|
16 Sep 12 - 09:51 AM (#3405602) Subject: BS: Embassygate? From: Sawzaw More details emerge on U.S. ambassador's last momentsBenghazi, Libya (CNN) -- Three days before the deadly assault on the United States consulate in Libya, a local security official says he met with American diplomats in the city and warned them about deteriorating security.Jamal Mabrouk, a member of the February 17th Brigade, told CNN that he and a battalion commander had a meeting about the economy and security. He said they told the diplomats that the security situation wasn't good for international business. "The situation is frightening, it scares us," Mabrouk said they told the U.S. officials. He did not say how they responded. Inside the U.S. consulate in Benghazi Slain ambassador returns. Possible security leak in Libya Mabrouk said it was not the first time he has warned foreigners about the worsening security situation in the face of the growing presence of armed jihadist groups in the Benghazi area. The main building in the compound is in charred ruins. Disagreement over how attack began The suite where the body of the ambassador was found was protected by a large door with steel bars; the windows had steel bars. His body was recovered after looters broke into the room. It appears his security detail left him in the room while they tried to deal with the attack. There are numerous questions about what happened at the consulate where protesters had gathered to demonstrate against the film "Innocence of Muslims," which reportedly was made in California by a filmmaker whose identity is unclear. Chief among the questions is what happened to U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, who went missing during the attack. The State Department has not released details about how Stevens died, though numerous media reports have said the ambassador was taken from the consulate to the Benghazi medical center by locals. He arrived at the hospital, according to the reports, unresponsive and covered in soot from the fire. A doctor was unable to revive him and declared him dead, the reports said. According to one of the Libyan security guards who was stationed at one of the gates armed with only a radio, the assault began simultaneously from three directions. Heavy machine guns and rocket -propelled grenades were used, according to the guard. He said masked men threatened to kill him at gunpoint for 'protecting the infidels. He declined to appear on camera for fear of repercussions. Ex-SEALs among Benghazi dead The February 17th Brigade -- a militia connected to the government but not part of Libya's armed forces -- was closely involved in the rescue of the American staff trapped after the attack Tuesday night. After the consulate was attacked and set on fire, a number of Americans escaped to a safe-house in another part of the city. But that came under attack too. Mabrouk said he received a call from an official in Tripoli, who said he had been called by a "terrified" American in Benghazi. The official was at the safe-house. Mabrouk says the Brigade asked the Americans if they needed help -- but were told that while the situation was dangerous, it was under control. A few hours later, Mabrouk said he received another call from Tripoli about the arrival of a U.S. team at Benghazi airport that needed transport into the city. He met the seven Americans, who were heavily armed but not in military uniform, on the runway and provided them with an armed escort, he said. Possible security leak in Libya As soon as the two vehicles carrying the seven Americans arrived at the safe house, they came under intense attack -- including a volley of grenades and machine-gun fire. The assailants then fled. The Libyan government has vowed to bring the perpetrators of the attack to justice. But on a visit to the heavily-damaged consulate, the country's president said Libya expected help form its friends in the international community. Asked whether the government was not capable of controlling extremist groups, he responded "You are not far from the truth." |
|
16 Sep 12 - 11:08 AM (#3405641) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Jack the Sailor Cut and paste trollgate? |
|
16 Sep 12 - 11:21 AM (#3405647) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Charley Noble The CNN report is of interest. It's reliability should be questioned with regard to how much is speculation or self-serving justification, but it seems to be a report based on interviews on the ground. The thread title does have a question mark. So I wouldn't label Sawzaw as trolling at this point. Charley Noble |
|
16 Sep 12 - 11:29 AM (#3405653) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Bobert No "gate" to it except in the minds of Obama haters who would accuse him of trying to put doctors out of work if he found a cure for cancer.. In other words??? Normal... B~ |
|
16 Sep 12 - 11:33 AM (#3405657) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Sawzaw Thanx Charlie. US in denial over embassy murdersThe Australian -- The day before the attacks, al-Qa'ida released a video of Ayman al-Zawahiri in which he called for his co-religionists to attack the US in retribution for the killing in June of his second-in-command Abu Al Yahya al-Libi by a US drone in Pakistan. Zawahiri asked for the strongest act of retribution to be carried out in Libya.As for the attack in Libya, it apparently came as no surprise to some US officials on the ground. In an online posting the night before he was killed, US Foreign Service information officer Sean Smith warned of the impending strike. Smith wrote, "Assuming we don't die tonight. We saw one of our 'police' that guard the compound taking pictures." The co-ordinated, premeditated nature of the attack was self-evident. The assailants were armed with rocket-propelled grenades and machineguns. They knew the location of the secret safe house to which the US consular officials fled. They laid ambush to a marine force sent to rescue the 37 Americans hiding at the safe house. Yet Clinton and Dempsey could not fathom why the attack occurred. Like Dempsey, the US media was swift to focus the blame for the attacks on the film. By Wednesday afternoon the media shifted the focus of discussion on the still ongoing attacks from the film to an all-out assault on Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney for his temerity in attacking as "disgraceful" the administration's initial apologetic response to the attacks on the embassies.... |
