- Jun 16, 2008
- 8,581
- 472
- 126
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/p...p_exposes_several_libyans_working_with_the_us
It's one thing when an organization opposed to state secrets and whose very existence is geared toward revealing those secrets reveals documents.
At least Wikileaks offered to go over the documents with the state department before releasing them.
Here are a couple of the people who's lives he might have endangered.
The latest seems to indicate that the video was a factor in that it provided cover for a group who wanted to attack a U.S. installation. It is yet unknown if the attack would have taken place without the opportunity provided by the outrage over the video.
If intelligence officials haven't reached a final conclusion over the reasons for the attack how it the Obama administration supposed to give U.S. citizens concrete answers during a press conference the next day?
Is he supposed to consult an f'ing psychic?
Good going Representative IssaUPDATE: A senior State Department official wrote in to The Cable to contest Hill's assertion the State Department had an opportunity to work with the committee to identity sensitive information in the documents before they were released by Issa.
"Many of the documents the committee posted weren't provided by State. So there wasn't any discussion about their sensitivity prior to the committee revealing them for all to see," the official said. "Had State been given that opportunity, we'd have taken it and pointed out what documents needed to be handled with extreme care so as not to endanger anyone."
It's one thing when an organization opposed to state secrets and whose very existence is geared toward revealing those secrets reveals documents.
At least Wikileaks offered to go over the documents with the state department before releasing them.
This guy going off on another witch-hunt is gunning for the most irresponsible federal official of the year award.The Cable pointed out that even WikiLeaks had approached the State Department and offered to negotiate retractions of sensitive information before releasing their cables. Hill confirmed that Issa did not grant the State Department that opportunity but said it was the State Department's fault for not releasing the documents when they were first requested.
Here are a couple of the people who's lives he might have endangered.
One of the cables released by Issa names a woman human rights activist who was leading a campaign against violence and was detained in Benghazi. She expressed fear for her safety to U.S. officials and criticized the Libyan government.
"This woman is trying to raise an anti-violence campaign on her own and came to the United States for help. She isn't publicly associated with the U.S. in any other way but she's now named in this cable. It's a danger to her life," the administration official said.
additionally according to this report the investigation hasn't finished determining what factors ultimately contributed to attack and in what proportion.Another cable names a Benghazi port manager who is working with the United States on an infrastructure project.
"When you're in a situation where Ansar al-Sharia is a risk to Americans, an individual like this guy, who is an innocent civilian who's trying to reopen the port and is doing so in conjunction with Americans, could be at risk now because he's publicly affiliated with America," the official said, referring to the group thought to have led the Benghazi attack.
One cable names a local militia commander dishing dirt on the inner workings of the Libyan Interior Ministry.
The latest seems to indicate that the video was a factor in that it provided cover for a group who wanted to attack a U.S. installation. It is yet unknown if the attack would have taken place without the opportunity provided by the outrage over the video.
If intelligence officials haven't reached a final conclusion over the reasons for the attack how it the Obama administration supposed to give U.S. citizens concrete answers during a press conference the next day?
Is he supposed to consult an f'ing psychic?
If democratic congressional officials behaved towards President Bush after 9/11 as the hardline asstastic republicans are behaving toward the current President; President Bush would have been impeached for not preventing 9/11The latest intelligence assessment of the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi indicates there was little if any pre-planning for it and that it was in part an opportunistic response to the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo.
Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the attack, which has become a political hot potato in the presidential campaign with questions over when the Obama administration called the attack an act of terrorism.
"Right now, there isn't any intelligence that the attackers pre-planned their assault days or weeks in advance," said a U.S. intelligence official. "The bulk of available information supports the early assessment that the attackers launched their assault opportunistically after they learned about the violence at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo." But the official added that "no one is ruling out that some of the attackers may have aspired to attack the U.S. in Benghazi."
Last edited: