest. There is no third option. And neither option is acceptable.

Keep shifting blame to the dead guy Spence.

"an important piece of information in what appears to be a complex situation. "

OK. So because Obama appears to have made an ass out of himself, it must be that there's more to this than we can grasp. It can't be that he just blew it.

Nobody is blaming Stevens, but his apparent comfort with the situation is certainly an important piece of information in what appears to be a complex situation.

-spence

yup..."apparent comfort"....right

According to one of the key witnesses expected to testify before the committee this week, even Ambassador Stevens himself had repeatedly requested more security personnel, but was turned down.


Lt. Col. Andy Wood, the former head of a U.S. Special Forces "Site Security Team" in Libya, has told CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson that he and many other senior staff at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, "felt we needed more, not less" security personnel in the country, but were told "to do with less. For what reasons, I don't know."


Wood and others have portrayed a State Department in Washington that was either unwilling to provide American officials in Libya with the security they required or ignorant of the pressing security concerns in a country where the central government is weak, and Islamic extremist militias have enjoyed virtual free reign in the power vacuum created by the toppling and killing of long-time dictator Muammar Qaddafi.


Top U.S. counterterrorism adviser John Brennan in Libya amid questions over security missteps - CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57528567/top-u.s-counterterrorism-adviser-john-brennan-in-libya-amid-questions-over-security-missteps/)

According to one of the key witnesses expected to testify before the committee this week, even Ambassador Stevens himself had repeatedly requested more security personnel, but was turned down.

Yes, stationed in Tripoli. But we're also talking about a small number of agents.

Everything I've read indicates the security situation was due to sectarian violence, not violence directed specifically at the US or Jim's large number of armed terrorists out to kill diplomats.

You guys will say anything if it makes Obama look bad, you're like MoveOn on steroids.

-spence

Everything I've read indicates the security situation was due ....
You guys will say anything if it makes Obama look bad, you're like MoveOn on steroids.

-spence

I'm starting to believe that you don't actually read a whole lot and what you do read isn't all that informative :uhuh:

Obama doesn't need help from us...he's doing a fine job doing a terrible job and looking really bad in doing so :)

is MoveOn trying to make Obama look bad?

Remember, 3-4 want-to-posts for every real post.

-spence

Everything I've read indicates the security situation was due to sectarian violence, not violence directed specifically at the US or Jim's large number of armed terrorists out to kill diplomats.


-spence

Pants On Fire: Obama Scrambles For Cover As Benghazi Lie Explodes - Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/10/14/pants-on-fire-obama-scrambles-for-cover-as-benghazi-lie-explodes/)


In addition to absolutely no evidence that the attack was connected to any objectionable video, information released in a letter from Representative Darrell Issa to Secretary of State Clinton shows that the situation in Libya had been deteriorating for months. It reads: “Based on information provided to the committee by individuals with direct knowledge of events in Libya, the attack that claimed the ambassador’s life was the latest in a long line of attacks on Western diplomats and officials in Libya in the months leading up to September 11, 2012.”

Those attacks began in April when two Libyans threw an improvised explosive device into the consulate compound. In June, postings on a pro-Gaddafi Facebook page encouraged Libyans to attack Ambassador Stevens during one of his early morning runs around Tripoli. And in the weeks leading up to September 11th, Libyan guards were being warned by their family members to quit their consulate jobs because of rumors about an impending attack. These are but a few of the escalating series of incidents. There were also carjackings, shoot-outs, and even a rocket-propelled grenade being shot at a convoy carrying the British ambassador.

Yes, stationed in Tripoli. But we're also talking about a small number of agents.

Everything I've read indicates the security situation was due to sectarian violence, not violence directed specifically at the US or Jim's large number of armed terrorists out to kill diplomats.

You guys will say anything if it makes Obama look bad, you're like MoveOn on steroids.

-spence

Spence, you said Stevens had a false sense of security. That's your opinion. The fact is, he requested more personal security.

Wrong. For example, I have repeatedly given him kudos for using drone strikes to kill terrorists. I am fair. You are the biased one, who will say anything (even blaming an assassinated anbassador) to deflect any criticismof Obama.

