• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Benghazi - the gift that keeps on giving

Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
This whole story is so utterly convoluted it has no hope of being an impact on the election.

Obama is praising his foreign policy and the elimination of OBL.
Implication that he is trying to portray is we got the head of AQ now.
with all the other publicized strikes against AQ; they are being relegated to minor irritant.
The attacks have shown that that is not the case - creating a major hole in his foreign policy umbrella.

If the attacks are spontaneous with the video as a trigger; then his coverup will work.

If it is terror and potentially caused by a lack of concern to the threat; he has a problem.

Deception to the public
And either State is full of it or the WH is full of it or both (my theory)
WH knew what was happeing;
WH knew of the threats
State ignored the threats - bean counter is an excuse.
 
Thanks, yes I do. The context is scum like Boomerang are happy to exploit the death of four Americans if they can use it to attack their enemies (i.e., Obama and Democrats).

Oh please, just stay on that high horse there buddy....willing to bet if the situation was reversed you'd be one of the first yahoos to post something similar.

Cry us all a river with your faux angst...pathetic.

Just admit it, the prez fucked up, big time, and continually fucks up by trying to downplay his fuckup, period
 
Barack Obama is a Liar

It's very difficult to explain to the hope and change crowd that idolize our first black president what he did wrong. The problem is compounded because lying to achieve a goal is not considered wrong among this same crowd. The ends justify the means and all that.

It's been said before. All he had to do was admit and maintain the position that it was a coordinated attack by terrorists. On the surface it appears that his ego wouldn't let him do so. I think it runs deeper than that. I think that he had actually convinced himself that he had turned the tide in the ME. That the sincere handshake and a bow had gotten the job done. Admitting that we had been attacked on what is considered our own soil by terrorists hell bent on killing some of our citizens was for him, a does not compute moment.

With a willing and compliant press he could have maintained the charade within his own mind and still have been the greatest president ever. Unfortunately for him a few in the press with some scruples that had maintained a degree of professionalism actually did some investigation and shared what they'd learned. The next mistake was the attempt to maintain the lie after everyone capable of critical thought knew otherwise. I can imagine it's a shock to find that one is not judged by all to be a success based solely on intentions. That there are still people in this country that base success on results. He did not heal the rift, his failure was blasted out around the world and he got caught in an enormous lie that the majority of adults would have been smart enough to not continue to propagate. Children yes, adults no.

It's not their first grandiose lie and we could be in for four more years of it too. I think it's time to put an adult back in charge.
 
Oh please, just stay on that high horse there buddy....willing to bet if the situation was reversed you'd be one of the first yahoos to post something similar.
Knock yourself out. Find an example of me celebrating tragedy like that. I won't wait up. In my book, that is the most repugnant, immoral form of partisanship, and I don't practice it. YMMV.


Cry us all a river with your faux angst...pathetic.
No angst here at all, sweetie. Just the recognition that there are too many slimeballs who place party above country. Sorry if I struck a nerve.


Just admit it, the prez fucked up, big time, and continually fucks up by trying to downplay his fuckup, period
L2read. What did I already say about it, in this very thread? I disagree with the way the administration handled this. I'm just not a frothing loon searching for phony reasons to be OUTRAGED at Obama. (I have far more reasoned, substantive issues with Obama than this.)

By the way, if you don't want to look like such an ignorant tool, you might read some of the extensive information Blankslate provided. Dates, intel reports, quotes, those sorts of pesky facts the nutter fringe loves to ignore. He's shown the truth is not nearly so black and white as you Foxbots have been programmed to believe.
 
Barack Obama is a Liar

It's very difficult to explain to the hope and change crowd that idolize our first black president what he did wrong. The problem is compounded because lying to achieve a goal is not considered wrong among this same crowd. The ends justify the means and all that.

It's been said before. All he had to do was admit and maintain the position that it was a coordinated attack by terrorists. On the surface it appears that his ego wouldn't let him do so. I think it runs deeper than that. I think that he had actually convinced himself that he had turned the tide in the ME. That the sincere handshake and a bow had gotten the job done. Admitting that we had been attacked on what is considered our own soil by terrorists hell bent on killing some of our citizens was for him, a does not compute moment.

