More relevations on Libya
 

A week after the attack, Ambassador Rice went on 5 Sunday talkshows, andsaid there was no evidence that this was anything other than a spontaneous protest to a movie.

We now know that hours after the attack, a known terroriet group claimed responsibility, and we know that the administration was aware of that claim.

Libya Attack Emails: White House Told Of Militant Claim 2 Hours After Benghazi attack

Likely conclusion: the Obama administration knew they screwed up by denying Stevens the security he asked for (and provided lots of supporting evidence for why he needed it). Rather than admit their mistake (which Obama is not known for doing), they concocted a story to make it look like this was something other than what it was, in the hopes that it would make them look less incompetent.

Hope and change.

Ouch...like a Blue Dress.....:uhuh:....gotta feeling Clinton's responsible for this one too

He just kinda flip flopped a bit :)
First he called it a terrorist attack them he blamed the movie for 2 weeks and now he claims all along he called it a terrorist attack ( pay no mind to Joe, he's a dope)
I think I have this right ... Spence? Spence?...Spence?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

wow the CIA covered something up to save face instead of owning up to the truth. thats never happened before

Now, now, we can't jump to conclusions here even if there was a live
feed and e mails back to the White House during the attack. We need
to believe VP Joe telling the American people on live TV that he and
Obama were not aware of what was going on at the time.

They just need more time to investigate to be sure they weren't just
hearing or seeing things at the time, at least until Nov 7th.

oh oh....

Emails detail unfolding Benghazi attack on Sept. 11 - CBS News

There will be another shoe to drop on this if Huffington is reporting something unfavorable to the left. There has to be word coming that Romney paid the Libyan group with Chinese money to carry it out.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Stanger things have happened. :hihi:
Don't ever loose your sens of huma. :D

So what's new here we didn't know about last week?

-spence

I don't know is this e mail evidence the White House knew the attacks were not related to a video? They did say on multiple occasions. This "act of terror" was directly related to a protest of a video. Did any one have the e mail evidence? If the e mail is a recent thing doesnt that make the two weeks of lying about it a little more damning? I am asking.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Did any one have the e mail evidence?"

yes. everyone in the state department, in the white house, and in the intelligence community, received mutliple emails, within hours of the attack.

Spence, we now have physical, irreutable, undeniable proof strongly suggesting that we knew this was a terrorist attack right off the bat. Obama, Biden, Jat Carney, and Ambassador Rice said for days afterword, that there was no evidence there was a terrorist attack.

This probably costs him the election, and deservedly so.

Suck on that, Spence.

You keep asserting this but it's clearly not true.

I don't know how you get more specific than this:

All the emails seem to indicate is that an extremist group took credit for the attack, well duh? Everybody there appeared to know this and a few days later stormed their headquarters.

The narrative here isn't that hard to understand and I'm not quite sure why you're having such a hard time with it.

Oh, wait, I get it now.

-spence

"You keep asserting this but it's clearly not "

You keep focusing on what he said in trhe Rose Garden, and you conveniently ignore everything else that was said for the next 2 weeks. Unfortunately for you and your hero, he really stepped in it, and he did it at a most inconvenient time.

"Everybody there appeared to know this "

When, exactly, did 'everyone' in the administration say out loud that it was a terrorist group that carried out the attack, without subsequently conrtadicting that? Did you hear anything that Jay Carney or Ambassador Rice said, afetr Obama's speech in the Rose Garden?

"I'm not quite sure why you're having such a hard time with it"

As usual, you misunderstand. I'm not having a hard time with this, I am enjoying it thoroughly. You and Obama will be the ones having a hard time with it.

Don't forget when we were once again "not apologizing " to the world for the "disgusting video"
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Evidence for a drone(s) tasked to that area starting to emerge.

There's somethig else that surfaced today...shortly aftre th eattack, the US head of counter-terrorism (I htink his name is Olsen) said it was clearly a terrorist attack. It is being reported that the White House told him to back off saying that.

Conclusion: Realizing this was a planned terrorist attack, Obama believed that his critics would conclude the deaths were his fault, since his administration rejected Ambassador Stevens' requests for extra security. So Obama desperately tried to portray this is something other than what it was, so that it wouldn't appear to be his fault.

Let's also remember that the day after the attack, knowing that 4 Americans had just been killed by terrorists, Obama flew to Vegas for a campaign event. Priorities.

Don't need this example to conclude that Obama has no sack.

Another thing...it is now being reported that the firefight within the embassy lasted for at least 7 hours. SEVEN HOURS. Why weren't US military assets immediately deployed? We knew the embassy was being attacked within minutes of teh start of the attack. They had 7 hours to get the cavalry to the embassy, and we did notihng? Stevens and 2 security officers made it to a 'safe room', which is designed as a place to hunker down and wait for help.

Some serious, serious questions need to be asked. Obama is willing to wait until after the election?

Priorities...

The quote I just posted was from Colorado the next day, not the Rose Garden. The 7 hour timeline has been out for days, I'd encourage you to actually read about it.

I'm not sure you really understand much about the story to be honest.

The email story from today was that someone posted on the extremist groups Facebook page that they were taking credit for the attack. It was then denied by the actual group. The information isn't a clear as you'd like to believe. As Clinton said today, we don't base our intel off of social media.

You're chasing the spin and misinformation like a half-blind horny coon hound in a pen full of meth addicted rabbits.

What you don't like you don't refute, rather you just ignore.

Sad.

-spence

Spence, you're right. Nothing to see here. don't give it a second thought. I hope Obama doesn't think this is an issue, either...