Hillary just came out and is taking 100% of the blame for this.....great timing the night before the debate, not sure it will help much...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Hillary just came out and is taking 100% of the blame for this.....great timing the night before the debate, not sure it will help much...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

as she should, it will be interesting to see if there are any consequences for her failure or if, as politicians often do, "pro"claiming to take responsibility for something and then assume "that is that"...move along... she's just made the man who blames everyone else for whatever is wrong appear even smaller if that were even possible, there's still the little issue of all of the intentional misinformation in the aftermath, that falls on the White House and is other part of this entire mess.... maybe Valerie Jarrett(since she appears to make all of the decisions up there) will take
"100% repsonsiblity" for that one, should help with the female vote:)

OUCH!!!
Poll: Romney, narrows gap with women, leads Obama in the swing states (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2012/10/15/swing-states-poll-women-voters-romney-obama/1634791/)

I disagree with Hillary on many things but I respect her, she has far more courage, devotion and integrity than her boss :uhuh: probably would have made a better President..


double OUCH!!! forboding:uhuh:

I missed this one from a while back.but e'splains a alot..

"Well, four years have passed and Obama has adroitly steered the bankrupted United States he inherited away from the precipice but has not provided a “different future” worthy of the hope invested in him; and that imagined team of rivals became a team, or rather a coterie, of idolizers.

There is only one star in the galaxy at this White House and his name is Barack Obama. Everyone in the Sun King’s court has drunk the Kool-Aid.

The Obama inner circle remains a group of tough political tacticians: David Axelrod, David Plouffe and Valerie Jarrett. The White House national security team does not boast a single name of strategic stature. Anyone outside Washington would be hard pressed to name one.

The policy upshot has been predictable: cerebral, cool, and with one big exception, cautious. Obama has corrected big mistakes — abandoning the unwinnable global war on terror and pulling out of Iraq. To his immense credit he took a big gamble on killing Osama Bin Laden. But elsewhere he has been cautious to a fault, eyeing the political calendar.



But the president’s semper wary political operatives, focused on votes, may well calculate otherwise."

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/28/opinion/roger-cohen-obamas-team-of-idolizers.html

In addition to absolutely no evidence that the attack was connected to any objectionable video

I believe this is factually incorrect as there was initial reporting, with interviews of the attackers, that indicated the video was a reason for the attack.

It's just one of the many mistakes in the OPINION piece you're referencing as a credible source.

Perhaps the largest is the flagrant use of al Qaeda to construct a narrative based on GOP talking points. I don't believe there is any evidence yet that this attack was planned or supported directly by al Qaeda in any material way.

The danger here is substantial. By exploiting this event for partisan gain the GOP risks undermining US security by attributing rock star status to a local militia.

-spence

update...forboding and prescient :uhuh:

if you read the NYT article it ends with reference to John Kael Weston, a former State Department officer imploring the President to present the Presidential Unit Citation during a ceremony held in honor of 2nd MEB, Sept. 14.

“Next month, Marines will gather at Camp Lejeune, N.C., to receive the PUC award. Secretary of the Navy Mabus is set to present it. While an honor, I know Marines hope you opt not to delegate the day’s special gathering to someone else. I feel the same way given ongoing Marine and troop sacrifice in Afghanistan.”

Weston added: “Please pardon my bluntness: I believe it is simply the right thing to do.”

and Roger Cohen suggesting that he ought to attend but wondering if political calculations might dictate otherwise...

"Obama needed more people in the Situation Room saying, “Please pardon my bluntness.” Having sent the Marines in (and concluded a Camp Lejeune speech in 2009 with “Semper Fi”) he should indeed present the award himself."


I guess he wondered right...I can't find any evidence that he attended

Secretary of the Navy awards 2nd MEB with Presidential Unit Citation > II Marine Expeditionary Force > News Article (http://www.iimef.marines.mil/News/NewsArticle/tabid/472/Article/101985/secretary-of-the-navy-awards-2nd-meb-with-presidential-unit-citation.aspx)

maybe it conflicted with Letterman or Nickolodeon or that guy in the Pirate Suit, The VIEW, Beyonce or JayZ....so many things to do...so little time :uhuh:

I believe this is factually incorrect as there was initial reporting, with interviews of the attackers, that indicated the video was a reason for the attack.