With a willing and compliant press he could have maintained the charade within his own mind and still have been the greatest president ever. Unfortunately for him a few in the press with some scruples that had maintained a degree of professionalism actually did some investigation and shared what they'd learned. The next mistake was the attempt to maintain the lie after everyone capable of critical thought knew otherwise. I can imagine it's a shock to find that one is not judged by all to be a success based solely on intentions. That there are still people in this country that base success on results. He did not heal the rift, his failure was blasted out around the world and he got caught in an enormous lie that the majority of adults would have been smart enough to not continue to propagate. Children yes, adults no.

It's not their first grandiose lie and we could be in for four more years of it too. I think it's time to put an adult back in charge.
Speaking of grandiose lies, I see you continue to pretend the information available to the administration at that time was clear and certain. It simply, factually was not. You also ignore the fact that quite early on people in the administration publicly acknowledged they were investigating to see if this was more than the opportunistic exploitation of the widespread outrage about the YouTube video.

It's been said before. All you had to do was admit you'd been duped by the one-sided squealing from the nutter bubble. On the surface it appears that your ego won't 't let you do so. I think it runs deeper than that. I think that you've actually convinced yourself that everything that Democrats do is evil or incompetent. But it's not your first grandiose lie. With a willing and compliant Fox media, you could have maintained the charade in your own mind that you're somehow thoughtful, rational, and capable of anything beyond parroting the RNC's propaganda points.

🙄

(In other words, your spew was some of the most inane, most partisan, most self-serving vacuous tripe I've read in a long time ... including PJenna's self-aggrandizing monologues. /golfclap )
 
Speaking of grandiose lies, I see you continue to pretend the information available to the administration at that time was clear and certain. It simply, factually was not. You also ignore the fact that quite early on people in the administration publicly acknowledged they were investigating to see if this was more than the opportunistic exploitation of the widespread outrage about the YouTube video.

It's been said before. All you had to do was admit you'd been duped by the one-sided squealing from the nutter bubble. On the surface it appears that your ego won't 't let you do so. I think it runs deeper than that. I think that you've actually convinced yourself that everything that Democrats do is evil or incompetent. But it's not your first grandiose lie. With a willing and compliant Fox media, you could have maintained the charade in your own mind that you're somehow thoughtful, rational, and capable of anything beyond parroting the RNC's propaganda points.

🙄

(In other words, your spew was some of the most inane, most partisan, most self-serving vacuous tripe I've read in a long time ... including PJenna's self-aggrandizing monologues. /golfclap )

They freaking WATCHED the attack occuring, with no angry mob or protest there. Then Obama and this administration said it was protests and some rogue elements of the protests that did it because of some never before heard of video.

That is a bald faced lie, and they kept that lie going for 2 weeks, hell Obama is probably still saying it was a mob protest over a video when that is not true and he knows it's not true.

Don't give me that "no information" crap, that had all the information and lied about it.
 
They freaking WATCHED the attack occuring,
Yes, dear, they watched the attack. What is your point? Nobody denies the attack occurred.


with no angry mob or protest there.
True, there was no mob outside by the time the drone was on the scene. Stretch your few coherent brain cells for a moment and think about why that might be. If you were part of a protest and mortar shells started dropping nearby, things started exploding, you became engulfed in the thick, black smoke of burning diesel, what do you do? Do you stand there like an idiot, or do you get the hell out of there?

(In case that's too tough for you, the answer is: You get out of there. It's not surprising there was no crowd visible by the time the drone go into position and we started seeing live video.)


Then Obama and this administration said it was protests and some rogue elements of the protests that did it because of some never before heard of video.

That is a bald faced lie, and they kept that lie going for 2 weeks.
Speaking of bald-faced lies, it was hardly a "never before heard of video". The furor this video was causing in the Muslim world had already been reported in the U.S., and there had been demonstrations due to it earlier the very same day. It was natural to initially assume that video played a role in the attack, either as a trigger, or at least as a cover. If you bothered to read the information provided earlier in the thread, you'll learn that question is not yet fully resolved.


Don't give me that "no information" crap, that had all the information and lied about it.
Seeing things again, Spidey? I said nothing about "no information". You pulled that out of the same dark hole you rely on for all your "facts".

Get help, dude.
 
