U.S. Ambassador to Libya Killed in Rocket Attack (2 Viewers)

[Maurile Tremblay]

I saw a blurb on this last night and figured somebody would post it. I suppose I'll do it.

Mayport-based USS New York 'goes dark' with Benghazi suspect on board

June 26, 2014

By Associated Press

According to The Washington Post, the Naval Station Mayport-based USS New York (LPD21) has “gone dark” for more than a week.

The San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock New York has aboard one of the accused ringleaders of the 2012 Benghazi terrorist attacks that left four Americans dead.

The Post reports the New York likely is steaming toward the East Coast with Abu Khattala, who was captured 11 days ago. He is being interrogated by the FBI-led High Value Detainee Interrogation Group.

CNN, quoting U.S. officials, recently reported that taking Khattala by sea will allow investigators "maximum time to question him."

The Post said the ship’s crew has been absent from social media, most likely because the ship’s outbound communications have been blacked out.

The New York, which was built with 7.5 short tons of steel from the rubble of the World Trade Center, has a crew of 360. It arrived at Mayport in December.

 

[tommyboy]

I saw a blurb on this last night and figured somebody would post it. I suppose I'll do it.

Mayport-based USS New York 'goes dark' with Benghazi suspect on board

June 26, 2014

By Associated Press

According to The Washington Post, the Naval Station Mayport-based USS New York (LPD21) has “gone dark” for more than a week.

The San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock New York has aboard one of the accused ringleaders of the 2012 Benghazi terrorist attacks that left four Americans dead.

The Post reports the New York likely is steaming toward the East Coast with Abu Khattala, who was captured 11 days ago. He is being interrogated by the FBI-led High Value Detainee Interrogation Group.

CNN, quoting U.S. officials, recently reported that taking Khattala by sea will allow investigators "maximum time to question him."

The Post said the ship’s crew has been absent from social media, most likely because the ship’s outbound communications have been blacked out.

The New York, which was built with 7.5 short tons of steel from the rubble of the World Trade Center, has a crew of 360. It arrived at Mayport in December.

reminds me of the scene in Zero Dark Thirty when the CIA guy says "you look hungry, you hungry? Lets get some food in you".

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Guys I'm sorry to do this but this debate was intense enough to follow up:

Providing more fuel for the extremely politicized debate over whether the 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was planned by terrorists or grew out of spontaneous protests, new documents released in the case of Ahmed Abu Khattala, the suspected ringleader captured in Libya last month, make no mention of the anti-Muslim YouTube video that sparked the demonstrations. In court papers filed on Tuesday, federal prosecutors say that Abu Khattala complained about the presence of an American facility in Benghazi several days prior to the attack, and was "motivated by his extremist ideology." Prosecutors added that he has "repeatedly expressed his hatred of Americans and his efforts to target American and Western interests."

The document, which is intended to convince a judge that the man the State Department designated as a terrorist shouldn't be released prior to his trial, provides a brief overview of the case against Abu Khattala. According to the prosecution, on the night of September 11, 2012, "a group of twenty or more armed men" gathered outside the U.S. mission in Benghazi, then "aggressively breached" the gate and set the fire that led to the deaths of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and Information Management Officer Sean Patrick Smith.

...

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/07/benghazi-suspect-supervised-attack-feds-say.html

I've looked at NYT, WaPo, etc., etc., and this is borne out.

The government's own case makes no mention of the movie. None.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I saw a blurb on this last night and figured somebody would post it. I suppose I'll do it.

Mayport-based USS New York 'goes dark' with Benghazi suspect on board

June 26, 2014

By Associated Press

According to The Washington Post, the Naval Station Mayport-based USS New York (LPD21) has “gone dark” for more than a week.

The San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock New York has aboard one of the accused ringleaders of the 2012 Benghazi terrorist attacks that left four Americans dead.

The Post reports the New York likely is steaming toward the East Coast with Abu Khattala, who was captured 11 days ago. He is being interrogated by the FBI-led High Value Detainee Interrogation Group.

CNN, quoting U.S. officials, recently reported that taking Khattala by sea will allow investigators "maximum time to question him."

The Post said the ship’s crew has been absent from social media, most likely because the ship’s outbound communications have been blacked out.

The New York, which was built with 7.5 short tons of steel from the rubble of the World Trade Center, has a crew of 360. It arrived at Mayport in December.

Ah, Alberto Gonzales would be proud of our president, nice one there getting the ol' dirty bstrd on a ship to, uh, "question" him away from prying eyes. Oh hey he gets the Miranda warning and a lawyer, never mind, kind of self-defeating.

 

[Chaka]

Guys I'm sorry to do this but this debate was intense enough to follow up:

Providing more fuel for the extremely politicized debate over whether the 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was planned by terrorists or grew out of spontaneous protests, new documents released in the case of Ahmed Abu Khattala, the suspected ringleader captured in Libya last month, make no mention of the anti-Muslim YouTube video that sparked the demonstrations. In court papers filed on Tuesday, federal prosecutors say that Abu Khattala complained about the presence of an American facility in Benghazi several days prior to the attack, and was "motivated by his extremist ideology." Prosecutors added that he has "repeatedly expressed his hatred of Americans and his efforts to target American and Western interests."

The document, which is intended to convince a judge that the man the State Department designated as a terrorist shouldn't be released prior to his trial, provides a brief overview of the case against Abu Khattala. According to the prosecution, on the night of September 11, 2012, "a group of twenty or more armed men" gathered outside the U.S. mission in Benghazi, then "aggressively breached" the gate and set the fire that led to the deaths of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and Information Management Officer Sean Patrick Smith.

...

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/07/benghazi-suspect-supervised-attack-feds-say.html

I've looked at NYT, WaPo, etc., etc., and this is borne out.

The government's own case makes no mention of the movie. None.

 

[jamny]

Guys I'm sorry to do this but this debate was intense enough to follow up:

Providing more fuel for the extremely politicized debate over whether the 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was planned by terrorists or grew out of spontaneous protests, new documents released in the case of Ahmed Abu Khattala, the suspected ringleader captured in Libya last month, make no mention of the anti-Muslim YouTube video that sparked the demonstrations. In court papers filed on Tuesday, federal prosecutors say that Abu Khattala complained about the presence of an American facility in Benghazi several days prior to the attack, and was "motivated by his extremist ideology." Prosecutors added that he has "repeatedly expressed his hatred of Americans and his efforts to target American and Western interests."

The document, which is intended to convince a judge that the man the State Department designated as a terrorist shouldn't be released prior to his trial, provides a brief overview of the case against Abu Khattala. According to the prosecution, on the night of September 11, 2012, "a group of twenty or more armed men" gathered outside the U.S. mission in Benghazi, then "aggressively breached" the gate and set the fire that led to the deaths of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and Information Management Officer Sean Patrick Smith.

...

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/07/benghazi-suspect-supervised-attack-feds-say.html

I've looked at NYT, WaPo, etc., etc., and this is borne out.

