Benghazi’s Back — Sort Of
Benghazi is back.
In a way.
The awaited special report by an independent review panel led by retired Ambassador Thomas Pickering and the former Joint Chiefs chairman, Adm. Mike Mullen, has been delivered to Congress and offered few revelations, at least according to the Associated Press.
The report appeared to break little new ground about the timeline of the Benghazi attack during which Libyan Ambassador Chris Stevens, information specialist Sean Smith and former Navy SEALs Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods — who were contractors working for the CIA — were killed. Stevens’ slaying was the first of a U.S. ambassador since 1988.
But it confirmed that contrary to initial accounts, there was no protest outside the consulate and said responsibility for the incident rested entirely with the terrorists who attacked the mission.
In the immediate aftermath of the attack, administration officials linked the attack to the spreading protests over an American-made, anti-Islamic film that had begun in Cairo earlier that day. Those comments came after evidence already pointed to a distinct militant attack. U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice appeared on numerous TV talk shows the Sunday after the attack and used the administration talking points linking it to the film.
But we knew that, didn’t we?
The report apparently also excoriates State Department branches (the Bureau of Diplomatic Security and the Bureau of Near East Affairs) for security lapses. Something else we knew — or at least assumed. Security at the Benghazi compound was obviously horrendous. It didn’t take a report — or a rocket scientist — to tell you that.
Further, according to the AP, the report exonerates the military. Quoting verbatim: “There was simply not enough time for armed U.S. military assets to have made a difference.”
How that was ascertained is unclear since the same report adds little to what we know of the timeline. But never mind. Perhaps that will be made clear when Pickering and Mullen testify before Congress on Wednesday. Or perhaps not.
The report also makes 29 recommendations for tightening up security in these dangerous foreign venues, which Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, herself not able to testify because of a concussion, has nonetheless found time to accept. She thanked the review board for their work.
Okay, so now we know — hardly anything.
The elephant is still very much in the room. Who told Susan Rice to lie about these events and why did they do it? And why did the president lie about Benghazi subsequently to everyone from the United Nations General Assembly to David Letterman, assuming you think he told the truth about it at his initial press conference on the subject in the first place, which I certainly don’t?
Perhaps Candy Crowley will do some in-depth investigation and find this out for us. Well, we all know she won’t, but somebody should. Who that will be is also unclear, given the current state of investigative reporting in our country and the current intellectual and moral level of our Congress.
The administration also has on its side that the world — not to mention most of their media lackeys — wants to move on from this. Benghazi is yesterday’s scandal. Didn’t Obama win the election? We have the fiscal cliff to deal with. And gun control. And who knows what else? Maybe condoms. That’s never been resolved.
Admittedly, Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham have shown a certain amount of life on this issue. Will they have the energy and courage to continue? It’s hard to believe it with the pace of (often deliberate) distraction coming out of the Washington press corps and the White House. That the president lied about a major homicidal event in the War on Terror is no big deal. He didn’t fiddle with an intern, did he?
Someone out there must know some of the truth, some CIA whistle-blower who normally leaks to the New York Times or the Washington Post, but they’re not listening this time. Deep Throat, where are you?
More from Claudia Rosett:
Here is the latest poop and scoop, and of course the powers that be will make sure that there is a ‘no-fault’ result when all is said and one – http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/12/19/hillarys-benghazigate-stonewall-will-she-or-wont-she-testify-that-is-the-question-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/
But that doesn’t let the people off the hook from doing their due diligence via MASSIVE pressure exerted on Capitol Hill!
Hillary! Hillary!
I wonder how many bottles of gin a night Hillary is putting down these days. She is looking more and more like an old unkempt drunk. In between bottles she probably holds her hands over her eyes and chants, “You can’t see me! You can’t see me! You can’t see me!”
BTW, isn’t “stomach flu” often used as a euphemism for hung over? And “concussion” for falling down drunk?
It sure was as far as her “husband” was concerned.
what would you do if the knowledge that you were directly responsible for the deaths of 4 people was hanging over your head, and you were trying desparately to direct the blame to someone else?
Nadhmi Auchi’s gut in Chicago
Rezko’s friend Dr. Ronald Michael and the State Attorney’s Office
http://illinoispaytoplay.com/2012/12/19/rezkos-friend-dr-ronald-michael-and-the-state-attorneys-office/
oh, and btw, unless she drinks herself to death or otherwise makes a complete and utter morally reprehensible caricature of herself in the next couple years, this incident will have absolutely no effect whatsoever on the love and adulation showered on her by the masses….Hilliary 2016
Will someone who likes Hillary please explain this phenomenon to me? I am utterly baffled.