Spidey oddly didn't have ANY scrutiny for the guy who let 3000+ people die on a single day. He READ while the attacks were occurring. 3000+ on our own soil vs a couple abroad. Oddly enough the dems didn't rush to hold Bush feet to the fire the next day, either. Change your name to GLASShole because you are transparent little yellow coward...
 
(In case that's too tough for you, the answer is: You get out of there. It's not surprising there was no crowd visible by the time the drone go into position and we started seeing live video.)

He obviously for some reason believes that a drone would have been on the scene within seconds and that it would have been equipped with "lazers" capable of melting the terrorists weapons.

He probably got that idea from watching too many military techno-thriller shows. Nothing wrong with them for entertainment but they probably aren't 100% accurate about surveillance capabilities.


Additionally based on his posts that addressed concealed carry permits he probably believes that the demonstrators should have had handguns under their shirts.
So that once the terrorists showed up the protestors should have shot them down instead of running for their lives. Because, obviously, if they had concealed carry weapons they wouldn't have to run... DUH!

Nevermind the fact that the terrorists probably had AK-47s and by accounts a couple of rocket and/or grenade launchers.
 
Last edited:
The letters show they were under attack, not a angry protest mob. This was VERY soon after the attack started.

Obama and his administration knew this, yet they continued to lie to the American People.
 
You didn't address the fact that a group of people gathered would disperse at the sound of gunfire especially if it was automatic gunfire going off rapidly.

Or if that didn't send them running an explosion from a rocket launcher that accounts describe the attackers as having.

You obviously didn't read the link provided that showed that intelligence even over a month after the attacks were still trying to determine how much the demonstration played into the attack.
That is would the attack have taken place even if there were no demonstrations or if they provided a great distraction for the terrorists that they couldn't pass up.

So go clean your gun spidey it'll make you feel better.
 
Why was there no communication from the embassy saying they had angry protestors outside?

Face it, there was no protest, obama knew this and yet continued to lie to the American People.
 
http://www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/benghazi-the-real-libya-story-is-no-story-20121024

Even now, intelligence officials say, the full story is not known. It is not even clear that the video-inspired protests in Cairo were unrelated to the attack in Benghazi, because some of the extremists who attacked Stevens and his colleagues may have been provoked by watching the demonstrations on TV. Officials say they are still compiling a list of suspects.
"The bulk of available information still supports the early assessment that extremists—many with ties to Ansar al-Sharia, AQIM [Al Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb], or other groups—didn’t preplan the attack days or weeks in advance, but launched their assault opportunistically after they learned about the violence at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo,” the intelligence official said.

Seems like a good summary. Still much to do about nothing IMO. I see no cover up or lies.
 
http://reason.com/archives/2012/10/25/why-obamas-actions-in-libya-should-cost

good article on why Libya should screw Obama's chance at the election, but won't.

I'm glad this article brings up the fact Libyan's leadership that we brutally removed had been on our side for the last few years before this whole ordeal. Obama totally screwed the pooch with Libya. The dictator they had was no saint, I'm not defending him, but to say he or his country was ran the same as they were in the 80s is bullshit.
 
http://reason.com/archives/2012/10/25/why-obamas-actions-in-libya-should-cost

good article on why Libya should screw Obama's chance at the election, but won't.

I'm glad this article brings up the fact Libyan's leadership that we brutally removed had been on our side for the last few years before this whole ordeal. Obama totally screwed the pooch with Libya. The dictator they had was no saint, I'm not defending him, but to say he or his country was ran the same as they were in the 80s is bullshit.

Libya started to wake up up after the airstrikes and completely changed their attitude after Iraq.
Remember that he dumped his nuke programs and started cooperation with the West.

The problem seems as the disendants (of which there are in any dictatorship) were emboldened by Egypt and the talk of an Arab spring. They also may have had some help from outside.
 
Last edited:
http://reason.com/archives/2012/10/25/why-obamas-actions-in-libya-should-cost

good article on why Libya should screw Obama's chance at the election, but won't.

I'm glad this article brings up the fact Libyan's leadership that we brutally removed had been on our side for the last few years before this whole ordeal. Obama totally screwed the pooch with Libya. The dictator they had was no saint, I'm not defending him, but to say he or his country was ran the same as they were in the 80s is bullshit.

ohhh give me a fuggin break!!

first the author starts off with this gem:

One can conclude from this that the president uttered a silent sigh of relief when he dodged a bullet. And one can conclude that Romney wanted to look and sound presidential and emphasize his economic credentials and allay fears that he wants another war. Whatever the gain and whatever the strategy, this matter of American deaths in Libya is of vital importance to American voters.