The government's own case makes no mention of the movie. None.

You weren't bored when a report stated the video was the reason. Then it was "ah ha! See! Case closed!"

 

[Chaka]

Guys I'm sorry to do this but this debate was intense enough to follow up:

Providing more fuel for the extremely politicized debate over whether the 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was planned by terrorists or grew out of spontaneous protests, new documents released in the case of Ahmed Abu Khattala, the suspected ringleader captured in Libya last month, make no mention of the anti-Muslim YouTube video that sparked the demonstrations. In court papers filed on Tuesday, federal prosecutors say that Abu Khattala complained about the presence of an American facility in Benghazi several days prior to the attack, and was "motivated by his extremist ideology." Prosecutors added that he has "repeatedly expressed his hatred of Americans and his efforts to target American and Western interests."

The document, which is intended to convince a judge that the man the State Department designated as a terrorist shouldn't be released prior to his trial, provides a brief overview of the case against Abu Khattala. According to the prosecution, on the night of September 11, 2012, "a group of twenty or more armed men" gathered outside the U.S. mission in Benghazi, then "aggressively breached" the gate and set the fire that led to the deaths of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and Information Management Officer Sean Patrick Smith.

...

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/07/benghazi-suspect-supervised-attack-feds-say.html

I've looked at NYT, WaPo, etc., etc., and this is borne out.

The government's own case makes no mention of the movie. None.

You weren't bored when a report stated the video was the reason. Then it was "ah ha! See! Case closed!"

Wrong. I have been bored from the beginning and I never said "See! Case closed" I said "Gee maybe it was because of the video" I never said anything definitively about what caused the attack and made that quite clear unlike the scandaliers.

And I have been bored with this from the beginning because it is quite obvious that the people promoting the Benghazi scandal theories don't give two ####s about Ambassador Stevens and only care about politicizing it in a pathetic attempt to hamstring the President during his final term and paint Hillary with the brush of scandal in the hopes of hurting her in 2016. But none of them really care about the deaths of four Americans. Let's be clear about this as well, I am referring to politicians and pundits because no one cares what message board posters think.

These are the same idiots who steadfastly insist that we were right to invade Iraq, and don't seem to care about the thousands of American deaths (and they ignore the tens to hundreds of thousands of dead innocent Iraqis because, y'know, #### them) and trillions of dollars wasted only to result in an even more destabilized Middle East and leaving America no safer than we were on 9/12/2001.

And if you want to be in the same corner as those jokers that's your problem.

 

[jamny]

Guys I'm sorry to do this but this debate was intense enough to follow up:

Providing more fuel for the extremely politicized debate over whether the 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was planned by terrorists or grew out of spontaneous protests, new documents released in the case of Ahmed Abu Khattala, the suspected ringleader captured in Libya last month, make no mention of the anti-Muslim YouTube video that sparked the demonstrations. In court papers filed on Tuesday, federal prosecutors say that Abu Khattala complained about the presence of an American facility in Benghazi several days prior to the attack, and was "motivated by his extremist ideology." Prosecutors added that he has "repeatedly expressed his hatred of Americans and his efforts to target American and Western interests."

The document, which is intended to convince a judge that the man the State Department designated as a terrorist shouldn't be released prior to his trial, provides a brief overview of the case against Abu Khattala. According to the prosecution, on the night of September 11, 2012, "a group of twenty or more armed men" gathered outside the U.S. mission in Benghazi, then "aggressively breached" the gate and set the fire that led to the deaths of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and Information Management Officer Sean Patrick Smith.

...

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/07/benghazi-suspect-supervised-attack-feds-say.html

I've looked at NYT, WaPo, etc., etc., and this is borne out.

The government's own case makes no mention of the movie. None.

You weren't bored when a report stated the video was the reason. Then it was "ah ha! See! Case closed!"

Wrong. I have been bored from the beginning and I never said "See! Case closed" I said "Gee maybe it was because of the video" I never said anything definitively about what caused the attack and made that quite clear unlike the scandaliers.

And I have been bored with this from the beginning because it is quite obvious that the people promoting the Benghazi scandal theories don't give two ####s about Ambassador Stevens and only care about politicizing it in a pathetic attempt to hamstring the President during his final term and paint Hillary with the brush of scandal in the hopes of hurting her in 2016. But none of them really care about the deaths of four Americans. Let's be clear about this as well, I am referring to politicians and pundits because no one cares what message board posters think.

These are the same idiots who steadfastly insist that we were right to invade Iraq, and don't seem to care about the thousands of American deaths (and they ignore the tens to hundreds of thousands of dead innocent Iraqis because, y'know, #### them) and trillions of dollars wasted only to result in an even more destabilized Middle East and leaving America no safer than we were on 9/12/2001.

And if you want to be in the same corner as those jokers that's your problem.

Sorry for lumping you in with the rest of those that jump on any report as vindication for their particular view of this mess.

 

[Chaka]

Guys I'm sorry to do this but this debate was intense enough to follow up:

Providing more fuel for the extremely politicized debate over whether the 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was planned by terrorists or grew out of spontaneous protests, new documents released in the case of Ahmed Abu Khattala, the suspected ringleader captured in Libya last month, make no mention of the anti-Muslim YouTube video that sparked the demonstrations. In court papers filed on Tuesday, federal prosecutors say that Abu Khattala complained about the presence of an American facility in Benghazi several days prior to the attack, and was "motivated by his extremist ideology." Prosecutors added that he has "repeatedly expressed his hatred of Americans and his efforts to target American and Western interests."

The document, which is intended to convince a judge that the man the State Department designated as a terrorist shouldn't be released prior to his trial, provides a brief overview of the case against Abu Khattala. According to the prosecution, on the night of September 11, 2012, "a group of twenty or more armed men" gathered outside the U.S. mission in Benghazi, then "aggressively breached" the gate and set the fire that led to the deaths of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and Information Management Officer Sean Patrick Smith.

...

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/07/benghazi-suspect-supervised-attack-feds-say.html

I've looked at NYT, WaPo, etc., etc., and this is borne out.

The government's own case makes no mention of the movie. None.

You weren't bored when a report stated the video was the reason. Then it was "ah ha! See! Case closed!"

Wrong. I have been bored from the beginning and I never said "See! Case closed" I said "Gee maybe it was because of the video" I never said anything definitively about what caused the attack and made that quite clear unlike the scandaliers.

And I have been bored with this from the beginning because it is quite obvious that the people promoting the Benghazi scandal theories don't give two ####s about Ambassador Stevens and only care about politicizing it in a pathetic attempt to hamstring the President during his final term and paint Hillary with the brush of scandal in the hopes of hurting her in 2016. But none of them really care about the deaths of four Americans. Let's be clear about this as well, I am referring to politicians and pundits because no one cares what message board posters think.

These are the same idiots who steadfastly insist that we were right to invade Iraq, and don't seem to care about the thousands of American deaths (and they ignore the tens to hundreds of thousands of dead innocent Iraqis because, y'know, #### them) and trillions of dollars wasted only to result in an even more destabilized Middle East and leaving America no safer than we were on 9/12/2001.

