myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Windsurfing Videos Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Benghazi-gate
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 48, 49, 50 ... 78, 79, 80  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
stevenbard



Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 4115

PostPosted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 7:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Blind ideology from the left. Facts be damned.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3360

PostPosted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stephen I don't get the connection. Obama was afraid to fight these particular terrorists?
Would a minute by minute timeline of every other successful terrorist attack against America and its soldiers show a similar result ?
would those timelines be proof of the cowardice of folks not in harms way far from the fight?
Or does putting in isolation work better as progaganda?
Otherwise it might look like nothing unusual in the complex dangerous world that diplomatic service folks live in.
My wife thinks that from reading the facts and timelines. She was in diplomatic work in four places working for the French Gov.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5213

PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 8:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stevenbard--like I said, you and many others here are eager to believe the worst about your political opponents, and sloppy about details. First, let me tell you that Jan Stevens, the Ambassador's father, was a Deputy Attorney General in California that represented agencies that I was with on many occasions, and remains in retirement a towering intellect with knowledge of the State tidelands that we enjoy when we sail. He and his wife asked that his son's death not be made a political football--and I have a particular distaste for those kicking his son's death around in an attempt for political gain.

Second, I looked at your post and the timeline. It was 25 minutes between the time that shots were fired after Stevens' meeting with Turkish Ambassador (21:40) and the time that Stevens had been abducted and the embassy was in flames (22:05). Twenty five minutes was not enough for any response. There was a second attack, at a different location. There was also a CIA presence in Benghazi, the precise details of which remain fuzzy because Scooter Libby is no longer around to leak top secrets for his own spin purposes. The citation you posted makes an attempt to conflate a number of different facts--from the requests for more security staff, and the later attack--into some grand conspiracy. It is the product of a biased mind.

Third, the problems of security at embassies are vast and complicated, and any effort to hold Obama to account for Benghazi--and give Reagan, Carter, Clinton and Bush a pass for attacks on their watch is, again, the product of serious bias. There are 294 embassies, missions, and consulates in the world--27 of them in the volatile Middle East and North Africa. Anyone who is paying attention knows that we do not have a complete understanding of the different uprisings in this part of the world, or how best to respond to them. The only person whose opinion I consider to be above suspicion is the head of security for Libya, Eric Nordstrom. He was the official who asked for, and did not get, more staffing. He testified before Congress, and I posted his conclusions on this site early in the life of the thread. You can find more informative news stories cited by me on page 4 of the thread, and this citation from page 19, which is Nordstrom's comment before Congress:

Quote:
“The ferocity and intensity of the attack was nothing that we had seen in Libya, or that I had seen in my time in the Diplomatic Security Service. Having an extra foot of wall, or an extra-half dozen guards or agents would not have enabled us to respond to that kind of assault. I’m concerned that this attack will signal a new security-reality, just as the 1984 Beirut attack did for the Marines; the 1998 East Africa bombings did for the State Department, and 9/11 for the whole country. It is critical that we balance the risk-mitigation with the needs of our diplomats to do their job, in dangerous and uncertain places. The answer cannot be to operate from a bunker.”


So the attack was well beyond anything anticipated, and would not have been forestalled by the additional security personnel that he had requested.

So what have we forgotten that has happened in earlier eras in the dangerous world out there?

Jan. 22, 2002: Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami Attacks Indian U.S. Consulate

June 14, 2002: Suicide Car-Bomb Outside U.S. Consulate in Karachi twelve killed, one of them a marine. The attack followed Rumsfeld's visit to the country.

Oct. 12, 2002: String Of Bali Bombings Included U.S. Consulate. No Americans were killed at the consulate--but seven Americans were among the 202 dead at the coordinated blasts inside a bar and outside a nightclub

May 12, 2003: 36 People Including 9 Americans Die After Terrorists Storm U.S. Compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

July 30, 2004: Islamist Attacks U.S. Embassy in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. Two Uzbek security guards killed.

Dec. 6, 2004: Five Staff and Four Security Guards Die in U.S. consulate attack in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

March 2, 2006: Third Attack on Karachi U.S. Consulate Killed U.S. Diplomat

U.S. Diplomat David Foy was specifically targeted in the third attack in as many years on the Karachi consulate compound. He was one of four people killed. The bomb occurred two days before President Bush was to visit Pakistan and also targeted the Marriot hotel in an upscale neighborhood of Karachi.

This was a planned and coordinated attack that nobody covered as more than a news item. I guess they threw more than a shoe after Bush announced plans to visit.