|
16 Sep 12 - 02:09 PM (#3405742) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Charley Noble Assessing the blame for the attack should take a bit more time. I'm not surprised that US Foreign Service information officer Sean Smith was aware that there was a potential attack. What steps do you think, Sawzall, should have been taken given infinite hindsight? Charley Noble |
|
17 Sep 12 - 09:55 AM (#3406143) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Sawzaw A timeline of events surrounding attacks on US facilities in MideastU.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice is gamely trying to toe the administration line on the attacks on U.S. diplomats in Benghazi and Cairo that left four dead including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens. On Sunday, she said the attacks were "spontaneous – not a premeditated" and "in reaction to this very offensive video that was disseminated." White House spokesman Jay Carney earlier claimed the attacks were not directed at the United States and cannot be read as an indictment of Obama administration policies.In fact, the attacks in Benghazi and Cairo were the result of massive intelligence failure at the top levels of government. There were many indications that extremists were targeting U.S. diplomats in Libya and Egypt months before this year's Sept. 11 attacks. These deadly plans had nothing to do with a low-budget, anti-Islamic film. The Obama administration simply failed to connect the dots. Ambassador Christopher Stevens had been targeted in Benghazi before. On June 6, a jihadist group called the "Brigades of the Imprisoned Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman" set off a bomb on the consulate perimeter, wounding one. The attack coincided with Mr. Stevens' first trip to the country as ambassador – he had arrived May 26 – and he was the likely target of the attack, though when the bomb went off he was not nearby. According to the SITE monitoring group, the Rahman Brigades said they were "targeting a group of 'Christian overseers' who were preparing to receive one of the 'heads of instigation' from the State Department." They were seeking to avenge the death of senior Al-Qaeda leader Abu Yahya al-Libi, who was killed in a U.S. drone strike. Even though the attack failed, the jihadists knew the ambassador was coming. The Rahman Brigades is named for the "Blind Sheikh," mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, who is currently serving a life sentence in the United States. His name runs like a current through both the events in Libya and Egypt, and his imprisonment is a much more important instigating factor in the violence than the scape-goat video the Obama administration has fixated on. In Benghazi five days after the initial June bombing, the same group attacked a car carrying British Ambassador to Libya Dominic Asquith with rocket-propelled grenades, injuring two. The United Nations special envoy to Libya was also targeted. These strikes were clearly pre-planned. The Rahman Brigades also mounted several attacks on the offices of the International Committee of the Red Cross, forcing the ICRC to suspend its operations in eastern Libya. On Aug. 11, General Mohammed Hadia, a senior military official in the new Libyan government, was gunned down in the city. On Sept. 2, a Libyan intelligence officer was killed and another wounded in a car-bombing attack in Benghazi. Three days before last week's attack that took four American lives, Benghazi security official Jamal Mabrouk warned U.S. diplomats that the situation there was not safe. These are only a few of the numerous violent acts that were being carried out in Benghazi prior to the Sept. 11, 2012 uprising. All are based on open-source information, and presumably the U.S. intelligence community had even more details. Mrs. Rice said the level of security afforded an ambassador "depends on the circumstances," but in Benghazi the circumstances were dire. Any reasonable person would conclude that city was a dangerous place, that U.S. interests were being targeted, that extremists groups affiliated with al Qaeda were involved and they knew exactly what they were doing. In Cairo, there were also reasons to believe there were endemic threats unrelated to the film. Again, the name that keeps popping up is Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman. There had been a sit-in in support of the "Blind Sheikh" outside the embassy for 18 months. On July 27, the sheikh's son Abdallah Abdel Rahman threatened to organize a blockade of the embassy and to detain the Americans inside unless his father was released. Two days later, then-president-elect Mohammed Morsi vowed publicly to work to free the sheikh, and it will be at the top of his agenda in future meetings with President Obama. The build-up to the embassy breach ran like clockwork. On Aug. 30, Jamaa Islamiya, the terrorist group formerly led by the Blind Sheikh, announced that the embassy sit-in was being turned into an active protest. On Sept. 4, the Egyptian General Intelligence Service warned all Egyptian security agencies of planned attacks against the embassy by a group called Global Jihad, which has been active in the Sinai. On Sept. 7, an Islamist named Nasser Al-Qaeda posted a statement on the Jihadi chat group Shumoukh Al-Islam that the U.S. embassy in Cairo should be burned down and everyone inside killed or taken hostage in order to bring pressure to bear to release the Blind Sheikh. On the day before the embassy assault, several other jihadist groups with ties to al Qaeda – including Islamic Jihad, the Sunni Group and Jamaa Islamiya – echoed this threat and called for the release of the Blind Sheikh and all detainees in all U.S. detention facilities including Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. None of these groups made mention of the allegedly offending film. The takeaway from this timeline is that the Obama administration was blind to the growing threats. The State Department has admitted as much. On Sept. 6, the Bureau of Diplomatic Security Overseas Security Advisory Council (OSAC) website announced it had "no credible information to suggest that al Qaeda or any other terrorist group is plotting any kind of attack overseas to coincide with the upcoming anniversary of Sept. 11." This announcement was taken down after the recent attacks took place. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton must explain why this part of the historical record was removed and what other incriminating documents have been deleted or destroyed. The White House and the liberal media want to keep attention focused on the film as a pretext for the violence to argue that the protests were spontaneous and not directed at administration policy. Yet substantial evidence exists to fatally compromise this self-serving narrative. The crisis was building all along, but the White House simply refused to see it. Mr. Obama's soft spot for Islam became a blind spot for American security. |
|
21 Sep 12 - 09:50 AM (#3408199) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Sawzaw U.S. officials appear less certain of events ahead of Libya attackCNNU.S. officials appear less certain about what happened in Benghazi, Libya, just before the attack that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans last week. "We certainly acknowledge contradictory information about whether there was a protest prior to the attack," a U.S. official told CNN on Thursday. "We're continuing to collect information and evaluate exactly what the circumstances were prior to the attack." U.S. officials have been saying they believe, based on the intelligence, that the attack grew out of a spontaneous protest over a trailer for an anti-Muslim film that was circulating on the Internet, and there is no indication it was a planned attack. It is a contention that critics like Republican Sen. John McCain have said is hard to believe true given the extensive attack and the amount of weaponry involved. On CBS' "Face the Nation," Rice said, "Soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi, we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals, joined in that effort with heavy weapons of the sort that are, unfortunately, readily now available in Libya post- revolution. And that it spun from there into something much, much more violent." But conflicting information about whether there really was a protest ahead of the attack calls into question whether the attack was planned. National Counterterrorism Center Director Matthew Olsen told a Senate committee on Wednesday that he believed the attack fit the definition of a terrorist attack. Although he maintained the evidence so far indicated the attack was not planned, he was careful in describing just what officials knew about how it transpired and who was involved. "The best information we have now, the facts we have now indicate this was an opportunistic attack on our embassy. The attack began and evolved and escalated over several hours," said Olsen. "It appears that individuals who were certainly well armed, seized on the opportunity that was presented as the events unfolded that evening into the morning hours of September 12th." But both Olsen and White House Press Secretary Jay Carney added a new characterization to their account. Olsen said there was nothing specific indicating "significant advanced planning" and Carney on Thursday said there was no information to suggest "a significantly preplanned attack." "It is, I think, self-evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack," Carney added. A U.S. intelligence official on Thursday also seemed more cautious. "Simply put, while everything is still under investigation, the available information suggests the protests in Cairo inspired what the attackers decided to do later that night in Benghazi," the official said. "Right now, this points to a plan that was hatched opportunistically that day. Of course, if credible new information suggests otherwise, the investigation will pursue those leads." The source also told CNN that "the available information suggests a group of people gathered sometime before ten o'clock that night outside of the consulate. The mixture of the people involved, and who took part in the attack, is certainly going to be part of the investigation." CNN's Arwa Damon, who has been in Benghazi this week, reports that on the night of September 11, a group of armed individuals showed up outside the consulate around 9:30 and a firefight had broken out within 30 minutes. On Thursday, Libya's Prime Minister Mustafa Abushagur told Damon that eight people who are believed to be involved in carrying out the attack are now detained in Libya. But he also said the evidence so far shows the attack was planned. Approximately 30 to 50 people took part and it was clearly organized, said the prime minister, but he added there was no one specific group behind the attack. |
|
21 Sep 12 - 11:06 AM (#3408226) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Stilly River Sage Over the years many of us were told that there is a policy about long cut and paste entries - they are frowned upon. I started an "I read it in the newspaper" thread for posts and made sure I put a short portion and a link to the rest, if I thought it was a durable link. If your long news cut-and-paste is applied to a non-music thread and fills more than one screen then it is in danger of being trimmed or deleted. (My original thread was closed because spammers kept hitting it, but I have a new one, for interesting tidbits, and during the last election Amos started ONE THREAD where he posted all of his political remarks. Think about it - keep in in one location, not spread all over. Save yourselves work. The Obama haters might do well to distill it into one thread the rest of us can ignore, rather than paving the forum with many iterations of "a few of us knuckle-draggers hate Obama" threads. So if these long things disappear, don't be surprised. SRS |
|