Hillary sufferred from Benghazigate virus, or whatever she wanted to have. One thing I am sure “hillary, you can’t grow conscience”. You really stooped so low since you joined hussein obama’s team. It is such a pathetic lie.
“No bell in us tolls to let us know for certain when truth is in our grasp.”
William James
One thing’s for sure, if she were a Republican, her little concussion incident would have sealed her fate for any possible Presidential aspirations. After all, we all now know that any concussion at all will inevitably lead to long-term brain damage. Yep, Hillary is damaged goods now that she’s had a concussion (as if she wasn’t damaged enough already). Of course, since she’s a Democrat, it won’t matter.
Too late to save America as we once knew it, Adina. Better to spend all our energies on making Israel stronger and better.
Enough of the self promotion already. There are very good writers on this site, as you obviously know, and by now we all know where your site is if we want to go there.
by your pleas to cease & desist & the powers that be here don’t seem to mind. Take my example & just skip her (his?) posts.
So don’t read the posts, and don’t click the links. You have no right to demand that other people not have the same options that you do. Oh, wait, you’re a Lefty, correct? Never mind…
I, for one, appreciate her links.
Then I would say you should spend more of your time perusing her blog site. She obviously needs your readership.
What’s you problem?
“But that doesn’t let the people off the hook from doing their due diligence via MASSIVE pressure exerted on Capitol Hill!”
I haven’t seen any appointed or elected official in the last several years who shows any interest in or ability to apply massive pressure on Capitol Hill or anywhere else.
The lack of political interest in Washington policies is perhaps overstated. The nation is polarized, and both political parties are internally incoherent. But one fact stands out: communist ideas are current, and many potential protesters are demoralized. I wrote about that here: http://clarespark.com/2012/07/19/communist-ideas-go-mainstream/.
Many of the individual congress-critters are “internally incoherent”, or simply “incoherent” as we used to say in less thoroughly corrupt times.
Who is willing to ask the questions and make the culprits answer?
Me! Me! Pick me! None of those congress-clowns or staffers, nor the corrupt judges, nor the media is willing to seriously try, because it is counter to their agendae.
Yes Congress is a den of traitors.
Their primary job is to defend the U.S. Constitution above all other considerations, such as political affiliation. Considering the present situation, the entire House of Representatives, where Articles of Impeachment originate other than through State Legislatures, has not called for the impeachment of Obama, they are complicit with his crimes against this nation, which must include the present support of war against Syria as well as Libya, the murder of American Citizens without due process, etc, etc, etc. Killing children around the world with Drones.
Tell your Congressman to do their job or resign. This means impeach Obama now.
Rep. Walter Jones (R) from North Carolina has put forth the warning of impeachment, HRC 107, as regards the President, Obama, if he goes to war without Congressional authorization.
Dumbass Republicans are not calling for Obama’s impeachment just as the Democrats would not impeach Bush. This is because both parties want an imperial presidency, both parties are corrupt warmongering sellouts.
Further, according to the AP, the report exonerates the military. Quoting verbatim: “There was simply not enough time for armed U.S. military assets to have made a difference.”
This is an absurd lie. There is, and was, an airbase just 400 miles away and the “events” lasted for 7 hours and for all they knew during that time it could have lasted a lot longer. And this is what we get for $800,000,000,000 ?
There was an AC-130 gunship orbiting overhead, but Barry told them not to shoot.
The “no time” thing is a giant lie.
Not only absurd but cynical and insulting. Hey, who cares, give ‘em another big bucket of whitewash to chug down, the peasants will do just fine, right?
Note too the deafening silence from GOP ‘leadership’.
And MSM indifference.
Nothing good will emerge from any of this: the lid is on, the fix is in, and the rest of us have a Maalox moment. That’s it.
For military assets to get to Benghazi within seven hours suggests a speed of 60 miles per hour.
The fastest oared warship we have would be lucky to break 6 MPH, assuming the Kraken didn’t get it first.
Get real.
Ah, but we have boats that can go underwater.
Huh? Yes and 3 MPH on foot, 15 MPH on bicycles and 37 MPH if they borrowed some 20 year old Fiats from the Italians. But how about helicopters (180 MPH) and airplanes. Would those be “real” enough for you?
No matter what and no matter how lame their arguments, 51% of Americans will never believe that Obama could do anything wrong. That’s why we are wasting out time with Benghazi.
My Predator pilot then in Afghanistan reports the government is lying about everything. She is VERY upset about EVERYTHING.
Why is that Am. Stevens, and Navy Seals Doherty and Woods are the only casualties that earn mention? You’d think we’re watching a Star Trek episode where the uncredited nobody actor in the battle scene is one that surely will be killed. Why is “victim no. 4″ simply an “also ran”.