And if you want to be in the same corner as those jokers that's your problem.

Sorry for lumping you in with the rest of those that jump on any report as vindication for their particular view of this mess.

Couldn't find a post of mine to support your claim?

Just kidding, and no worries. Seriously.

I find extreme viewpoints frustrating on both sides I just see it far more on the scandaliers side in this particular debate. Is anyone (pundit, politician or poster) saying that this was definitively caused by the video?

I just find it so infuriating the number of hearings they are holding and all the attempts to paint this as some huge scandal instead of what it really is which is a great tragedy that, sadly, was not a unique event in our history, heck it isn't even the first attack on our embassy in Benghazi (1967). We can't protect all of our installations at all time and it is unrealistic to hold that as an expectation.

 

[jamny]

Couldn't find a post of mine to support your claim?

Just kidding, and no worries. Seriously.

lol...no, I didn't look. I doubt you would have posted that if there was anything.

I find it more than a little embarrassing for Republicans to continue on with this, and suing the President, when there is so much more that needs to be done. No one, from either side, wants to address the really tough issues and they both welcome these distractions.

 

[timschochet]

Agree with Jamny on his last point. Especially with what's happening in Iraq right now, what purpose does it serve for us to continue this circus?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Agree with Jamny on his last point. Especially with what's happening in Iraq right now, what purpose does it serve for us to continue this circus?

Someone posted the NYT story.

MT posted the transfer to the ship.

I posted the actual, official statement of the Obama administration's USA on the facts of the matter.

There will be a trial, and Hillary will be running for office based on her record as SOS. People debated for 84 pages what happened, now the killers' leader is actually in custody and there is some actual clarity coming into focus.

That's it, those are the updates, no tap-dancing needed.

 

[Chaka]

Agree with Jamny on his last point. Especially with what's happening in Iraq right now, what purpose does it serve for us to continue this circus?

Someone posted the NYT story.

MT posted the transfer to the ship.

I posted the actual, official statement of the Obama administration's USA on the facts of the matter.

There will be a trial, and Hillary will be running for office based on her record as SOS. People debated for 84 pages what happened, now the killers' leader is actually in custody and there is some actual clarity coming into focus.

That's it, those are the updates, no tap-dancing needed.

There is still no scandal.

 

[timschochet]

Agree with Jamny on his last point. Especially with what's happening in Iraq right now, what purpose does it serve for us to continue this circus?

Someone posted the NYT story.

MT posted the transfer to the ship.

I posted the actual, official statement of the Obama administration's USA on the facts of the matter.

There will be a trial, and Hillary will be running for office based on her record as SOS. People debated for 84 pages what happened, now the killers' leader is actually in custody and there is some actual clarity coming into focus.

That's it, those are the updates, no tap-dancing needed.

There dont need to be more hearings. It's a political circus. It makes us look foolish as a nation.

 

[Parrothead]

Agree with Jamny on his last point. Especially with what's happening in Iraq right now, what purpose does it serve for us to continue this circus?

Someone posted the NYT story.

MT posted the transfer to the ship.

I posted the actual, official statement of the Obama administration's USA on the facts of the matter.

There will be a trial, and Hillary will be running for office based on her record as SOS. People debated for 84 pages what happened, now the killers' leader is actually in custody and there is some actual clarity coming into focus.

That's it, those are the updates, no tap-dancing needed.

There dont need to be more hearings. It's a political circus. It makes us look foolish as a nation.

we have hearings over traffic jams.. its what we do

 

[Chaka]

Agree with Jamny on his last point. Especially with what's happening in Iraq right now, what purpose does it serve for us to continue this circus?

Someone posted the NYT story.

MT posted the transfer to the ship.

I posted the actual, official statement of the Obama administration's USA on the facts of the matter.

There will be a trial, and Hillary will be running for office based on her record as SOS. People debated for 84 pages what happened, now the killers' leader is actually in custody and there is some actual clarity coming into focus.

That's it, those are the updates, no tap-dancing needed.

There dont need to be more hearings. It's a political circus. It makes us look foolish as a nation.

we have hearings over traffic jams.. its what we do

13 public hearings and over 25,000 pages of documents.

Don't they have anything better to do, like voting to repeal the ACA...again?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Agree with Jamny on his last point. Especially with what's happening in Iraq right now, what purpose does it serve for us to continue this circus?

Someone posted the NYT story.

MT posted the transfer to the ship.

I posted the actual, official statement of the Obama administration's USA on the facts of the matter.

There will be a trial, and Hillary will be running for office based on her record as SOS. People debated for 84 pages what happened, now the killers' leader is actually in custody and there is some actual clarity coming into focus.

That's it, those are the updates, no tap-dancing needed.

There is still no scandal.

Any real scandal? No. I still like CSTU's statement on it, or at least it's fair. I think the 'so what' is in just getting the facts and history right.

 

[Chaka]

Agree with Jamny on his last point. Especially with what's happening in Iraq right now, what purpose does it serve for us to continue this circus?

Someone posted the NYT story.

MT posted the transfer to the ship.

I posted the actual, official statement of the Obama administration's USA on the facts of the matter.

There will be a trial, and Hillary will be running for office based on her record as SOS. People debated for 84 pages what happened, now the killers' leader is actually in custody and there is some actual clarity coming into focus.

That's it, those are the updates, no tap-dancing needed.

There is still no scandal.

Any real scandal? No. I still like CSTU's statement on it, or at least it's fair. I think the 'so what' is in just getting the facts and history right.

Then leave it to the historians and not the politicians.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Agree with Jamny on his last point. Especially with what's happening in Iraq right now, what purpose does it serve for us to continue this circus?

Someone posted the NYT story.

MT posted the transfer to the ship.

I posted the actual, official statement of the Obama administration's USA on the facts of the matter.

There will be a trial, and Hillary will be running for office based on her record as SOS. People debated for 84 pages what happened, now the killers' leader is actually in custody and there is some actual clarity coming into focus.

That's it, those are the updates, no tap-dancing needed.

There is still no scandal.

Any real scandal? No. I still like CSTU's statement on it, or at least it's fair. I think the 'so what' is in just getting the facts and history right.

Then leave it to the historians and not the politicians.

Well actually it looks like it's being left to the US's and Khattala's lawyers (and Hillary will probably keep having something to say on it herself, it was after all her 3 am moment).

 

[fatness]

The testimony of nine military officers undermines contentions by Republican lawmakers that a "stand-down order" held back military assets that could have saved the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans killed at a diplomatic outpost and CIA annex in Benghazi, Libya.


The "stand-down" theory centers on a Special Operations team of four — a detachment leader, a medic, a communications expert and a weapons operator with his foot in a cast — who were stopped from flying from Tripoli to Benghazi after the attacks of Sept. 11-12, 2012, had ended. Instead, they were instructed to help protect and care for those being evacuated from Benghazi and from the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli.