22 Sep 12 - 10:42 AM (#3408669) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Greg F. Disappear? The sooner the better. Now, if we could only get SawZall/SawGrass to disappear..... |
|
22 Sep 12 - 11:46 AM (#3408695) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Bobert Not to fear, Greg... Sawz will inevitably disappear as he has done before and reinvent himself as someone else... It's his M.O.... The new one, however, won't be any better than the old one... I mean, Old Guy and Dickey were the S.O.S... B~ |
|
22 Sep 12 - 12:05 PM (#3408701) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Jack the Sailor You know if you two reacted to him less that day would come sooner. |
|
22 Sep 12 - 12:24 PM (#3408713) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Q (Frank Staplin) I will no longer post to his threads. That is the only sensible response. |
|
22 Sep 12 - 12:37 PM (#3408720) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Bobert Color me gone, as well... B~ |
|
23 Sep 12 - 11:08 AM (#3409026) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity From another thread: From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 23 Sep 12 - 01:02 AM Was anyone reading?????? Score ANOTHER RIGHT ON CALL from GfS: Subject: RE: porn+FL Rev koran burner=ambassador killed From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 13 Sep 12 - 09:17 AM The film was a cover-up of the REAL reasons for the uprisings. This will come out even more than it has already....you'll see! GfS |
|
23 Sep 12 - 10:56 PM (#3409250) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Mrrzy plus ca change... (forgot how to do cedilles) |
|
23 Sep 12 - 11:51 PM (#3409261) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Sawzaw Ask J. Christopher Stevens if he is better off than he was 4 years ago. |
|
24 Sep 12 - 01:05 AM (#3409285) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Jack the Sailor The man died a hero serving his country. How dare you try to debase his memory with your cheap partisanism. |
|
24 Sep 12 - 01:16 AM (#3409288) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Stilly River Sage Sawzaw is a stalker and a troll. Ignore him. |
|
24 Sep 12 - 01:17 AM (#3409289) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity What???? How come he was left there 'twisting in the wind'? by his government?..and how come the media spent all the time covering Romney's 'gaff', instead of what is going on there? Look, I hate 'partisanship' as much or more than anyone one here...but let's not chalk this one up to that....you are being silly! GfS |
|
24 Sep 12 - 03:06 AM (#3409301) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Jack the Sailor Two, two unpatriotic jackasses trying to cheapen the man's memory. I heard the President and the Secretary of State, and many media sources, including MSNBC and Fox News speak well of the man's service and honor his service. I have seen grateful Libyans do the same. I remember this well because it inspired me to start a thread on this forum. If you have a crumb of decency you will keep the political comments confined to the politicians and show our service members and civil servants who put their lives on the line a little gratitude and respect. |
|
24 Sep 12 - 07:51 AM (#3409366) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Sawzaw Would the man be alive if the security warnings had been heeded? I think you attempt to cover it up by claiming partisan politics which is partisan politics on your part. The man did not have adequate security. If you had a crumb of decency you would be upset by that and not merely write him off as collateral damage. |
|
24 Sep 12 - 03:18 PM (#3409526) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Jack the Sailor Sawzaw you know bloody well that embassies get threatened every day. Stop pretending otherwise. |
|
24 Sep 12 - 09:40 PM (#3409698) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Sawzaw Give me some examples Jack. A continuous, everyday threat given to embassies. Just for a week will do. |
|
24 Sep 12 - 09:45 PM (#3409699) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Bobert (Yo, Jack... Listen to your own advice...) |
|
25 Sep 12 - 08:45 AM (#3409870) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Sawzaw 100% of Boberts somewhat agree or strongly agree that somewhat agree means the same thing as somewhat disagree. |
|
25 Sep 12 - 11:42 AM (#3409960) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity ..and it is also being reported on that wonderful 'news' media, that Obama has not attended his security briefings for weeks. Regardless, there is some culpability on OUR part for not being aware, or at least, being in a state of heightened security. Where that breakdown occurred, is only speculation at this point....However, (as in the military or corporate structures), when something goes wrong, which includes oversight, the responsibility goes all the way UP the chain of command, as to who screwed up. Obviously, at least, one can safely assume it was in the State Department..fair enough?? Any shifting of 'blame' by covering it up, will, of course, get the word 'Gate' attached to it.. Oh yeah, I forgot to specify...that meant OUR State Department...you know, the one under OUR President..... GfS |
|
26 Sep 12 - 09:56 AM (#3410429) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Sawzaw Or his Jobs Council meetings. But he has plenty of time for celebrity guest appearances on TV and to comment on football and fundraisers. Talking like a pirate, the important stuff. A tough day to him is when Americans die due to his negligence on security due to focusing on his campaign. A bump in the road to his reelection. CBS At the end of what he called a "tough day," on which it was learned that four American personnel were killed in Libya, including the U.S. ambassador, President Obama used a campaign rally to talk tough, vowing to "bring their killers to justice." His audience of some 8,000 supporters gave him a thunderous cheer. |
|
26 Sep 12 - 12:52 PM (#3410526) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Q (Frank Staplin) The briefings are delivered to the President daily in written form. This is serious campaign time; no president has ever spent this period glued to the chair at endless briefings in Washington. |