Because in the greatest of Star Trek traditions, “red shirts are expendable” when furthering a narrative. The left has also done another very interesting thing here:
Say..this all occurred with a republican administration. Aside from the obvious that security would’ve been far more stringent, but that the cries about how much the republicans hate homosexuals. Stevens was killed and that would’ve set forth Matthews, Madcow, Schultz and the rest of the Hee-Haw gang into tirades about Stevens being assigned that post because “republicans know how much islamists brutalize gays”. Or would they?
The selective silence by the left and lies of omission are often the great indicators of what they’re really about.
Needless to say the tragedy will never be resolved and…interestingly, and all-too-sadly, Obama embraced the shooting in Newtown as a welcome deflection to get out from the stank of Benghazi. The timing couldn’t have been more welcome. And that it is a perfect canvas for a gun-control opportunist like him makes it that much more welcome.
He’s a sick individual. Most of the democrats are deluded anyhow. Utopia, if only they can do what they want, their way.
His name is Mr. Sean Smith.
Rest in Peace.
Round and round they go, spin upon spin just hoping that no one ever asks ‘Where was the USURPER when the Ambassador was been sodomized and killed and the other brave Americans killed and tortured,what were his exact movements for the 7 HOURS the that the attack took place, when did he go to and when did he leave the Situation Room, when and to whom did he give the order ‘do everything you can to save them’ as he SAID he did and who is being investigated for DISOBEYING that Presidential order if indeed he is not LYING about giving it’
They are the REAL questions the American public deserves to know answers too.
You obviously have not been paying attention. The president had nothing–repeat nothing–to do with this debacle. Move on, move on, move on. (Sarc)
“Stevens’ slaying was the first of a U.S. ambassador since 1988.”
I think that is factually wrong. Stevens was the first US Ambassador killed since 1979, when I believe we lost one in Afghanistan. Anyway, somebody can check this out to see if it’s true.
But the larger question is, WHO did not approve of, let alone increase, the security at Benghazi and for Stevens in particular, especially since Stevens was in such a dangerous part of Libya? The report says that “the Bureau of Diplomatic Security and the Bureau of Near East Affairs” are to blame. But WHO at those two bureaus denied the request for additional security? A “bureau” didn’t deny the request, PEOPLE did. So who were those PEOPLE?
Then, after having answered that question, the next logical question is did the top people at those two bureaus forward the request (and the denials of the requests) for more security to Hillary Clinton? In fact, the most critical question is, who KNEW about all of Stevens’ desperate requests for more security, since there were several of them, including one that was made, tragically, on 9/11 itself, the very day he was killed? Did this information about the requests go as high as the White House, or did it end with Clinton?
Clinton has A LOT of questions to answer. But unless somebody has some evidence that she knew about it, or at least was told about it by somebody, then Hillary is going to walk on everything, which is a shame since she undoubtedly knew about all of this. Hillary, along with Susan Rice, was one of biggest boosters for intervention into Libya. It seems impossible that she knew nothing about what was going on with one of her best ambassadors in one of the most dangerous countries in the Middle East.
Ironically, on September 11, 2007, the Politico printed a recap of Hillary Clinton’s questioning General David Petraeus about Iraq. She said that, “I think that the reports that you provide to us really require a willing suspension of disbelief.” http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0907/Clinton_Believing_Petraeus_and_Crocker_requires_willing_suspension_of_disbelief.html
One could certainly say the same thing about the State Department’s report regarding Benghazi.
Very important question. If Clinton knew about the requests and denials for more security, then the terrorists most likely did too. Remember who Hillary’s aide is. And if that’s true, how current was the information the killers had.
Obama likes the idea of gun free zones for schools. Yet, even better, he likes the idea of fault free zones in the most corrupt administration in the history of this nation.
#5 Liberty Ship
“I think that is factually wrong. Stevens was the first US Ambassador killed since 1979, when I believe we lost one in Afghanistan. Anyway, somebody can check this out to see if it’s true.”
It’s correct…Ambassador Raphel, our Amb to Pakistan was killed along w/General Zia (the ruling dictator) when he made the ultimate mistake (along with his Defense Attache) to accept a ride back to the capital from Bahawalpur (it was an inspection of some Abram tanks)in the general’s C-130. Sabotage or assasination? All hushed p quickly.
In short, our last two Ambassadors killed in line of duty were in Afghanistan (’79) and Pakistan (’88) respectively.
‘Someone out there must know some of the truth, some CIA whistle-blower who normally leaks to the New York Times or the Washington Post, but they’re not listening this time. Deep Throat, where are you?’