The senior military officer who issued the instruction to "remain in place" and the detachment leader who received it said it was the right decision and has been widely mischaracterized. The order was to remain in Tripoli and protect some three dozen embassy personnel rather than fly to Benghazi some 600 miles away after all Americans there would have been evacuated. And the medic is credited with saving the life of an evacuee from the attacks.

Transcripts of hours of closed-door interviews with the military leaders by the House Armed Services and Oversight and Government Reform committees were made public for the first time on Wednesday. The Associated Press had reviewed the material ahead of its release.

Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., chairman of the Oversight panel, has suggested Hillary Rodham Clinton gave the order, though as secretary of state at the time, she was not in the military chain of command.

Despite lingering public confusion over many events that night, the testimony shows military leaders largely in agreement over how they responded to the attacks.

Beyond questions of timing, the testimony of Rear Adm. Brian Losey, who was then Special Operations commander for Africa, also challenged the idea the team had the capacity to bolster security in Benghazi.

Losey said there was "never an order to stand down." His instruction to the team "was to remain in place and continue to provide security in Tripoli because of the uncertain environment." Earlier on Sept. 11, the U.S. Embassy in Cairo had been breached as well.

Losey questioned what the four could have done to aid the situation in Benghazi, where American personnel were preparing to evacuate as soon as possible. He said assigning the small team to defend a perimeter wouldn't have been appropriate, and would have meant the military losing its command operation in Tripoli "for the benefit of four riflemen who weren't even riflemen."

"The guy's command and control, he's communications, medical," Losey recounted. "I've got one weapons guy with his foot in a cast. Didn't make a lot of sense."

http://news.yahoo.com/apnewsbreak-no-stand-down-order-benghazi-175147837--politics.html

at Issa.

 

[fatness]

Wednesday evening, Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA), Chairman of the House Committee on Armed Services, decided to release the transcripts of interviews of nine military personnel conducted between January and April of this year regarding the attacks in Benghazi. McKeon has been saying for a while now that he’s satisfied with the military’s response to the Benghazi attack, but it seems no one in his party is listening to his attempt to keep them from attacking our servicemembers.

http://www.politicususa.com/2014/07/09/there-stand-order-democrats-bust-republicans-completely-baseless-benghazi-conspiracy.html

 

[timschochet]

I was reading last night about the Yalta Conference towards the end of World War II. Extreme conservatives (known as "ultras" in those days) led by Joe McCarthy were convinced that there were secret accords in which FDR & company gave away half the world to Soviet Russia. For the next NINE YEARS, they held hearing after hearing in House and Senate. Finally Eisenhower in frustration ordered the public release of all papers related to Yalta, and of course there was nothing there. But this only convinced some conservatives that Ike was part of the conspiracy.

 

[Politician Spock]

Agree with Jamny on his last point. Especially with what's happening in Iraq right now, what purpose does it serve for us to continue this circus?

Someone posted the NYT story.

MT posted the transfer to the ship.

I posted the actual, official statement of the Obama administration's USA on the facts of the matter.

There will be a trial, and Hillary will be running for office based on her record as SOS. People debated for 84 pages what happened, now the killers' leader is actually in custody and there is some actual clarity coming into focus.

That's it, those are the updates, no tap-dancing needed.

There dont need to be more hearings. It's a political circus. It makes us look foolish as a nation.

We're doing things as a nation far more foolish than this circus.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I was reading last night about the Yalta Conference towards the end of World War II. Extreme conservatives (known as "ultras" in those days) led by Joe McCarthy were convinced that there were secret accords in which FDR & company gave away half the world to Soviet Russia. For the next NINE YEARS, they held hearing after hearing in House and Senate. Finally Eisenhower in frustration ordered the public release of all papers related to Yalta, and of course there was nothing there. But this only convinced some conservatives that Ike was part of the conspiracy.

Hm, let us see.

Germany invades Poland.

USSR invades Poland.

Germany takes all of eastern and central Europe.

USSR takes all of eastern and central Europe.

Germany is defeated.

We got into the war to preserve Europe's freedom (aside from other things).

FDR and Stalin and Churchill go to Yalta.

What happened after that?

USSR keeps all of eastern and central Europe, including Poland.

 

[timschochet]

I was reading last night about the Yalta Conference towards the end of World War II. Extreme conservatives (known as "ultras" in those days) led by Joe McCarthy were convinced that there were secret accords in which FDR & company gave away half the world to Soviet Russia. For the next NINE YEARS, they held hearing after hearing in House and Senate. Finally Eisenhower in frustration ordered the public release of all papers related to Yalta, and of course there was nothing there. But this only convinced some conservatives that Ike was part of the conspiracy.

Hm, let us see.

Germany invades Poland.

USSR invades Poland.

Germany takes all of eastern and central Europe.

USSR takes all of eastern and central Europe.

Germany is defeated.

We got into the war to preserve Europe's freedom (aside from other things).

FDR and Stalin and Churchill go to Yalta.

What happened after that?

USSR keeps all of eastern and central Europe, including Poland.

There were legitimate objections to Yalta. That's not what I'm referring to. What I'm referring to is that every time something went wrong during the next 9 years (Russia explodes atom bombs, then H-bombs, Mao takes over China, North Korea invades South Korea, MacArthur is "prevented" by Truman from winning the Korean War, Chiang is "prevented" by Truman from recapturing China, etc., etc.) conservatives believed it was part of the Yalta conspiracy.

 

[Politician Spock]

I was reading last night about the Yalta Conference towards the end of World War II. Extreme conservatives (known as "ultras" in those days) led by Joe McCarthy were convinced that there were secret accords in which FDR & company gave away half the world to Soviet Russia. For the next NINE YEARS, they held hearing after hearing in House and Senate. Finally Eisenhower in frustration ordered the public release of all papers related to Yalta, and of course there was nothing there. But this only convinced some conservatives that Ike was part of the conspiracy.

Hm, let us see.

Germany invades Poland.

USSR invades Poland.

Germany takes all of eastern and central Europe.

USSR takes all of eastern and central Europe.

Germany is defeated.

We got into the war to preserve Europe's freedom (aside from other things).

FDR and Stalin and Churchill go to Yalta.

What happened after that?

USSR keeps all of eastern and central Europe, including Poland.

There were legitimate objections to Yalta. That's not what I'm referring to. What I'm referring to is that every time something went wrong during the next 9 years (Russia explodes atom bombs, then H-bombs, Mao takes over China, North Korea invades South Korea, MacArthur is "prevented" by Truman from winning the Korean War, Chiang is "prevented" by Truman from recapturing China, etc., etc.) conservatives believed it was part of the Yalta conspiracy.

Shame on ALL conservatives. They ALL believed in the Yalta conspiracy. Tim is NEVER wrong in his broad, sweeping categorizations of what people believe. NEVER I TELL YOU! NEVER!!!!!