|
26 Sep 12 - 01:23 PM (#3410541) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: pdq In the last few months, al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri said the his people will kill Americans on September 11. The Libyian head of security told the American embassy officials there was an attack coming. That was three day before the Septembet 11 murder of four members of our embassy staff. Various Islamic groups say the attacks were revenge for our evil culture and our support for Israel. Yesteday, the president of Libya (in an interview with noted US reporter) said the video had nothing to do with the attack on tthe embassy in his country. The same day, Obama spent much of his speech before the UN implying that the obscure film caused riots all over he World including the embassy attacks. Is there anything this guy says that can be taken at face value? |
|
26 Sep 12 - 01:40 PM (#3410548) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: GUEST,999 "Is there anything this guy says that can be taken at face value?" Well, he said the US would get bin Laden. |
|
26 Sep 12 - 02:48 PM (#3410576) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: pdq Please note "we will get Bin Laden" was a prediction since he was perfectly healthy at the time that statement was made. Hard to call somebody a liar over a prediction. Global Warming hawkers can say "temperature will rize 8 degrees by 2050. We all gonna die!". They are not liars even though they are wrong since it is a prediction, not fact. If you say "smoking is good for your health" and everybody knows it is not, that make you either ignorant or a liar. If you were warned three days before a branch of al-Qaeda attacked our embassy in Libya with rockets and gernades and you persisted in saying that it was a peaceful protest by little Islamic darlings angered by a movie made by bad rightwing extremist Christians, you would be |
|
26 Sep 12 - 03:32 PM (#3410593) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: GUEST,999 That's true, pdq, but it would be lots more convincing had you spoken this way when Bush was in power. Then I would feel I was reading your unbiased view of the president. |
|
26 Sep 12 - 03:41 PM (#3410598) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: pdq Nobody is "unbiased", not even Jesus, Gandhi nor Sitting Bull. |
|
27 Sep 12 - 02:15 AM (#3410761) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Sawzaw The state Department is now saying it was a terrorist Attack but Obama still cannot bring himself to say it. He says it was "sparked" by the video. The hatred was already there and the video was the spark, not the entire cause. He is being diversionary, blaming it on the video, not the growing animosity toward the US that he was supposed to diminish. There were plenty of warnings and it was negligence that got 4 Americans killed. Apparently there were no guards on duty inside the compound armed or otherwise. even without any warnings Shouldn't they Someone should have taken extra security measures because it was Sep 11th? (CNN) -- More than two weeks after four Americans -- including the U.S. ambassador to Libya -- were killed in an attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, FBI agents have not yet been granted access to investigate in the eastern Libyan city, and the crime scene has not been secured, sources said. "They've gotten as far as Tripoli now, but they've never gotten to Benghazi," CNN National Security Analyst Fran Townsend said Wednesday, citing senior law enforcement officials. NBC/WSJ poll: Obama's approval on foreign policy dropsAfter last week's political firestorm over attacks on U.S. embassies in Egypt and Libya, the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finds that President Obama's approval rating on foreign policy has dropped five points since August.In the poll, 49 percent approve of the president's job in handling foreign policy, versus 46 percent who disapprove. Last month, 54 percent said they approved of his foreign-policy handling. Much of that drop can be attributed to increased political polarization just seven weeks until Election Day. Indeed, 86 percent of Democrats approve of Obama on foreign policy, compared with just 10 percent of Republicans. Yet in August, nearly twice as many Republicans -- 19 percent -- approved. Still, in the current NBC/WSJ poll, only 41 percent of independents approve of Obama's foreign-policy handling, versus 53 percent who did so last month. The full NBC/WSJ poll -- which was conducted Sept. 12-16 of 900 registered voters (including 270 by cell phone) and which has an overall margin of error of plus-minus 3.3 percentage points -- will be released at 6:30 pm ET. |
|
27 Sep 12 - 02:42 AM (#3410765) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: GUEST "WASHINGTON—With a succession of fresh polls suggesting crucial swing states may already have swung to Barack Obama, frustrated Republicans now are venting fury in two directions — at a floundering Mitt Romney and the surveyors themselves." [September 26, 2012] from http://www.thestar.com/news/world/uselection/article/1262499--obama-leads-romney-in-new-polling-ahead-of-early-voting |
|
27 Sep 12 - 02:42 AM (#3410766) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: GUEST,999 That Guest was me. |
|
27 Sep 12 - 10:41 AM (#3410893) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: GUEST,TIA Again, I win. ID'ed the OP before opening the thread. Bet I can start one that you will open fully expecting more of the same... Maybe on April Fool's day. Stay tuned. |
|