Everything that happened was observed and _recorded_ by people up and down
various chains of command in accordance with standard operating procedures.
President Obama is the Top Boss of all those people, and could order them
to release the recordings, assuring them that no blame will attach to the
actors or the whistle-blowers. He will not because he is to blame.
Mr. Simon, the line from AP you reported had one purpose – to avoid anyone from having to answer the only relevant question: Did the President give cross border authorization? If not, he left 30 plus people to die during an off again on again fire fight that lasted 14 hours. 2 did die. Others were wounded. All are now unaccounted for, in all liklihood to keep the administration from answering this question.
Everything else is smoke and mirrors.
I read in this so called “unclassified” version of the report that no one at the state dept. would lose their job.
People like Charlene Lamb who was on the front lines of consistently turning down requests out of Benghazi for beefed up security, including, reportedly, the day of the incident itself, Sept. 11.
Once a federal hire, always a federal hire.
And Hillary is unavailable for testimony. She has been gallivanting around the planet continuously in the interim but has found (concocted) a convenient out for the moment, 3+ months after the fact.
People who vote to reelect such an administration deserve this kind of “special report”.
And they deserve all the rest, all the damages to the economy and to our military power.
We don’t, but our failures are a fault that we must own.
Roger, we conservatives continue to demonstrate Einstein’s definition of a form of insanity. We have pointed out Obama Administration falsehoods regarding Operation Fast and Furious and the Benghazi cover-up over and over again with hopes that the leftist establishment media would be goaded (shamed) into assigning well paid, full time reporters to honestly and comprehensively seek the truth. Well, for reasons which should have become obvious by now, it ain’t gonna work.
Someone, or everyone, in the alternative media must begin to search for a means for funding a highly competent, full time, professional, investigative reporting team that has the resources and expertise to find every missing witness, uncover every buried body and establish the who, what, when, where, why and how of top tier investigative reporting.
Part time bloggers and journalists spreading themselves thinly, and trying to respond to all of the misleading trash spread by the leftist trash creators simply cannot devote the focus necessary to fully expose the serious instances of willful misconduct perpetrated by the Obama administration. We need to provide the American public with solid evidence that cannot be ignored or forgotten.
What do you say or do when it is blatantly obvious well in advance of an election that for 2 solid weeks a sitting United States President consistently lied all over the airwaves and in front of the UN..
And he gets re-elected anyway ?
There isn’t much we can say or do but hope the republic survives until his term is over. The Obama zombies just flat out don’t care what Obama does; He IS the Messiah and we are more than lucky to have him as El Presidente.
Or we can move to Colorado or Washington and choom out for the next four years.
What if Obama has plans to get rid of the 22nd Amendment and Rule for a third and even a fourth term?
It’s strange but all he does now is: campaign. His web site, now, has posted his speech to Newtown…that’s Obama politicizing a tragedy..and it asks at that site for donations.
Why does Obama need campaign donations? The election is over.
IRS rules allow a campaign contribution to become non-taxable income to the “candidate” through a series of form filings with the IRS (the actual process requires a series of legal filings etc- there are tax lawyers in D.C whose specialty this is) – all very legal and utterly corrupt – this is how paupers like Harry Reid become millionaires and why Obama is still ‘running’ – it’s about the money. It’s always about the money.
Obama’s net worth (as reported in his filing when he ran for the Senate) in 2005 was between $200K and $400K. Today his net worth is around $11M. He did not earn that increase simply from salary, or even from his book sales. No. He takes advantage of an IRS “loophole” to convert campaign contributions into personal wealth — legally.
Well, Nixon did not lie in front of the UN before he was re-elected but….
I understand your dicouragement, tanstaafl, and feel it myself at times. But what you must remember is that almost half of the voters found their way through the left-wing establishment media’s continuous bombardment with disinformation, distortion and socialist propaganda.
Are the founding purposes of the American republic worth fighting to preserve? With all of my being, I beieve they are. A battle has been lost, but the war continues, and will continue as long as there are mature, self motivated, independent thinking Americans who are determined to chart their own destiny.
Dust yourself off, rest if you are weary, salve your wounds, give thought to a more effective way to defeat the socialists and then turn your thoughts into action. There is no reason to relinquish self respect. Pause and reasses when necessary, but never give up. You are fighting a most worthy battle – - a battle for human dignity. Never give up.
We need to buy one of the broadcast networks, not a cable like FOX, but one of the majors.
The alternative we are heading toward, unless TRUTH prevails, and soon, will be much more costly in life and treasure.
Calling Mr. Adelson, Mr. Sheldon Adelson….
Calling Mr. Adelson, Mr. Sheldon Adelson, come in please…..
It’s ironic that Obama was using that “consulate” as a conduit for arming the Libyian “freedom fighters”, while now looking to disarm Americans. As you can read in the news, weapon sales are booming here as American freedom fighters coninue to arm themselves and stock up for the inevitable. But inevitable what?
Yes I have been surprised to see in the WSJ the Benghazi facility where Stephens was killed referred to as a “consulate.” My impression had been that it was NOT a consulate.
Clinton said she ‘took responsibility’ for Benghazi. Then she accedes in sending lame Rice out to speak on her behalf and on Barry’s. Then she hides, twice. Well, she is quitting anyhow, preparing for ’16. All pundits say she is an overwhelming favorite.
What happened to the United States of America? Somebody write the history of the fall – no need to wait.
High tech banana republics of the USA variety do not need to answer to such trivial matters.
Our banana republic needs to keep marching forward to strengthen its union base and reduce income inequality – all under the careful guidance of the eilte Breitbart-denoted “Democrat media complex”. It really seems a simple as that.
Not the power, the pride (and firm will) is broken in the USA, and in other countries of the West too, including my country: Israel.
Speak for yourself, Jossi. Mine is not broken.
Along with this report comes the “internal investigation” that says mistakes were made, but nobody made them. The cover up is in there is nothing left to look for, so it will be put behind them and they can continue with business as usual. This is the most inept and corrupt administration in the history of our nation.
Why do I get the feeling that the Pickering and Mullen report is just an attempt to head off the hearings Congress will hold early next year – just one more way of saying “Nothing to see here folks – move on”?
Its obvious that this feckless administration does not want us to know what was going on in Benghazi that night. Forget WHO gave what orders – I want to know WHY an ambassador was even there that night. Meeting a Turkish Ambassador was the given answer but makes no sense – why couldn’t they have met in Tripoli? There was a physical reason why they had to meet in Benghazi. Why? I bet the answers will be very interesting. Might even cook a career or two eh?
“There was simply not enough time for armed U.S. military assets to have made a difference.”
The attack went on for more than 6 hours, more than enough time to send help from the nearest airbase. How much time would they have needed?
“The administration also has on its side that the world — not to mention most of their media lackeys — wants to move on from this. Benghazi is yesterday’s scandal. ”
Funny how the media never wants to move on when a Republican is president. Did the media want to move on after the far smaller Watergate break in?
I do not understand the obsession with the Susan Rice aspect of the story.
What I want to know is, WHO ORDERED OUR MILITARY TO STAND DOWN AND REFUSE TO RESCUE OUR PEOPLE? !!!!!!!!!!!
She is like the canary in the mine — a clear signal that something is amiss.
Susan Rice is a distraction.
Who gave the stand down order?
Exactly. Since Gen. Carter Hamm was the only person other than POTUS who was authorized to give the order to send help and he was relieved of his command by his 2nd after giving the order, the only conclusion is that he was defying an order from above to stand down. Rep. Jason Chaffetz claimed he was told by Gen. Hamm that no one gave the general the order to go in. Therefore, Hamm had to have been relieved of his command for defying an order not to go in. Only POTUS or his spokesperson could have done that. It’s the only thing that makes sense (to me).
Rice is a distraction. So are the 3 scapegoats who resigned today. The real questions are who gave the stand down order (or gave no order and went to bed to be refreshed for an early morning flight to Vegas, baby!) and who ordered the cover up? Who really produced the video as it had only 17 hits prior to the US Embassy in Tripoli apologizing for it.
While we are focused on Obama BS the Russians have upped the ante and we are one step closer to WW3 -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zemQ4u5J7gA&feature=player_embedded
I don’t know the elephant’s name or shoe size, but can tell you why it’s here: President You Didn’t Build That, Mrs. Clinton, Huma Abedin and numerous others in the State Department, and more than a few in the U.S. military have united behind foreign policies that are deeply and acutely hateful to both America and Israel and supportive of Islamic jihad.
YDBT is a passionate anti-American, anti-individualist, anti-capitalist Jew hater. The State department has been heavily infested with assorted communists, socialists, self-proclaimed “progressives,” Arabists and Islamists, and Jew haters at least since the 1930s. I have no idea why the military has turned toward the jihadis, but can tell you there’s a reason we don’t still hear the word “quagmire” very often: it would contradict the official narrative.
Was the U.S. arming this or that jihadi organization? From all that’s been turned up thus far, I believe we have to conclude that’s a fact. It’s ugly in and of itself; I believe it’s going to prove much, much uglier when its implications see the light of day. Someone’s going to wonder why the U.S. was arming Islamic jihadis. Someone’s going to wonder what else was being done and doubtless still is being done.