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Libya Airport Is Crippled in Fighting by MilitiasTRIPOLI, Libya — The halls of this city’s international airport have been emptied of passengers and converted into a barracks for fighters, with a kitchen and a field hospital. Smoke rose from the building on Tuesday, while beyond it, on the airfield, mortar shells crashed into the tarmac.

Three days of pitched battles between feuding militias have left most of the airport’s commercial airplanes, runways and even the tower badly damaged, all but stranding Libyans as their country slides further into turmoil.

The country has been plagued by violence for much of the time since Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s fall in 2011, as the central government has tried in vain to wrest authority from the powerful militias that control territory and vital installations like the airport.

Continue reading the main story Related Coverage

• Rival Factions in Libyan Capital Battle for Control of Main Airport JULY 13, 2014

But the latest dark turn, marked by the demoralizing destruction of the airport but also by furious, deadly battles in Libya’s two largest cities, has stirred new distress among Libya’s international allies and forced the government to contemplate outside intervention.

In an emergency declaration on Monday ordering a stop to the fighting — an order that the militias ignored — the government said it had “studied the strategy of a possible request for international forces to establish the state’s capacity and safeguard citizens and resources of the state, in order to limit chaos.”

It may have been intended as a threat to the armed groups, and there was no sign of any outside actor rushing to help the Libyans. Rather, the country’s friends seemed to be running the other way.

On Monday, the United Nations announced the withdrawal of its mission to Libya because of safety concerns that grew more urgent after the closing of the airport, saying it could not continue its work “while at the same time ensuring the security and safety of its staff as well as their freedom of movement.”

Speaking in Vienna, Secretary of State John Kerry said in a news conference that the United States was “deeply concerned about the level of violence” in Libya. “It is dangerous, and it must stop,” Mr. Kerry said, while pointing to the efforts of international envoys, including from the United States and Britain, to foster dialogue among Libya’s quarreling sides. Those efforts have faltered so far.

At the Tripoli airport, no quick end to the fighting was in sight. Fighters from the western mountain city of Zintan took control of the airport in 2011, after the revolt against Colonel Qaddafi, when the militias involved in the revolt embarked on a mad dash for spoils.

Hundreds of Zintani fighters were in the airport on Tuesday, defending their turf. In the passenger terminal, some cooked dinner, preparing to break the Ramadan fast. On the airfield, the fighters used tanks, mortar shells and antiaircraft guns against their enemies: rival fighters, including from the coastal city of Misurata, who had taken up positions in a village next to the airport.

Rockets had torn through airplane hangars, destroying whatever had been inside. The wing of a plane, pierced by bullets, left fuel dripping on the ground. The fighters from Misurata lobbed mortar rounds back, over the walls of the airport grounds.

The violence had links to a battle on the other side of the country, in the eastern city of Benghazi, where a general named Khalifa Hifter has declared that fighters loyal to him constitute the national army, with a mission to vanquish Libya’s Islamist militias and politicians. The fighting at the airport also seems to reflect the unsettled politics in Libya, where recent elections were expected to return fewer Islamist lawmakers to Parliament.

The fighters from Zintan said their alliance with Mr. Hifter was the reason they were being attacked. A commander, Mahmoud al-Wakwak, said at least 14 of his men had been killed. With his fellow Libyans grounded because of their fighting, he was unapologetic. “We will not let them take the airport,” he said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/16/world/africa/libya-airport-is-crippled-in-fighting-by-militias.html?_r=0

Kerry getting super-serial there.

Man, they are reaaalllly pissd off about that video.

Still goin' at it.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Where are the Benghazi suspects?Tripoli, Libya (CNN) -- A man once detained by Libyan officials and interviewed by the FBI over suspected links to the deadly 2012 attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, has turned up dead.

Faraj al-Shibli, whose name is also spelled Chalabi, was last seen in the custody of a local militia in Marj two days ago, a Libyan source said. His body was found Monday in the eastern Libyan town.

He's the second Benghazi suspect to surface in recent weeks. U.S. forces arrested suspected attack mastermind Ahmed Abu Khattalah last month.

Here's what CNN has previously reported about those suspected of involvement in the attacks. With the exception of Abu Khattalah, it's unknown if any have been charged in connection with the Benghazi attack. The charges remain under seal.

Al-Shibli -- The Libyan government took al-Shibli into custody in March 2013 in connection with the Benghazi attack. The FBI was able to question him during that detention. Al-Shibli was no longer in custody as of May 2013, according to a Libyan source briefed on the case. Libyan officials have not explained why he was released. It's not clear what role he may have played in the attack, or if he's among the suspects named in sealed federal charges brought last year. Al-Shibli was a member of the Libyan Islamist Fighting Group, a militant organization that tried to overthrow the government of late Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi in the mid-1990s. That regime named him as a suspect in the murder of a German counterintelligence official and his wife, who were killed in the Libyan town of Sirte in 1994. Libyan authorities also issued an arrest warrant for former al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in connection with the crime.

...

Ali Ani al Harzi -- Tunisian authorities held him in Tunis for several weeks in 2013 in connection with the Benghazi attack. A Tunisian judge released him in January on grounds of insufficient evidence, but a U.S. law enforcement official with direct knowledge of the Benghazi investigation told CNN at the time that al Harzi's release "doesn't mean he's any less a suspect."

...

Sufian bin Qumu -- He headed the Darnah branch of Ansar al-Sharia, which the U.S. State Department said in January was involved in the Benghazi attack.

Several unnamed Yemeni men -- A senior law enforcement source told CNN in May 2013 that authorities had traced the men to northern Mali, where they are believed to have connected with a fighting group commanded by jihadist leader Moktar Belmoktar. It's unclear where these men might be.

Moktar Belmoktar -- He is an Algerian terror suspect linked to al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb who was on the receiving end of an excited phone call from someone in or close to Benghazi in the attack's aftermath, a source briefed on the investigation told CNN in May 2013. "Mabruk, Mabruk!" the caller repeated, meaning "Congratulations" in Arabic. There is no proof the call was about the attack, but it was assumed to be, the source said. Troops in Chad claimed to have killed Belmoktar in 2013, but several taped messages from him have been released since then.

Mohammed Jamal Abu Ahmed -- According to a U.S. official with direct knowledge of the investigation, authorities were examining in December whether Abu Ahmed played a role in the attack. He is allegedly the leader of a post-revolution terrorist network in Egypt. He was released from jail after the downfall of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak but was thought to be back in an Egyptian prison late last year.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/14/world/africa/libya-benghazi-suspect-dead/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Obviously just some aggravated citizens who were spontaneously protesting in outrage after websurfing on youtube.

 

[Chaka]

 

[BigSteelThrill]

House Intel Committee Reveals Benghazi FindingsA report unanimously adopted by the Republican-led House Intelligence Committee last week flatly contradicts a number of criticisms of the Obama administration’s response to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.


The report denies several allegations that have been made against the administration, including the inflammatory claim that military assets available to assist the beleaguered U.S. compound were ordered to “stand down” during the attack, which left four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, dead.