08 Oct 12 - 08:53 AM (#3416290) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Sawzaw Ex-U.S. security team leader in Libya: "We needed more, not less" security staffCBS NewsThe former head of a Special Forces "Site Security Team" in Libya tells CBS News that in spite of multiple pleas from himself and other U.S. security officials on the ground for "more, not less" security personnel, the State Department removed as many as 34 people from the country in the six months before a terrorist attack in Benghazi that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others. Lt. Col. Andy Wood will appear this week at a House Oversight Committee hearing that will examine security decisions leading up to the Sept. 11 terrorist attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi. Speaking to CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson, Wood said when he found out that his own 16-member team and a six-member State Department elite force were being pulled from Tripoli in August - about a month before the assault in Benghazi - he felt, "like we were being asked to play the piano with two fingers. There was concern amongst the entire embassy staff." He said other staffers approached him with their concerns when the reduction in security personnel was announced. "They asked if we were safe," he told Attkisson. "They asked... what was going to happen, and I could only answer that what we were being told is that they're working on it - they'll get us more (security personnel), but I never saw that." Wood insists that senior staff in Libya, including Ambassador Stevens, State Department Regional Security Officer Eric Nordstrom, and himself, all wanted and had requested enhanced security. "We felt we needed more, not less," he tells Attkisson. Asked what response their repeated pleas got from the State Department in Washington, Wood says they were simply told "to do with less. For what reasons, I don't know." "We tried to illustrate... to show them how dangerous and how volatile and just unpredictable that whole environment was over there. So to decrease security in the face of that really is... it's just unbelievable," Wood tells CBS News. One State Department source tells CBS News the security teams weren't "pulled," that their mission was simply over. State Department officials have told CBS News that Wood was not part of the security assessment in Benghazi and that his assignment to Tripoli means he was unfamiliar with the local situation in the smaller port city in the country's east. Wood, however, says some of the members of his own team and additional personnel from the State Department's elite security detail - the two teams which left Libya in August - would have traveled to Benghazi with Ambassador Stevens had they still been in the country. He did not say how many additional security agents might have been deployed for the Ambassador's trip to the city, which is at least 400 miles east of Tripoli, but he tells Attkisson that he's wondered if it might have made a difference on the night of the attack. Lt. Col. Wood, Nordstrom and State Department official Charlene Lamb, based in Washington, will offer some of the key testimony at this week's House Oversight Committee hearing, led by committee chairman Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.). CBS News correspondent Margaret Brennan reports that the U.S. Under Secretary of State for Management, Patrick Kennedy, will be the highest ranking official from the State Department to testify before the committee. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says the State Department is cooperating fully with the congressional investigation, according to Brennan. |
|
09 Oct 12 - 11:18 PM (#3417303) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Sawzaw Saving Big bird is more important than this "spontaneous protest over a movie trailer" New details of Sept. 11 consulate attack in Libya Associated Press WASHINGTON (AP) — Senior State Department officials provided a more detailed picture Tuesday of the consulate attack in Benghazi, Libya, that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans. A look at how they say the attack took place: Sept. 10-11, 2012 Stevens arrives in Benghazi and holds meetings on and off the consulate grounds on Sept. 10. He spends the night, and for the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks on the U.S. holds meetings only inside the compound. It is an enclosed area about 300 yards long by 100 yards wide, with a 9-foot outer wall topped by barbed wire and augmented by barriers, steel drop bars and other security upgrades. There are four buildings in the compound. Five diplomatic security officers are present, along with four members of a local militia deployed by Libya's government to provide added security. Around 8:30 p.m. Stevens finishes his final meeting of the day and escorts a Turkish diplomat outside the main entrance of the consulate. The situation is calm. There are no protests. Around 9:40 p.m. Agents hear loud noises, gunfire and explosions near the front gate. A barracks at the entrance housing the local militiamen is burnt down. Agents viewing cameras see large group of armed men flowing into the compound. Alarm is sounded. Telephone calls are made to the embassy in Tripoli, officials in Washington, the Libyan authorities and a U.S. quick reaction force located at a second compound a little over a mile away. Grabbing weapons One agent, armed with a sidearm and an M4 submachine gun, takes Stevens and computer specialist Sean Smith to a safe room inside one of the compound's two main residences. It has a heavy metal grill and several locks, medical supplies and water, and windows that can be opened only from the inside. The other agents equip themselves with long guns, body armor, helmets and ammunition at other buildings. Two try to make it to the building with Stevens. They are met by armed men and are forced to retreat. Attackers breach the compound Attackers penetrate Stevens' building and try to break the grill locks for the safe room, but cannot gain access. They dump jerry cans of diesel fuel in the building, light furniture on fire and set aflame part of the exterior of the building. Two of the remaining four agents are in the compound's other residence. Attackers penetrate that building, but the agents barricade themselves in and the attackers can't reach them. Attackers try to enter the tactical operations center, where the last two agents are located. They smash up the door but cannot enter the building. Americans trapped Meanwhile, Stevens' building rapidly fills up with thick diesel