I like the ping pong ball analogy.
The story/perception wass the attack was in response to the video. It matters because it’s not some American nutjob who “caused/triggered” the attack, but just the US presence in Libya alone was enough. To me, that’s very significant.
There weren’t any cables coming from the consulate about a protest or group of people outside (that we know of). There would have been. There’s a guy who sits in an information room and when something happens - let’s the Embassy/Response Team/State Dept know. There is no doubt he would have cabled that a growing crowd of protesters was gathered outside the consulate, at least to have the response team stationed two miles away on alert. So I fail to see where any miscommunication could have happened from Benghazi.
I suppose that doesn’t mean the attack wasn’t based on the video, just that there was not a protest beforehand. Anyways, maybe the WH just assumed that because there were protests in other countries over the video on the same day, this attack was based on the same reason’s people were protesting. Or maybe we don’t know all the facts. But I still haven’t seen any conflicting evidence to suggest it wasn’t just a straight up attack.
Watergate? Really? From the link, this is three emails out of a potential avalanche of data that day. One of the emails cites posts on Facebook and Twitter as their source that Ansar al-Sharia was involved. To say that officials “deliberately lied” is a stretch, and it’s hardly the equivalent of taped White House conversations showing the President planning to use the CIA to impede an FBI investigation and planning blackmail payments to cover up a crime.
Really? What crime was he committing? What crime was he covering up? This won’t even be Obama’s 9/11. Where were you on that? Did you demand the impeachment of George Bush?
Some crazy/angry/terroristy people attacked us on the same day 19 other cities had riots over that stupid film. People died, it was tragic, but hardly a coverup or some severe failing. They’ll do better next time
According to Media Matters, Obama has had at least eight “Katrinas”, three “Waterloos”, two “Watergates”, an Iranian hostage crisis, a 9/11, an Iraq, an Enron, and a “My Pet Goat moment”.
And that’s just from the first year and a half of his presidency. It’s a miracle he’s still in office.
Plain and simple: someone directly in charge of security in Libya fucked-up. Film or no film, it’s pretty clear that Libya is hardly a consolidated democracy much less a united country. Add to the fact that the Ambassador went to Benghazi in rather reckless though obviously good-willed fashion – being as it is, not just the flashpoint/excuse for the OTAN intervention, but a known enclave of well-armed (mostly by the West!) ‘rebels’ – and you have…well, what you had. Mind you, England’s consulate had already been attacked there & they retired all/most of their personnel.
So yeah, mistakes were made…but I don’t think it’s an ‘evil cover-up’ or anything of the sort. Just the nature of the beast: the US’s attempt to police the world. Can’t be done. Not Obama, not Romney, not Reagan’s ghost.
As a political point it’s worthless – as part of a larger discussion, valid. But no one went (dares?) there.
Not a liberal so grain of salt. My take is there is no -gate. At most what we have is a short term attempt at CYA by the administration and some confusion from the top guys (Biden, press secretary, etc) that made them look a bit incompetent. Compared to some of the clusterfucks under Bush though this is pretty small beer. But…it’s what the 'Pubs have as material to attempt to attack Obama over foreign policy, which frankly is Obama’s strongest suit IMHO, and if they can get traction just before the election then it will be a positive for Romney. If not, nothing lost. With the compressed timeframe to election it’s worth the gamble I guess. Don’t think it’s going to work, but you never know.
As an unseemly politicization of the deaths of four Americans.
Come on folks, we are better than this.
No we aren’t and we never were. Come on. We politicize deaths all the time. Let’s get real here.
The transitional period of an oil-rich Muslim country in a strategic location is PRIME territory for US intelligence to do whatever it is that it does to encourage friendly regimes, and I’d imagine the embassy was more about that sort of thing than spreading goodwill and stamping passports.
Likewise, I’d imagine there is a reluctance to immediately blurt out all kinds of details before they figured out how to handle any intelligence related loose ends and make sure any assets in the area were protected.
My take on this is that it’s the same reaction we saw after Pearl Harbor and 9/11 (and dozens of other examples). A tragedy happened and people were killed.
No reasonable effort is going to always prevent tragedies like this from happening. But after the fact, it’s always possible to go back and see something that might have been done differently.
Add politics to this and you get “This only happened because those guys were in office. If we had been in office, we would have done things differently.”
Yes. And…
No. We aren’t.
How do I see it?
Number of Americans killed in Libya in 2012: regrettably, 4.
Number of Americans killed in Iraq in 2012: [1 (non-hostile)](http://icasualties.org/iraq/fatalities.aspx).
Number of American soldiers killed in Iran in 2012: 0
Number of American soldiers killed in Syria in 2012: 0
Number of Americans killed in terrorist attacks in NYC in 2012: 0Or to fizzle as sputteringly as Ayersgate, Wrightgate, Beersummitgate, Birthergate… the list goes on and on.
Keep pounding. I’m confident you’ll coax that square peg through the round hole eventually.
I just happened upon Joe Biden’s remarks to the father of one of the ex-Seals killed in Benghazi-quite astounding.
I guess it was poor Joe’s attempt to provide some levity.
You’re getting your “news” from Glen Beck again, aren’t you? I don’t believe a word of that guy’s story. None of it. It’s outrageous.
Who would do that? Even if you think Joe Biden is a gaffe factory, can you believe he’d go up to the father of one of the Seals killed in Benghazi and ask him “in a boisterous voice” if his son always had balls as big as cue balls? Seriously? A man who was in the Senate for 30 years, the vice-president for 4 now?
I’m in the “we see this as another stupid-ass wingnut attempt to generate a scandal where none exists” camp.* If it weren’t for that, we wouldn’t be thinking of it at all.
Truer words were never spoken.
*I’m certainly not saying that libruls have never done the same thing. But it seems that the past four years have been filled with dozens, perhaps hundreds, of attempts to gin up Obama administration ‘scandals’ that quickly proved to be nothingburgers. Shirley Sherrod! Solyndra! Birth certificate! Apology tour! Auto bailout was crony capitalism! Conspiracy to alter unemployment numbers! Obama gutted welfare work requirements! And on and on.
You have no idea what you’re talking about. You want Obama to be wrong and evil, and you assume that he must be, but that assumption is not sound.
The Republican base is motivated by fake issues and misinformation. The reason they’re so incensed at Obama’s every move is that people they get their news from are lying and presenting common things as outrageous. You’re being manipulated.
How do liberals see it?
Crooks and Liars point at who are so crooked that they need servants to help them screw their pants on every morning. *
That is the way I see it too, this accusation is so low that, in a fair universe, it should convince independents and reasonable Republicans to not encourage that kind of trash by not electing the proponents and the beneficiaries of those lies into office.
- Tip to the hat to Hunter S. Thompson.