It is important because it shows how far the American government has drifted from the confines of the Constitution and how far we as a people have drifted from the rule of law.


then in the next sentence, proceeds to heap praise on GWB and Tony Blair for their foreign policy....

what a fvcking joke.
 
Oh really? I didn't read the part where he pats Bush on the back for his foreign policy, only the part where he says Gaddafi was working with Bush and Blair and praised by them. Derp a der, that's totally praising their foreign policy and endorsing it etc, instead of you know explaining the situation in how it pertains to the USA's previous dealings with Libya.

Eaglekeeper, yeah Obama really screwed the pooch with Libya and it was HIS BABY. That's what blows my mind the most, is that he was the one against the better judgement of EVERYONE ELSE AROUND HIM decided we needed to get involved. To you guys who say "we weren't really involved" bullshit and you fucking know it. We ran the whole show, we people in Libya calling the shots, we made it possible period. Libya is Obama's Iraq, to bad his side gives him a slide because you know partisanship is cool
 
Spidey oddly didn't have ANY scrutiny for the guy who let 3000+ people die on a single day. He READ while the attacks were occurring. 3000+ on our own soil vs a couple abroad. Oddly enough the dems didn't rush to hold Bush feet to the fire the next day, either. Change your name to GLASShole because you are transparent little yellow coward...

um wow really? a 12+ hour long battle vs. 9/11 are you fucking stupid?

and how exactly did Bush LET all those people die on 9/11? go out and hold up the twin towers like superman? jesus you are retard.
 
Not surprisingly, the Obamaites here can find no fault in what happened in Benghazi.

The startling lack of security, the lack of pre-positioned evacuation resources, the actual removal of security teams, the refusal to acknowledge any risk to American diplomats are all being dismissed as business as usual by the blindered here and elsewhere.

Despite the denials and the implorations to move along, nothing to see here, there actually are significant questions raised by the more serious amongst us.

I earlier posted accounts of the President, the Vice President and numerous Obama officials sitting around, watching the attack in real time and taking the telephone calls of the staff in Benghazi as they are attacked.

It must have caused a thrill up their legs or something that they continued to sit there and do nothing. There was no call for a quick reaction force to be airlifted to Benghazi. There was no call to send a fighter bomber or two already on air patrol to provide air to ground support. There was no call to send airlift for an evacuation. There wasn't a call to local Libyan security forces to respond.

Obama, Biden and his team literally just sat there and watched the attack and did nothing. Maybe there was a football game on and they switched channels once in a while.

It may be that they put out the lie about the attack being a mob action caused by an obscure video simply because the truth that they did nothing in response, just as they did nothing to prepare for such an eventuality, is so damning.

There will be an investigation and there will be answers. Too bad most of this information will be only available after the election.

From Senator Rand Paul,

Monday's foreign policy debate between President Obama and Gov. Mitt Romney was designed to help voters better understand each man's vision for America's role abroad. While I have publicly taken issue with both candidates on aspects of their foreign policies, there is no question that Mr. Romney remains the right choice for Americans on Nov. 6.

However, it is also clear neither candidate adequately addressed the gross intelligence failure in Libya that left four Americans dead, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens. Too many important questions remain unanswered concerning Mr. Obama's entire mishandling of the recent siege of Benghazi.

I would like to take this opportunity to ask the questions Americans want answered.

The first and most pressing question for Mr. Obama remains: Where the hell were the Marines?

Two of the most potentially vulnerable or dangerous American embassies are in Iraq and Libya. In Iraq, we have roughly 17,000 people guarding our ambassador. Not all of them are Marines, but some several hundred are, and they guard our ambassador behind a 10-foot-high walled fortress. In Iraq, we cannot afford to take any unnecessary risks with our diplomats and go to great lengths to ensure that there are plenty of armed personnel between our representatives and any potential threats.