smoke and burning fumes from the furniture. Inside, visibility is less than 3 feet. Unable to breathe, the Americans go to a bathroom and open a window, but still can't get enough air. They decide to leave the building. The agent goes first, flopping out onto a patio enclosed by sandbags. He takes immediate fire, including probably rocket-propelled grenades. Stevens and Smith don't come out of the building. The agent, suffering severely from smoke inhalation, goes in and out of the building several times to look for them. He then climbs a ladder to the roof of the building and collapses. He radios the other agents to alert them to the situation there. The other four agents are able to reunite and take an armored vehicle to Stevens' building. They reach the collapsed agent and try to set up a perimeter. They take turns going into the building, searching on hands and knees for the missing Americans. Smith is pulled out, dead. Stevens cannot be found. Reinforcements A six-person quick reaction security team arrives from their compound across town. About 60 Libyan militiamen accompany them. They attempt to secure a perimeter around Stevens' building, and take turns going inside. Taking fire, Libyan forces determine they can't hold the perimeter. A decision is made to evacuate the compound and return with everyone to the reaction force's compound. Evacuation Agents pile into an armored vehicle, with Smith's body, and leave through the main gate. They face immediate fire. Crowds and groups of men block two different routes to the security compound. Heavy traffic means they are traveling only about 15 mph, and trying not to attract attention. On a narrow street they reach a group of men who signal for them to enter a compound. They sense an attack and speed away, taking heavy fire from AK-47 machine guns at a distance of only 2 feet, and hand grenades thrown against and under the car. Two tires are blown out. They speed past another crowd of men and onto a main street and across a grassy median into opposing traffic. The agents drive against traffic, eventually reaching their compound. Security gets into firing positions around the compound and on the roof. They take more gunfire and rocket-propelled grenades intermittently for several hours. More reinforcements In the night, a team of reinforcements from the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli arrives on a chartered aircraft at the Benghazi airport and reaches the security compound. Around 4 a.m. The compound's building is hit by mortar fire. The roof is hit and two security personnel are killed. One agent involved in the attack from the beginning is severely wounded. The men decide to evacuate the city entirely. They spend the next hours securing the annex and moving a large convoy of vehicles to the airport. They evacuate on two flights. |
|
10 Oct 12 - 06:32 AM (#3417415) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Do you really think anybody reads through your constant stream of Cut 'n Pastes Sawz. Do you have a single original thought in that mush that stops your head from ringing like a bell? Don T. |
|
10 Oct 12 - 08:09 AM (#3417446) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Bobert I doubt if he even reads them, Don... They all come from right winged blogs and Sawz assumes that if some rightie, who is paid 6 figures to research and twist facts into unrecognizable mush, that the mush is the real story... In other words, more right winged Boss Hog propaganda... (((((yawn))))))) B~ |
|
10 Oct 12 - 08:38 PM (#3417835) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Sawzaw "Senior State Department officials provided a more detailed picture"="more right winged Boss Hog propaganda" in Bobert's primitive mind, pickled in lead contaminated ethylene glycol tainted illegal ethanol and numbed by tetrahydrocannabinol, known to cause paranoia and sleepiness. As an example of this cerebral deterioration from an already compromised IQ, Bobert believes there is a Boss Hogg hiding behind every tree. Also he believes Huey The Kingfish Long, the flaming fire breathing liberal, was a rightie. |
|
29 Oct 12 - 08:40 AM (#3427699) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Sawzaw factcheck.org: Benghazi TimelineThe long road from "spontaneous protest" to premeditated terrorist attack.October 26, 2012 The question won't go away: Did President Obama and administration officials mislead the public when they initially claimed that the deadly Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi began "spontaneously" in response to an anti-Muslim video? The question surfaced again on Oct. 25 - more than six weeks after the incident - when government emails showed the White House and the State Department were told even as the attack was going on that Ansar al-Sharia, a little-known militant group, had claimed credit for it. We cannot say whether the administration was intentionally misleading the public. We cannot prove intent. There is also more information to come - both from the FBI, which is conducting an investigation, and Congress, which has been holding hearings. But, at this point, we do know that Obama and others in the administration were quick to cite the anti-Muslim video as the underlying cause for the attack in Benghazi that killed four U.S. diplomats, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens. And they were slow to acknowledge it was a premeditated terrorist attack, and they downplayed reports that it might have been. What follows is a timeline of events that we hope will help put the incident into perspective. We call attention in particular to these key facts: *There were no protesters at the Benghazi consulate prior to the attack, even though Obama and others repeatedly said the attackers joined an angry mob that had formed in opposition to the anti-Muslim film that had triggered protests in Egypt and elsewhere. The State Department disclosed this fact Oct. 9 - nearly a month after the attack. *Libya President Mohamed Magariaf insisted on Sept. 16 - five days after the attack - that it was a planned terrorist attack, but administration officials continued for days later to say there was no evidence of a planned attack. *Magariaf also said the idea that the attack was a "spontaneous protest that just spun out of control is completely unfounded and preposterous." This, too, was on Sept. 16. Yet, Obama and others continued to describe the incident in exactly those terms - including during the president's Sept. 18 appearance on the "Late Show With David Letterman." *Matt Olsen, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, was the first administration official to call it "a terrorist attack" during a Sept. 19 congressional hearing. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did the same on Sept. 20. Even so, Obama declined opportunities to call it a terrorist attack when asked at a town hall meeting on Sept. 20 and during a taping of "The View" on Sept. 24. Here is our timeline: |