It's just one of the many mistakes in the OPINION piece you're referencing as a credible source.

Perhaps the largest is the flagrant use of al Qaeda to construct a narrative based on GOP talking points. I don't believe there is any evidence yet that this attack was planned or supported directly by al Qaeda in any material way.

The danger here is substantial. By exploiting this event for partisan gain the GOP risks undermining US security by attributing rock star status to a local militia.

-spence

haaaa.haaa.haaaa

"I believe"...of course you do:uhuh:
" I don't believe"....of course you don't :uhuh:

"Everyone in the Sun King’s court has drunk the Kool-Aid."

The danger here is substantial. By exploiting this event for partisan gain the GOP risks undermining US security by attributing rock star status to a local militia.

-spence

pfffft....Lybia is "a tiny country"....:uhuh:

pfffft....Lybia is "a tiny country"....:uhuh:

It's a pattern of behavior that eclipses Libya. It's political and irresponsible...

-spence

It's a pattern of behavior that eclipses Libya. It's political and irresponsible...

-spence

you are hilarious :spin:

OUCH!!!
Poll: Romney, narrows gap with women, leads Obama in the swing states (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2012/10/15/swing-states-poll-women-voters-romney-obama/1634791/)



First established poll I've seen that has Romney ahead, on an aggregate basis, in the swing states. Romney up 4 among likely voters, in a Gallup poll, is very significant. One thing is for sure, Romney is 'peaking' at the right time.

First established poll I've seen that has Romney ahead, on an aggregate basis, in the swing states. Romney up 4 among likely voters, in a Gallup poll, is very significant. One thing is for sure, Romney is 'peaking' at the right time.

He could be...I'm sure not sure an aggregate swing state poll means all that much unless it's weighted for OH and FL.

Once again Ohio is going to be the key, it's why the Boss is out and Paul Ryan is pretending to wash clean dishes..

Charity president unhappy about Paul Ryan soup kitchen ‘photo op’ (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/10/15/charity-president-unhappy-about-paul-ryan-soup-kitchen-photo-op/)

Seriously :biglaugh:

-spence

I think if Romney does well tonight he takes the election, if not the momentum is lost and it will be dog fight to the end.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think if Romney does well tonight he takes the election, if not the momentum is lost and it will be dog fight to the end.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Regression towards the mean...

Last debate Romney over performed and Obama under performed. If I was to wager I'd say tonight will be somewhat even.

Contrary to the evil liberal bias we keep hearing about, the media seems have loved the Romney resurgence story.

-spence

Regression towards the mean...

Last debate Romney over performed and Obama under performed. If I was to wager I'd say tonight will be somewhat even.

Contrary to the evil liberal bias we keep hearing about, the media seems have loved the Romney resurgence story.

-spence

Yes they do!!
I hardly hear any talk about Libya :)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Contrary to the evil liberal bias we keep hearing about, the media seems have loved the Romney resurgence story.
-spence

Or maybe they saw it like it was, Romney kicked Obamas ass in the first debate. If Obama won, could you imagine how over the top that "evil liberal bias" media would be..........
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes they do!!
I hardly hear any talk about Libya :)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Turn on the TV.

-spence

Turn on the TV.

-spence

I did....it's all Hillary:rotf2: The most brilliant person in the administration and she just proved it:rotf2:

I did....it's all Hillary:rotf2: The most brilliant person in the administration and she just proved it:rotf2:

I'm surprised they waited this long to get her out.

You're looking at the 2016 POTUS don't you know :hihi:

-spence

Even today she would be a more viable candidate for her party than the incumbant.

Even today she would be a more viable candidate for her party than the incumbant.

Yes she would be and she was in 2008

I'm surprised they waited this long to get her out.

You're looking at the 2016 POTUS don't you know :hihi:

-spence

Put her boss in a no win situation too
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device