The members of the committee also voted to declassify the report so that the details of the lengthy investigation can be made public.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/house-intel-committee-reveals-benghazi-131300736.html

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

House Intel Committee Reveals Benghazi Findings

A report unanimously adopted by the Republican-led House Intelligence Committee last week flatly contradicts a number of criticisms of the Obama administration’s response to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.


The report denies several allegations that have been made against the administration, including the inflammatory claim that military assets available to assist the beleaguered U.S. compound were ordered to “stand down” during the attack, which left four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, dead.

The members of the committee also voted to declassify the report so that the details of the lengthy investigation can be made public.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/house-intel-committee-reveals-benghazi-131300736.html

Good update:

"The Committee spent thousands of hours in the course of the investigation, which included poring over pages of intelligence assessments, cables, notes and emails,” said Rep Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD) in a statement. “The Committee held twenty briefings and hearings and conducted detailed interviews with senior intelligence officials and eyewitnesses to the attacks, including eight security personnel on the ground in Benghazi that night. The result is a bipartisan, factual, definitive report on what the Intelligence Community did and did not do.” ...

He continued, “It also found that a mixed group of individuals including those associated with Al-Qaeda, Qadafi loyalists and other Libyan militias participated in the attack. ... “[T]he Intelligence Community warned about an increased threat environment, but did not have specific tactical warning of an attack before it happened,” he said, a finding “consistent with testimony that the attacks appeared to be opportunistic.”

The report also addresses the controversial “talking points” delivered by National Security Adviser Susan Rice, when she appeared on Sunday morning talk shows in the days following the attacks. Rice said the attacks appeared to have been a spontaneous reaction to an anti-Islam film that was released on YouTube in the days prior to the attack.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), said in a release, “The Intelligence Committee report adds to the body of investigative work now completed by numerous committees in Congress, and reaches the same noncontroversial conclusions – that the initial talking points provided by the intelligence community were flawed because of conflicting assessments not an intention to deceive.”

It's pretty clear now that the administration was in fact point blank wrong about the movie being behind the cause for the attack. Definitely not a conspiracy yet definitely wrong.

Interesting stuff.

 

[tommyGunZ]

House Intel Committee Reveals Benghazi Findings

A report unanimously adopted by the Republican-led House Intelligence Committee last week flatly contradicts a number of criticisms of the Obama administration’s response to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.


The report denies several allegations that have been made against the administration, including the inflammatory claim that military assets available to assist the beleaguered U.S. compound were ordered to “stand down” during the attack, which left four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, dead.

The members of the committee also voted to declassify the report so that the details of the lengthy investigation can be made public.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/house-intel-committee-reveals-benghazi-131300736.html

Good update:

"The Committee spent thousands of hours in the course of the investigation, which included poring over pages of intelligence assessments, cables, notes and emails,” said Rep Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD) in a statement. “The Committee held twenty briefings and hearings and conducted detailed interviews with senior intelligence officials and eyewitnesses to the attacks, including eight security personnel on the ground in Benghazi that night. The result is a bipartisan, factual, definitive report on what the Intelligence Community did and did not do.” ...

He continued, “It also found that a mixed group of individuals including those associated with Al-Qaeda, Qadafi loyalists and other Libyan militias participated in the attack. ... “[T]he Intelligence Community warned about an increased threat environment, but did not have specific tactical warning of an attack before it happened,” he said, a finding “consistent with testimony that the attacks appeared to be opportunistic.”

The report also addresses the controversial “talking points” delivered by National Security Adviser Susan Rice, when she appeared on Sunday morning talk shows in the days following the attacks. Rice said the attacks appeared to have been a spontaneous reaction to an anti-Islam film that was released on YouTube in the days prior to the attack.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), said in a release, “The Intelligence Committee report adds to the body of investigative work now completed by numerous committees in Congress, and reaches the same noncontroversial conclusions – that the initial talking points provided by the intelligence community were flawed because of conflicting assessments not an intention to deceive.”

It's pretty clear now that the administration was in fact point blank wrong about the movie being behind the cause for the attack. Definitely not a conspiracy yet definitely wrong.

Interesting stuff.

the initial talking points provided by the intelligence community were flawed because of conflicting assessments not an intention to deceive.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

House Intel Committee Reveals Benghazi Findings

A report unanimously adopted by the Republican-led House Intelligence Committee last week flatly contradicts a number of criticisms of the Obama administration’s response to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.


The report denies several allegations that have been made against the administration, including the inflammatory claim that military assets available to assist the beleaguered U.S. compound were ordered to “stand down” during the attack, which left four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, dead.

The members of the committee also voted to declassify the report so that the details of the lengthy investigation can be made public.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/house-intel-committee-reveals-benghazi-131300736.html

Good update:

"The Committee spent thousands of hours in the course of the investigation, which included poring over pages of intelligence assessments, cables, notes and emails,” said Rep Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD) in a statement. “The Committee held twenty briefings and hearings and conducted detailed interviews with senior intelligence officials and eyewitnesses to the attacks, including eight security personnel on the ground in Benghazi that night. The result is a bipartisan, factual, definitive report on what the Intelligence Community did and did not do.” ...

He continued, “It also found that a mixed group of individuals including those associated with Al-Qaeda, Qadafi loyalists and other Libyan militias participated in the attack. ... “[T]he Intelligence Community warned about an increased threat environment, but did not have specific tactical warning of an attack before it happened,” he said, a finding “consistent with testimony that the attacks appeared to be opportunistic.”

The report also addresses the controversial “talking points” delivered by National Security Adviser Susan Rice, when she appeared on Sunday morning talk shows in the days following the attacks. Rice said the attacks appeared to have been a spontaneous reaction to an anti-Islam film that was released on YouTube in the days prior to the attack.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), said in a release, “The Intelligence Committee report adds to the body of investigative work now completed by numerous committees in Congress, and reaches the same noncontroversial conclusions – that the initial talking points provided by the intelligence community were flawed because of conflicting assessments not an intention to deceive.”

It's pretty clear now that the administration was in fact point blank wrong about the movie being behind the cause for the attack. Definitely not a conspiracy yet definitely wrong.

Interesting stuff.

the initial talking points provided by the intelligence community were flawed because of conflicting assessments not an intention to deceive.

Gunz, I've said this quite a few times - I have never advocated a conspiracy theory here, not once, I have just suggested incompetence on the part of the administration.

It continues to look like State and intelligence on the ground was saying it was militants including some connected to real terror groups like AQ (see above) and was in no way spontaneous. The administration seemed to be getting their info off of Google News.

 

[Jackstraw]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvTNyKIGXiI

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Libya : Benghazi now an “Islamic emirate” under Ansar al-ShariaA day after the militants of Ansar al-Sharia took over an army base in Benghazi and killing more than a score of soldiers, they have announced that Benghazi is now formally an “Islamic emirate.” The claim is however being denied by pro-government militias who called their withdrawal from “certain positions” was due to “tactical reasons.” Benghazi is located in eastern part of the country and its fall to Ansar al-Sharia could mean that Islamist militants could end up setting a similar Islamic caliphate that has been proclaimed by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria in the Middle East.