|
29 Oct 12 - 10:40 AM (#3427759) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: GUEST,TIA Great timeline. Please read the Sept. 12 entries to see what utter bullshit Fox News and the right wing bloviators are trying to peddle: snip (from the link above)-------------- Sept.12: Obama Labels Attack an 'Act of Terror' Sept. 12: Clinton issues a statement confirming that four U.S. officials, not one, had been killed. She called it a "violent attack." Clinton: All the Americans we lost in yesterday's attacks made the ultimate sacrifice. We condemn this vicious and violent attack that took their lives, which they had committed to helping the Libyan people reach for a better future. Sept. 12: Clinton delivers a speech at the State Department to condemn the attack in Benghazi and to praise the victims as "heroes." She again makes reference to the anti-Muslim video in similar language. Clinton: Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior, along with the protest that took place at our Embassy in Cairo yesterday, as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. America's commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear — there is no justification for this, none. Sept. 12: Obama delivers a morning speech in the Rose Garden to address the deaths of U.S. diplomats in Libya. 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." He also makes reference to the anti-Muslim video when he says: "Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None." He uses the term "act of terror" later that night when talking about the attack at a campaign event in Las Vegas. Sept. 12: Senior administration officials, who did not permit use of their names, hold a briefing with reporters to answer questions about the attack. Twice officials characterize those involved in the attack as "extremists." In one case, an official identified only as "senior administration official one" is asked by Fox News reporter Justin Fishel if the administration had ruled out the possibly that the attack was in response to the anti-Muslim video. The official says, "We just don't know." ⬐ Click to expand/collapse the full transcript ⬏ Senior administration official one: With regard to whether there is any connection between this Internet activity and this extremist attack in Benghazi, frankly, we just don't know. We're not going to know until we have a chance to investigate. And I'm sorry that it is frustrating for you that so many of our answers are "We don't know," but they are truthful in that. NBC's Andrea Mitchell asks officials to address news reports that the attack has been "linked to a terror attack, an organized terror attack," possibly al Qaeda. The official refers to it as a "complex attack," but says it is "too early to say who they were" and their affiliation. ⬐ Click to expand/collapse the full transcript ⬏ Senior administration official one: Frankly, we are not in a position to speak any further to the perpetrators of this attack. It was clearly a complex attack. We're going to have to do a full investigation. We are committed to working with the Libyans both on the investigation and to ensure that we bring the perpetrators to justice. The FBI is already committed to assisting in that, but I just – we're – it's just too early to speak to who they were and if they might have been otherwise affiliated beyond Libya. Sept. 12, 4:09 p.m.: At a press briefing en route to Las Vegas, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney is asked, "Does the White House believe that the attack in Benghazi was planned and premeditated?" He responds, "It's too early for us to make that judgment. I think — I know that this is being investigated, and we're working with the Libyan government to investigate the incident. So I would not want to speculate on that at this time." Sept. 12: Libya's deputy ambassador to London, Ahmad Jibril, tells the BBC that Ansar al-Sharia was behind the attack. The little-known militant group issues a statement that says it "didn't participate as a sole entity," neither confirming nor denying the report. Sept. 12: Citing unnamed "U.S. government officials," Reuters reports that "the Benghazi attack may have been planned in advance" and that members of Ansar al-Sharia "may have been involved." Reuters quotes one of the U.S. officials as saying: "It bears the hallmarks of an organized attack." snip------------------------------ |
|
29 Oct 12 - 12:48 PM (#3427826) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: Charley Noble And there are more details still being released. As usual, it's a complex story. And it's a tragic one as well. Clearly too much of a story for small minds to deal with. It's heartening that so many of the consulate staff were safely evacuated to the "safe house" during this attack. But it was a very close call for the survivors. Charley Noble |
|
29 Oct 12 - 11:30 PM (#3428119) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: GUEST,999 Sarah Palin says you bombed Egypt. Bastards! She also says that Canada sent troops to Vietnam. I am pissed off and am am composing a diatribe to our government. Sarah for president. We need Republican truth. |
|
29 Oct 12 - 11:33 PM (#3428122) Subject: RE: BS: Embassygate? From: GUEST,TIA No no no. it was Ann Coulter who insisted that Canada had troops in Vietnam.... Wait a minute! Palin-Coulter in 2016! |