There are another five, excepting the first attack on the World Trade Center and the attack on the USS Cole--which led Bush II to block access for the terrorist specialist.

It is obvious that the battle between modernity and tribalism makes many of the 294 State Department outposts, and the countries they are located in, dangerous places to work. Yet people like Ambassador Stevens continued to work there, and refused to be tied to the consulate for security purposes. I think many of you know little about courage, or sacrifice in the interest of the nation in the chaos in North Africa. But you know how to hate Obama and Hillary--and forgive Bush for even greater casualties.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
techno900



Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 1474

PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 4:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

All of this would have been "water under the bridge", but the Administration chose to blame it on the video, and with those talking points, created a fire storm. Why did they do it? Dumb, dumb, dumb - or there is something else here that hasn't yet been discovered.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 1701
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 7:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nice diatribe there mac, but it's never been about body-count, it's about not owning up to the facts by deploying a cover up, in the lamest sort of way. Considering us a bunch of gullible idiots in the process, hence the name of this thread, totally Nixonian.
_________________
I don't drink the 'cool' aid, I drink tequila, it's more honest.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5213

PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Techno--so water under the bridge. Both Obama and Mitt tried to control the spin on this because it was close to the election. But subsequent news and e-mail has shown, if you listened, that the State Department, not the
White House, developed the talking points--while a CIA team and operatives were, presumably, being extracted. The fog of war? It matters not at all, there was no possibility of a rescue mission--that entire narrative is false accusations by the hysterical right. I repeat, holding Obama to a different standard than you did Bush is biased. NW--what a laugh.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
techno900



Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 1474

PostPosted: Tue Jul 09, 2013 8:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mac said:
Quote:
But subsequent news and e-mail has shown, if you listened, that the State Department, not the White House, developed the talking points-


If you believe this to be 100% accurate, I have a bridge for sale that you may be interested in.

Actually, it may be true that the State Department developed the talking points, but isn't it just possible that the Whitehouse directed them to develop the bogus (video) talking points? Unless there are a bunch of idiots (or maybe puppets) in the State Department, why would they push the video premise?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3360

PostPosted: Tue Jul 09, 2013 3:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You guys are making the main point.
This is all about how complete the story was told to the media and how quickly the story was told to the media, and mix in some talk radio "Doubts"

Dead Embassy guys are a minor part of this scandal. 26 minutes was never enough to save him. The requested assistance would have made little difference.
Not announcing all the facts quickly, clearly, and in exact detail is the scandal here.
Just like every other embassy attack involving the CIA.
As scandals go this one is at least not completely imaginary like the Birth certificate or a bush Reagen program like the cell phones ànd the FF guns and the NSA surveillance.

And O really was sworn in as President, unlike the Limbaugh thing, so I see why this is your favorite "scandal"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 14164

PostPosted: Tue Jul 09, 2013 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anyone who claims the attack was anything less than a highly researched, planned, professional militant attack with impeccable advance intelligence after reading just the book review at
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/2013/08/Benghazi-book-fred-burton-samuel-m-katz ,
let alone reading the book due out next month, is neither sane nor honest.

And Hillary had access to all this information as it emerged.

A few excerpts from many pages just in the book review alone:
"They were not members of a ragtag force. Split into small groups, which advanced throughout the compound methodically, they employed military-style hand signals to direct their progression toward their objectives. ... It was clear that whoever the men who assaulted the compound were, they had been given precise orders and impeccable intelligence. They seemed to know when, where, and how to get from the access points to the ambassador's residence and how to cut off the DS agents as well as the local guard force and the February 17 Martyrs Brigade militiamen on duty that night. ... The attackers had seemed to know that there were new, uninstalled generators behind the February 17 Martyrs Brigade command post, nestled between the building and the overhang of foliage from the western wall, as well as half a dozen jerry cans full of gasoline to power them. One of the commanders dispatched several of his men to retrieve the plastic fuel containers and bring them to the main courtyard."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stevenbard



Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 4115

PostPosted: Tue Jul 09, 2013 11:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The last 2 American diplomats died 8 1/2 hours into the attack. The Navy Seals were 3 1/2 hours away. Something should and could have been done. Even if the mission failed, that is why we train our soldiers. Even if they just did a fly over to check the Embassy. THE EMBASSY IS ON U.S. SOIL AFTERALL.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 48, 49, 50 ... 78, 79, 80  Next
Page 49 of 80

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group