It’s not at all difficult to understand why YDBT felt compelled to lie about the Benghazi fiasco: he had much to try to hide, and in any event, congenital liars lie for the sake of lying. It’s child’s play to figure out why Susan Rice and that Clinton woman et alia so willingly helped YDBT tell his decidedly less than convincing Benghazi lies: sycophants always do “whatever it takes,” and those we’ve encountered to date seem to be congenital liars themselves. The higher level questions that need to be asked are:
1.) What exactly is U.S. Middle Eastern policy?
2.) Why does it have to be lied about?
In answering those and related questions, I believe history will validate the assertion I’ve made above:
YDBT
I like the new name.
Apparently some state dept. people have “resigned” today, including the woman I mentioned above, Charlene Lamb,deputy assistant secretary responsible for embassy security who testified (clueless, CYA) in October…
“I made the best decisions I could with the information I had,” Lamb said. “We had the correct number of assets in Benghazi at the time of 9/11.”
She also told Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., that she rejected requests for more security in Benghazi, instead training “local Libyans and army men” to provide security…
I’m sure those who died are thrilled that 3 worthless bureaucrats have lost their jobs
Yes, President YDBT is a great acronym for Obama, with his sneers of contempt for individual work and success.
As for those three who ‘lost their jobs’ today, I’ll bet that they simply lost these particular positions but did not have to resign from the public service. They’ll keep their salaries, benefits and pensions..in some other position in the government.
This phony report will likely go down in the annals of American history
as one of the most blatant whitewashes of lies, deception,
misleading information, corruption and high treason to ever originate in
the White House.
We must never, ever forget Benghazi.
We need a new president……soon.
Good luck, America.
nobody was ordered to stand down-there were no roadblocks-there were no crowds in the streets-ambassador stevens made the decision to go there hinself-there were no prisoners at the connsulate-there was no armed drone or C-130. There was not enough security and that is the State department and CIA’s fault. Depending on local security, as is done in 99% of the embassies doesn’t work in countries without a real government, Libya, Sudan, etc. And if Jennifer graham gets a Pulitzer it should e for fiction because even the worst reporter couldn’t have been this wrong and not disscovered it. Three state departments employees have resigned-bet more will soon.
“He didn’t fiddle with an intern, did he?”
Well…… We don’t know if he did or he didn’t!!!!!
The only thing we know for certain is that the MSM would NEVER let us know if he did!!!
“By Roger L. Simon
The elephant is still very much in the room. Who told U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice to lie about the events surrounding the Benghazi attack, and why did they do it? And why did the president lie about Benghazi subsequently to everyone from the United Nations General Assembly to David Letterman?”
Mr. Simon, I have a question: who, in your opinion will be willing to ask the questions you posed and make the culprits answer? That’s what I’d appreciate you wrote about.
This former USAF Lieutenant (Reserve) 1954-1957 with active duty on Kyushu at an Air Defense Direction Center (Seburiyama) who used to scramble F86D fighters against what we called “Flash Tracks” within a three minute period after the “Flash” of a radar plotted track says, all of these years later, that….
“Quoting verbatim: “There was simply not enough time for armed U.S. military assets to have made a difference.” …..is absolute bullsh*t.
Improvements, presumably, have been made and modifications adjusted since then to adapt to the distances and times, with suitable aircraft available in our current Mediterranean/North African Theater. [sarcasm off]
The key thing is the “alert status” of a particular squadron at a particular airbase.
Who the he*l is trying to fool who? Civilians control the Military. Let these smartass civilians giving the Orders testify under oath in the glare of a bi-partisan Joint Committee.
Charlie, hello.
Your post re: scrambling 86′Ds reminds me of my time on Okushiri-Shima in the same time frame. We regularly scrambled 86′Fs/Ds from Misawa, when the Ruskies flew out of Vladistok directly at our site, only to veer off just before reaching the island; interesting time’s indeed!
DDay! Cheers!
…with one of those rare “inversions” we could see a bit of the Chinese coast.
I have no doubt that the planes could have gotten there, but with the chaos on the ground, they would have done exactly what? Blow up friend and foe alike?
“Blow up friend and foe alike?”
Not necessarily, brilliant illumination is a terrific deterrent until ground reinforcements (hopefully from our “ally”, that particular Libyan “government”) arrive who’re familiar with the terrain and the tactics used by the attackers….and, who may very well be familiar with the attackers’ tribes and families, individually……but that’s another subject altogether.
At issue here is the “unavailability” of our own superbly equipped military…..which of course is abject B.S. Among the varied unanswered questions is why this Libyan “government” on hand during that several hour period….again, several hour period….. wasn’t itself better prepared, then of course our superior equipment wouldn’t have been needed.