Ansar al-Sharia came to light during the war against the Gadhafi regime but soon became famous after being linked to the attack of the 2012 US consulate in Benghazi which left four US citizens dead amongst which was Ambassador Christopher Ross.

Fighting in Benghazi has been very fierce for the past two weeks and the announcement by the official spokesman of the Islamist group on Radio Tawhid sent a shockwave around the country. “Benghazi has now become an Islamic emirate,” he said. The announcement was made after the group seized weapons and ammunition from an army base with the Red Cross confirming the recovery of 35 dead soldiers with the belief that more will be recovered.

Khalifa haftar, a former army general who has decided to lead an arm campaign against the Islamists, was quick to refute Ansar al-Sharia’s announcement as a as a “lie.” He claimed that the “national army is in control of Benghazi and only withdrew from certain positions for tactical reasons.”

Nevertheless, the claim of the establishment of an “Islamic emirate” in Benghazi could be a signal of the government’s weakness to unite the country.

http://northafricapost.com/5877-libya-benghazi-now-an-islamic-emirate-under-ansar-al-sharia.html

Man, they are really, really ticked about that movie.

 

[Chaka]

House Intel Committee Reveals Benghazi Findings

A report unanimously adopted by the Republican-led House Intelligence Committee last week flatly contradicts a number of criticisms of the Obama administration’s response to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.


The report denies several allegations that have been made against the administration, including the inflammatory claim that military assets available to assist the beleaguered U.S. compound were ordered to “stand down” during the attack, which left four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, dead.

The members of the committee also voted to declassify the report so that the details of the lengthy investigation can be made public.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/house-intel-committee-reveals-benghazi-131300736.html

Good update:

"The Committee spent thousands of hours in the course of the investigation, which included poring over pages of intelligence assessments, cables, notes and emails,” said Rep Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD) in a statement. “The Committee held twenty briefings and hearings and conducted detailed interviews with senior intelligence officials and eyewitnesses to the attacks, including eight security personnel on the ground in Benghazi that night. The result is a bipartisan, factual, definitive report on what the Intelligence Community did and did not do.” ...

He continued, “It also found that a mixed group of individuals including those associated with Al-Qaeda, Qadafi loyalists and other Libyan militias participated in the attack. ... “[T]he Intelligence Community warned about an increased threat environment, but did not have specific tactical warning of an attack before it happened,” he said, a finding “consistent with testimony that the attacks appeared to be opportunistic.”

The report also addresses the controversial “talking points” delivered by National Security Adviser Susan Rice, when she appeared on Sunday morning talk shows in the days following the attacks. Rice said the attacks appeared to have been a spontaneous reaction to an anti-Islam film that was released on YouTube in the days prior to the attack.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), said in a release, “The Intelligence Committee report adds to the body of investigative work now completed by numerous committees in Congress, and reaches the same noncontroversial conclusions – that the initial talking points provided by the intelligence community were flawed because of conflicting assessments not an intention to deceive.”

It's pretty clear now that the administration was in fact point blank wrong about the movie being behind the cause for the attack. Definitely not a conspiracy yet definitely wrong.

Interesting stuff.

the initial talking points provided by the intelligence community were flawed because of conflicting assessments not an intention to deceive.

Gunz, I've said this quite a few times - I have never advocated a conspiracy theory here, not once, I have just suggested incompetence on the part of the administration.

It continues to look like State and intelligence on the ground was saying it was militants including some connected to real terror groups like AQ (see above) and was in no way spontaneous. The administration seemed to be getting their info off of Google News.

Your claim of incompetence does not ring true either.

 

[Chaka]

Let it go saints. It will never be the controversy that you seem to hope it will be.

 

[urbanhack]

Let it go saints. It will never be the controversy that you seem to hope it will be.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Let it go saints. It will never be the controversy that you seem to hope it will be.

the initial talking points provided by the intelligence community were flawed because of conflicting assessments not an intention to deceive

It also found that a mixed group of individuals including those associated with Al-Qaeda, Qadafi loyalists and other Libyan militias participated in the attack

That is from BST's link. That is, the talking points were wrong.

Yaknow Chaka, it is the opposite of a controversy now. Both parties want to run from this. I've never said there was a conspiracy, I've never said the military should have been the sooner or that the President should have sent troops or jets to save the day. I have basically said that the administration, especially Rice and Obama as spokespersons, had the claim about the movie as the cause for a spontaneous demonstration or protest wrong from the beginning. I've linked to the Senate (read Democratic) report and quoted from it. And as we get further and further away from it, including BST's own link, the more and more wrong those statements by Rice and Obama look. That's it, no conspiracy, never has been. I have no idea why it's wrong or crazy to post updates or comments on these facts as they develop. I'm all in favor of the House releasing it's report just as the Democrats suggest here. You're right, Democrats don't care because it contradicts the president's themes and Goppers care less and less because their theories get more and more remote as well.

 

[Chaka]

Let it go saints. It will never be the controversy that you seem to hope it will be.

the initial talking points provided by the intelligence community were flawed because of conflicting assessments not an intention to deceive

It also found that a mixed group of individuals including those associated with Al-Qaeda, Qadafi loyalists and other Libyan militias participated in the attack

That is from BST's link. That is, the talking points were wrong.

Yaknow Chaka, it is the opposite of a controversy now. Both parties want to run from this. I've never said there was a conspiracy, I've never said the military should have been the sooner or that the President should have sent troops or jets to save the day. I have basically said that the administration, especially Rice and Obama as spokespersons, had the claim about the movie as the cause for a spontaneous demonstration or protest wrong from the beginning. I've linked to the Senate (read Democratic) report and quoted from it. And as we get further and further away from it, including BST's own link, the more and more wrong those statements by Rice and Obama look. That's it, no conspiracy, never has been. I have no idea why it's wrong or crazy to post updates or comments on these facts as they develop. I'm all in favor of the House releasing it's report just as the Democrats suggest here. You're right, Democrats don't care because it contradicts the president's themes and Goppers care less and less because their theories get more and more remote as well.

I didn't say you were promoting conspiracy I said you are promoting controversy when there is barely that. They ran with the movie story a little longer than you think they should have even though they didn't have all the information at the time.

There were protests on the American embassy in Egypt on 9/11/2012 and those protests were linked with the movie at the time and AFAIK that has not changed. So using that as a jumping off point for why Benghazi happened made sense at the time. And now we are calling the attackers of the Benghazi embassy "opportunistic", well what opportunity were they exploiting? Could it have been related to the protests over the film that were happening in Egypt?

Of course they were wrong in retrospect but you are trying to whip this up into some gross level of Executive incompetence when it barely registers on the Executive Incompetence Radar (Hello? Weapons of mass destruction? Anyone?).

 

[Chaka]

Be honest saints are you trying to get the stink of controversy to stick to Hillary? Is that your primary motivation in here?