In Libya, there were no uniformed Marines guarding our ambassador. Originally, there was a 16-person security team led by Col. Andrew Wood, who had requested to stay in Libya. In July, Stevens sent memos to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee requesting an "extension of tour of duty (TDY) personnel." Stevens was referring to Col. Wood's 16-man team, which was scheduled to leave in August. Stevens requested on Aug. 2 -- just six weeks before his murder -- to keep security personnel in Libya "through mid-September," calling the conditions there "unpredictable, volatile and violent."

Col. Woods has also said that he repeatedly requested to remain in Libya because he felt both the environment and the ambassador were unsafe. Now, after the tragic fact, no one knows what happened to Stevens' original request.

Why was the security team that both Stevens and Col. Woods requested sent home? Who made this decision?

What happened to the plane, Mr. President? There was supposed to be a DC-3 available to help people get out of Libya or to travel around the country as needed. But that plane was taken away on May 4. On May 8, just four days later, the State Department spent $108,000 on a new electrical charging station to "green up" our embassy in Vienna.

You have to ask: Was this "green" initiative more important than the security of our embassy in Libya? We spent about $1 million on electric cars to make a political statement in Vienna, but we somehow couldn't find the time or resources to have just one Marine guarding our Libyan embassy, much less a much-needed 16-man personnel team. We spent $100,000 on an electric car-charging station to show Vienna how green we are, but did not keep a plane in Libya that could have been instrumental in transporting our own diplomats to safety.

The president now says the buck stops with him. Fair enough. So, President Obama, again: Where the hell were the Marines? Where was the plane? Saying the buck stops with you sounds good, but you have to follow through.
We've seen this kind of government incompetence before.

Once the initial shock and horror of Sept. 11, 2001, began to subside, the finger pointing commenced. Everyone agreed that our intelligence had failed -- massively -- but no one would claim responsibility for this failure. Reports of possible terrorist attacks had been repeatedly ignored, including the FBI turning down search warrants from their Minnesota branch that could have potentially provided us valuable information.

Still, after the worst terrorist attack in American history, no one was held accountable.

In 2001, 3,000 innocent people lost their lives -- but not one government bureaucrat lost his job.

The siege of our embassy and the murder of our diplomats in Benghazi should never have happened. But these events did happen, and this administration continues to be reluctant to give us answers and provide accountability.

As a member of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, I am calling for hearings and a full investigation into what really happened in Benghazi, how our intelligence failed and how, ultimately, we failed to protect our own people.

What happened in Libya was inexcusable. I'm tired of hearing too many government officials make too many excuses. Those responsible must be held accountable and those at fault should be fired.

The president now says, "The buck stops here." It's time for him to prove it, and if he won't, it is time for Congress to do its job and get to the bottom of it.

Sen. Rand Paul is a Kentucky Republican.
 
A witch hunt from the opposition party to score points. Not that I would expect different. Classy way to exploit an attack with Monday morning quarterbacking.
 
A witch hunt from the opposition party to score points. Not that I would expect different. Classy way to exploit an attack with Monday morning quarterbacking.

Frankly, we can expect nothing else from partisan deflectors like this.

As the facts are coming out there will be little that won't be known despite the attempts to suppress that we have seen to date.

Unless the deliberate failures and the failures by oversight are brought under full review they will continue to happen.

Unless the cover-ups are exposed, they, too, will continue to happen.

Based on what we know now, a number of Obama Administration officials should be fired. If more damning information comes to light, more dramatic measures will have to be taken.

Despite the Democrat political operatives' desire that this be swept under the rug, it will remain an event under extensive review now and after the election.
 
Frankly, we can expect nothing else from partisan deflectors like this.

As opposed to opinion pieces from sitting Republican senators and commentators from the Fox News Channel, which are universally accepted as being non-partisan.

I especially loved how Rand said the third debate showed that Romney was the best choice for America, even though Romney spent 90 minutes agreeing with every single specific of Obama's foreign policy.
 
A witch hunt from the opposition party to score points. Not that I would expect different. Classy way to exploit an attack with Monday morning quarterbacking.

the problem is that the arrogance that the Obama administration exhibited toward;
1) Ignoring the thread
2) Refusing to acknowledge support requests from on-site personnel
3) Covering up that information was known
4) Trying to blame the video for the problem rather than acknowledge that the amount of firepower was not a simple demonstration.
 
Back
Top