Couldn’t these butchering Muslims been kept at a safe distance? This of course raises the nasty question, will Muslims rat on Muslims?…..ask yourself….even inside our United States?…yet another interesting politically incorrect question….key here of course is Obama-olitics.
We can go on and on…..
The official Benghazi Report is now out. Obama, Clinton, Petraeus, Panetta and Rice all had nothing whatsoever to do with the US government’s “response” to the attack on the US “consulate” in Benghazi. The names Obama, Clinton, Petraeus, Panetta, Rice do not even appear anywhere in its 39 pages.
So we now officially know they all saw nothing, they heard nothing, they knew nothing. They were not there. they did not even get up that morning.
Clarity, indeed.
I just finished reading the report and realized that not one word was mentioned about Ambassador Stevens’ autopsy report. It certainly would answer a few questions, principally, how did the ambassador really died? The autopsy report remains hidden to public scrutiny.
It might have something to do with his being gang raped before being murdered,
From the report-
Security in Benghazi was not recognized and implemented as a “shared responsibility” by the bureaus in Washington charged with supporting the post,resulting in stove-piped discussions and decisions on policy and security. That said, Embassy Tripoli did not demonstrate strong and sustained advocacy with Washington for increased security for Special Mission Benghazi.
It looks like the board openly laid some of the blame on Ambassador Stevens, who of course now cannot respond. Who truly knows if he did or did not demand more security? The bureaucrats up the stovepipe who resigned (possibly eligible for reassignment)?
Hillary would have be in trouble if she testified in front of Congress on Benghazi.
So she drank her troubles away.
AP Transcript, White House Press Conference, 7 May 1915.
White House Press Secretary J. Carny opened the press conference with a brief statement.
Mr. Carny: First and foremost, the President and the First Lady would like to join all Americans in extending their deepest sympathies to the families of the passengers who died yesterday on the Lusitania. Tragic incidents like this one clearly demonstrate the need for improved iceberg reporting in the Atlantic shipping lanes. It is the President’s hope that Congress will appropriate the funds necessary for the Coast Guard to expand its iceberg patrols so that incidents like this one can never happen again. All right, first question. Helen?
Miss Thomas, AP: Thank you, Jay. Let me see if I have this straight: it is the Administration’s position that the Lusitania was struck by an iceberg?
Mr. Carny: Yes it is. All the intelligence we have right now points to this being a tragic accident. We have no information that says otherwise.
Miss Thomas: Then what are we to make of the reports in the British press that claim that a German U-boat sank the Lusitania?
Mr. Carny: We’ve seen those reports as well. First, I would point out that the British are hardly neutral observers here. They are at war with Germany, so if the British can make the Germans look bad then so much the better for them. This is part and parcel of that effort. The President is not going to allow this sort of bump in the road negatively impact American foreign policy. Second, an iceberg is an iceberg, simple as that. As far as we know, the iceberg had no political allegiance to either side in the European war. It was an entirely random act of God. Mr. Duranty?
Mr. Duranty, New York Times: Jay, how can the Administration be so sure that the iceberg was not working for one side or the other? The British obviously want us to come in on their side. Could they have put the iceberg up to this in order to create a casus belli?
Mr. Carny: That’s an interesting hypothesis, Walt, but the Office of Naval Intelligence has already investigated that possibility and they tell the Administration that neither the Allied powers nor the Central Powers have an iceberg capability. As far as we are concerned, this was a lone iceberg.
Mr. Duranty: Just a quick follow-up, Jay. How do you account for some of the survivors’ claims that they saw a torpedo’s wake in the water just moments before the iceberg allegedly struck the ship?
Mr. Carny: Whales.
Mr. Duranty: I beg your pardon?
Mr. Carny: What those people saw were whales creating a bubble net to catch fish with. There’s a very interesting article in this month’s National Geographic magazine about the phenomenon, complete with a colored Autochrome insert of the whales and the bubble net. Fascinating stuff.
Mr. Duranty: Are you serious?
Mr. Carny: Totally. Look, Walt, the people who claimed they saw torpedo wakes in the water aren’t naval officers. I doubt they would know what a torpedo’s wake looked like if it came up to them on the street and knocked their hats off. Let’s face reality here: being on a ship that strikes an iceberg and sinks is a highly stressful experience. You’re tired, you’re overwrought, you’re cold, you’re under more pressure than you’ve ever been in your entire life. As any good lawyer can tell you, those conditions do not make for reliable eyewitness testimony. On the psychological aspect of this tragedy, I should point out that our Embassy in London will be providing grief counseling and psychological services for any American survivor who feels they need the help. Mr. Matthews?