 

[timschochet]

This is the right handing Democrats another election.

What? Highly doubt the Democrats hold the Senate after this election.

What? The Benghazi drum-banging isn't about the midterms.

It energizes the conservative base further, which just sets the stage for another ###-kicking.

I think you have to look at the bigger picture here. If there were no Benghazi, the people pushing Benghazi would be feeding some other fake scandal into the outrage machine. There's nothing specific about Benghazi that will energize the base any more than whatever other scandal would have been in its place. The fact they keep having to beat this dead horse is evidence that they couldn't latch onto something with meat on the bone—like an Obamacare disaster or skyrocketing inflation, since neither materialized.

The problem you have here is that Benghazi is not a fake scandal; it has become clear that the administration pushed the video story for far longer than they knew it to be true so as not to harm their re-election campaign.

Curious to know if you still believe this to be true, Slapdash.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Be honest saints are you trying to get the stink of controversy to stick to Hillary? Is that your primary motivation in here?

Isn't it enough to say this was a very interesting historical event and the facts continue to come out?

I actually saw Hillary on CNN with Zekhariah recently and thought she was pretty good, and actually she impressed me. I will leave it at that, maybe glad to discuss in the Hillary thread but to me it looks more and more like the State Department knew what was going on (she says in her book and she said on Zakhariah that the first State heard of it it was militia / Al-Sharia attacking) but it did not have much to do with Rice's appearance or Obama's statements. That's just my impression. I buy her statement that she did not have to appear on every Sunday show, that's fine, it really wasn't her call actually by the sound of it. I also buy her statements on the US not being within range of being able to do anything.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Let it go saints. It will never be the controversy that you seem to hope it will be.

the initial talking points provided by the intelligence community were flawed because of conflicting assessments not an intention to deceive

It also found that a mixed group of individuals including those associated with Al-Qaeda, Qadafi loyalists and other Libyan militias participated in the attack

That is from BST's link. That is, the talking points were wrong.

Yaknow Chaka, it is the opposite of a controversy now. Both parties want to run from this. I've never said there was a conspiracy, I've never said the military should have been the sooner or that the President should have sent troops or jets to save the day. I have basically said that the administration, especially Rice and Obama as spokespersons, had the claim about the movie as the cause for a spontaneous demonstration or protest wrong from the beginning. I've linked to the Senate (read Democratic) report and quoted from it. And as we get further and further away from it, including BST's own link, the more and more wrong those statements by Rice and Obama look. That's it, no conspiracy, never has been. I have no idea why it's wrong or crazy to post updates or comments on these facts as they develop. I'm all in favor of the House releasing it's report just as the Democrats suggest here. You're right, Democrats don't care because it contradicts the president's themes and Goppers care less and less because their theories get more and more remote as well.

I didn't say you were promoting conspiracy I said you are promoting controversy when there is barely that. They ran with the movie story a little longer than you think they should have even though they didn't have all the information at the time.

There were protests on the American embassy in Egypt on 9/11/2012 and those protests were linked with the movie at the time and AFAIK that has not changed. So using that as a jumping off point for why Benghazi happened made sense at the time. And now we are calling the attackers of the Benghazi embassy "opportunistic", well what opportunity were they exploiting? Could it have been related to the protests over the film that were happening in Egypt?

Of course they were wrong in retrospect but you are trying to whip this up into some gross level of Executive incompetence when it barely registers on the Executive Incompetence Radar (Hello? Weapons of mass destruction? Anyone?).

Oh Ok. Iraq/WMD --------------------->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Benghazi is way out of that scale.

I do think our president being that out of whack on facts for that long is not a good thing. I also think the NSA writing political strategy memos is even worse.

 

[fatness]

I do think the Republican committee members trying for months to manufacture this into a criminal matter, absent the facts to do so, allowed them to make utter fools of themselves publicly. Awesome comedy. America is great like that.

Good thing nobody here was taken in by all the alarmist claims.

 

[fatness]

The members of the committee also voted to declassify the report so that the details of the lengthy investigation can be made public.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/house-intel-committee-reveals-benghazi-131300736.html

Good.

 

[Chaka]

I do think the Republican committee members trying for months to manufacture this into a criminal matter, absent the facts to do so, allowed them to make utter fools of themselves publicly. Awesome comedy. America is great like that.

Good thing nobody here was taken in by all the alarmist claims.

Plenty of mouthbreathers were taken in by it all and at this point, after all the meaningless sound bites, the only think they think they know is "Hillary killed Chris Stevens with her bare hands"

And that was the point of all this shameful nonsense.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

And that was the point of all this shameful nonsense.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Let it go saints. It will never be the controversy that you seem to hope it will be.

the initial talking points provided by the intelligence community were flawed because of conflicting assessments not an intention to deceive

It also found that a mixed group of individuals including those associated with Al-Qaeda, Qadafi loyalists and other Libyan militias participated in the attack

That is from BST's link. That is, the talking points were wrong.

Yaknow Chaka, it is the opposite of a controversy now. Both parties want to run from this. I've never said there was a conspiracy, I've never said the military should have been the sooner or that the President should have sent troops or jets to save the day. I have basically said that the administration, especially Rice and Obama as spokespersons, had the claim about the movie as the cause for a spontaneous demonstration or protest wrong from the beginning. I've linked to the Senate (read Democratic) report and quoted from it. And as we get further and further away from it, including BST's own link, the more and more wrong those statements by Rice and Obama look. That's it, no conspiracy, never has been. I have no idea why it's wrong or crazy to post updates or comments on these facts as they develop. I'm all in favor of the House releasing it's report just as the Democrats suggest here. You're right, Democrats don't care because it contradicts the president's themes and Goppers care less and less because their theories get more and more remote as well.

I didn't say you were promoting conspiracy I said you are promoting controversy when there is barely that. They ran with the movie story a little longer than you think they should have even though they didn't have all the information at the time.

There were protests on the American embassy in Egypt on 9/11/2012 and those protests were linked with the movie at the time and AFAIK that has not changed. So using that as a jumping off point for why Benghazi happened made sense at the time. And now we are calling the attackers of the Benghazi embassy "opportunistic", well what opportunity were they exploiting? Could it have been related to the protests over the film that were happening in Egypt?

Of course they were wrong in retrospect but you are trying to whip this up into some gross level of Executive incompetence when it barely registers on the Executive Incompetence Radar (Hello? Weapons of mass destruction? Anyone?).

Oh Ok. Iraq/WMD --------------------->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Benghazi is way out of that scale.

I do think our president being that out of whack on facts for that long is not a good thing. I also think the NSA writing political strategy memos is even worse.

That's the beauty of conspiracy theories. Even when they are proven completely false, those who fanned the flames won't admit they were wrong.

 

[fatness]

I have my suspicions, which is Secretary Clinton told Leon [Panetta] to stand down, and we all heard about the stand-down order for two military personnel. That order is undeniable.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), remarks during a GOP fundraising dinner, Concord, N.H., Feb. 17, 2014