Spence with all due respect. In the Reuters article it was stated (paraphrasing) the administration did not want to point fingers immediately regardless of the FB and Twitter posts by al Shari (sic) . Why then did they go and skewer a US citizen to the world for two weeks? semantics aside the whole thing stinks! Hiding that this was an act perpetrated by an Al Qaeda affiliate was done deliberately. Then once the truth began to trickle out they hang Hillary out to dry.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Great simile by the way very creative
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Exactly, seven hours to respond and NOTHING !
At the very least after extra security was asked for and denied there should have been a contingency plan put in place if needed.

The fact that taking fire from mortars etc. for 7 hours with rifles the only defense had to be a harrowing experience waiting for help that never came.
That's how we treat our citizens in a known danger zone, defenseless?
There is NO defense for that. Pathetic failure. :af:

Spence ,
Phony twitter and fb claims don't happen as the attack is occurring!!!!
Use your head man
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Not only did we leave them essentially defenseless, Obama then spins the response in way that attempts to cover his ass. And 24 hours after the attack, he is in Vegas at a fundraiser.

It is reported that the 2 dead SEALs were found slumped over a machine gun position, and that evidence suggests they fought long aftr they had been wounded by mortar fire.

Unbelievable. There's a whole lot of soldiers that were within 7 hours of that embassy. Fly a helicopter over, announce that anyone who is still visible around the compound in 30 seconds will be strafed with machine gun fire.

What he is saying is the group took credit for the attacks on twitter and FB that did happen post attack
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Act of terror" is the forked tongue way fo not saying "Terrorist Act". The guy who blasted people in the movie theater commited an act of terror. Big difference though between an act of terror and a "Terrorist Act". You don't have to admit you got kicked in the butt by actual terrorists but you get to point at the "act of terror" statement later when you get caught.

I've never seen any evidence that the act was perpetrated by an al Qaeda affiliate. Quite to the contrary, even the House testimony didn't reveal this.

-spence

And able to respond in a timely way? Where? How do you know this?

Interesting, now that Romney is getting security briefs he seems to have abandoned his earlier attack.

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2...-speeches?lite

-spence

If we can't respond anywhere in the world within 7 hours we
might as well just give up.

The real problem here is that with 2 previous attacks on the consulate
and the request for more security being denied, there should have been
a contigency plan in place if it was attacked. Complete failure.

A low flying F18 alone would have scattered them, let alone a few
well placed rockets obtaining targets from the overhead drone.

"And able to respond in a timely way? Where? How do you know this?"

I know this, because I don't rely solely on The Huffington Post to get my ifo.

There are special operations forces all over the place within 200 miles of the embassy. Even in Tripoli, it's been reported there were special forces soldiers who could have gotten there on bikes in less than 7 hours. There are ships in the Gulf that could have deployed helicopters.

Not until we perfect the Heisenberg compensator.

As we've discussed, there's certainly a decision here to investigate but the actual security requests that were made wouldn't have likely made a difference.

Think of what you're saying here. The US invades a sovereign and mostly friendly country and fires rockets that likely have a high chance of collateral damage and perhaps little impact on the safety of those who may or may not even still be alive.

This isn't that black and white.

-spence

No, not black and white but we have a right to defend our soverign embassy land in any country. Just wouldn't have been Politicaly Expedient but would
have been an attempt to save American lives.
So we shouldn't have tried something because we didn't know if they were still alive or not???

Considering how many people were aware this event was unfolding do you not seriously think if we had military positioned to defend we wouldn't have sent them?

The 7 hour timeline is misleading. It wasn't a sustained attack on a single location, but rather a confused situation across buildings spaced far apart.

While there certainly was growing concern about extremist influence in the area there doesn't appear to be much intel an attack was preplanned. The local people protested the attack and stormed the extremists HQ just days after.

The most likely scenario appears to be that a problem was brewing, but the moment accelerated to conflict before our system had responded. i.e. it's not all about the video, but to some degree it is.

-spence

"do you not seriously think if we had military positioned to defend we wouldn't have sent them? "

We did have military in a position to defend, and we didn't send them.

"but rather a confused situation "

The Situation Room knew of the attack very early on. They didn't know every detail early on, but they knew there were 20 armed terrorists in the compound, they knew there was a viscous firefight, and they knew that Ambassador Stevens was locked in a safe room, waiting for help that would never come. The fact is, we could have sent rreinforcements before the attack ended (maybe not in time to save anyone). But we didn't. Obama will not discuss why, until after the election. We sent a drone over the embassy to take pictures. That drone came from an American base somewhere, and somewhere on that base, are soldiers with guns who could have gone in after the drone showed what was happening.

Priorities.

Spence, if you want to provide us with any other keen insights into military capabilities and infantry tactics, please share them with us. Don't hoard all that knowledge to yourself.

Spence, just came over the TV Marines were 2 hours away.

You tell me why they weren't sent?

You seem to have all the specifics, I wonder why you won't share them.

Where were the troops? What was the process?

-spence

Where? Who?

-spence

THEY WERE
 

An anti-terrorism marine group from Rota Spain.
They were dispatced AFTER the fight was over.

Wonder if Obama,Joe or Hillary were visiting at the time if there
would have been a hesitancy to dispatch in real time??

Yes, immediately after it was over. This was public information the day after the attack.

Are you suggesting they were able to mobilize and deploy to Benghazi within hours?

A quick Google shows it's about 2000 miles line of site between Rota and Benghazi. Assuming they were on the ground and ready to go (which isn't likely) once word of attack came out you're still talking many hours of transport time and I'd assume several refueling stops. In other words they wouldn't have been there in time to do anything anyway.

Hence my earlier remark that had military troops been able to respond immediately they would have likely been sent. I still have not seen anything that indicates this was an option.

-spence