Chris Matthews, Washington Daily Tingle: Jay, let’s get down to brass tacks here. There’s more than a little speculation here and in London that the reason the President is sticking to this iceberg story is that he intends to run for President next year on the platform of he kept us out of the war and so he’ll do whatever it takes to keep us out of the war, including ignoring the deaths of 124 Americans on the Lusitania. Anything to that?
Mr. Carny: I don’t think that that deserves an answer. The idea that the President of the United States would use a disaster like this to advance his re-election campaign next year is just too cynical for words, even by Washington standards.
Mr. Matthews: Then why would this iceberg go after the Lusitania?
Mr. Carny: We don’t have all the facts yet, but according to the Office of Naval Intelligence this iceberg objected to a movie about the Titanic sinking now showing in New York. The iceberg apparently found the depiction of icebergs in that film demeaning and offensive. The Attorney General is looking into the matter now.
Mr. Matthews: Looking into the matter how?
Mr. Carny: The United States Marshals have brought the producer of the film so we can question him and find out what his motivations were in making this film. And we have also asked the Mayor of New York to close down any theater showing this film.
Mr. Matthews: What about the First Amendment?
Mr. Carny: What about the First Amendment? It’s a movie about the Titanic, Chris. It’s not as if the producer was making a movie with Charlie Chaplin doing something for laughs like cooking pork chops over a stack of burning Korans, after all. We have to be sensitive to the emotional context here.
Mr. Matthews: Hey, works for me.
Mr. Carny: Thanks, Chris. Miss Mitchell?
Miss Mitchell, National Biscuit Company: Jay, this iceberg attack took place off the southern coast of Ireland. Will the Attorney General be looking at the possibility of Fenian involvement?
Mr. Carny: At this point, Andrea, nothing is off the table, but I can’t go further into the details at this point as the Attorney General’s investigation is ongoing.
Miss Mitchell: Will the Attorney General be asking for any cooperation from the British government?
Mr. Carny: We will be, that’s obvious. The Lusitania was a British ship and it sank in international waters off the coast of Ireland. So cooperation is, almost by definition, a given in this case. I should point out, however, that this cooperation does not mean that the United States is taking a position on the outcome of the European war. This is purely a police matter. No one should read anything more into this cooperation than that.
Miss Mitchell: So this should not be seen as an attempt to influence the Irish and/or the German vote next year?
Mr. Carny: Absolutely not. Okay, who’s next? Jorge?
Jorge Ramos, El Excelsior: Jay, isn’t the southern coast of Ireland a bit far south for an iceberg this time of year?
Mr. Carny: Not at all. Remember that the Titanic was struck in the middle of April three years ago.
Mr. Ramos: That’s true, but the Titanic was struck in the middle of the North Atlantic. The Lusitania went down in the Southwest Approaches, which is nowhere near Greenland or the Arctic pack ice. And your statement about whales doesn’t seem to hold water, either. Our London bureau has interviewed many of the survivors and every eyewitness we have talked to says the same thing, that they saw a line of bubbles coming straight for the ship’s hull, followed by two large explosions. None of the eyewitnesses say anything at all about an iceberg.
Mr. Carny: Look, Jorge, you can do as much original reporting as you want, but it’s not going to change our position. We have the facts: the Lusitania was hit by an iceberg and sank. Period. You’re putting way too much emphasis on what the survivors thought they saw and not enough on what the Administration is saying here now.
Mr. Ramos: Let me go through this again, Jay, just to make sure I’ve got the details right. The President is saying that an iceberg that no one saw sank a British ship in a declared war zone because the iceberg didn’t like a movie that no one saw in New York. Furthermore, the torpedo wake that the survivors did see was in fact a pod of whales traveling in a perfectly straight line, a phenomenon unknown in nature, and that these whales were hunting fish or krill or something that was prepared to blow itself up in order to get away from the whales. Is that right?
Mr. Carny: Precisely, except without the hint of sarcasm I’m hearing, Jorge.
Mr. Ramos: Just a quick follow-up, Jay. Is it true that the Lusitania was carrying war supplies, including munitions, bought here in the United States in its hold? And wouldn’t the sale of munitions to Great Britain require some sort of Congressional approval?
Mr. Carny: That’s a lot of baloney, Jorge. It’s 1915; isn’t there a revolution going on in Mexico? Why don’t you go cover that instead of peddling these idiotic rumors at a White House press conference, for crying out loud? Anyway, in other news, the President will be traveling to Philadelphia tomorrow to spend a little time at the Philadelphia Cricket Club’s newly refurbished golf course. He’ll be back here at the White House Tuesday of next week. Okay, that’s it for me. Have a nice day, everyone.