Taken from today's Wall Street Journal
Yet another stand-alone newsbite on the Libyan "incident" of 9/11/12:
In his United Nations speech on Tuesday, President Obama
talked about the September 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya and
declared that "there should be no doubt that we will be relentless in
tracking down the killers and bringing them to justice."
FOLKS... DID YOU READ THE PREVIOUS NEWSBITE? (ENOUGH
SAID.)
What he didn't say is how relentless he'll be in tracking
down the security lapses and intelligence failures that contributed to the
murders.
None of the initial explanations offered by the White
House and State Department since the assault on the Benghazi consulate has held
up.
BUT, HEY... THEY'VE BEEN GOOD ENOUGH FOR MY BUDDY ROB
SO FAR - GO FIGURE!
First the Administration blamed protests provoked by an
amateurish anti-Islam clip posted on YouTube. Cue Susan Rice, the U.N.
Ambassador and leading candidate for Secretary of State in a second Obama term:
"What happened initially was that it was a spontaneous reaction . . . as a
consequence of the video, that people gathered outside the embassy and then it
grew very violent."
IF NOT A LIE... THAN INCOMPETENCE. RIGHT? THE PROBLEM
WITH GIVING MS. RICE "THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT" IS THAT I CERTAINLY
KNEW SHE WASN'T MAKING AN ACCURATE STATEMENT. WHY DIDN'T SHE...? (AND ASSUMING
"SIMPLE" INCOMPETENCE IS THE BEST CASE SCENARIO, ROB.)
Administration officials also maintained that the
diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt, the site of the first attacks this
September 11, were properly defended and that the U.S. had no reason to prepare
for any attack.
ROB. IT WAS 9/11. ISN'T THAT REASON ENOUGH ALONE - ALL
BY ITSELF - TO INCREASE SECURITY FOR THE DAY? ISN'T THAT ENOUGH TO TRIGGER
COMMON SENSE "PREPARATION" FOR A WORST-CASE SCENARIO?
"The office of the director of National Intelligence
has said we have no actionable intelligence that an attack on our post in
Benghazi was planned or imminent," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said
last week...
ROB... THE AMBASSADOR HIMSELF FELT HIMSELF TO BE AN
AT-RISK TARGET. (REMEMBER, BUDDY... OBAMA AND CLINTON DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE
DIARY - LET ALONE ENVISION IT'S CONTENTS BEING MADE PUBLIC.)
...calling the security measures in place there "robust."
ROB... "ROBUST...???" REALLY...?!?!
Cell phone video footage and witness testimony from
Benghazi soon undercut the Administration trope of an angry march
"hijacked" by a few bad people. As it turned out, the assault was
well-coordinated, with fighters armed with guns, RPGs and diesel canisters,
which were used to set the buildings on fire. Ambassador Chris Stevens died of
smoke inhalation. Briefing Congress, the Administration changed its story and
said the attacks were pre-planned and linked to al Qaeda.
RIGHT? TRUE? (BUT HERE'S THE THING, ROB... WHY DID THEY
HAVE TO CHANGE THEIR STORY IN THE FIRST PLACE? WHY DIDN'T THEY KNOW WHAT THE
FOREIGN MEDIA KNEW... WHAT LIBYAN OFFICIALS KNEW... WHAT WILLIAM R. BARKER KNEW
(THANKS TO SIMPLY READING OPEN-SOURCE SOURCES)?
AGAIN... BEST CASE... INCOMPETENCE. (BUT IT SURE STILL
LOOKS LIKE A DELIBERATE ATTEMPT EARLY ON TO SHIFT BLAME... TO SHIFT FOCUS AND
ATTENTION... (AND WHO COULD BLAME THEM FOR TAKING THE BET THAT THEY COULD GET
AWAY WITH IT? PERHAPS THEY WERE CONFIDENT THE LIBYAN AUTHORITIES WOULD BACK
THEIR PLAY? PERHAPS THEY COUNTED ON THEIR ALLIES IN THE MSM TO PROTECT THEM AND
NOT "GO OFF THE RESERVATION" LIKE CNN HAS DONE.) NO, BUD... I DON'T
HAVE ALL THE ANSWERS... BUT I'M CERTAINLY LOOKING AT ALL THIS THE SAME WAY I
WOULD IF IT WERE THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION OR A ROMNEY ADMINISTRATION.
(*SHRUG*)
You'd think this admission would focus attention on why
the compound was so vulnerable to begin with.
I KNOW, ROB... I KNOW... IT WAS A CONSULATE, NOT AN
EMBASSY. GRANTED! SO LET'S SUBSTITUTE FOR "COMPOUND" THE WORD...
"AMBASSADOR." WHY WAS ANY AMERICAN AMBASSADOR ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD SO
OUT OF CONTACT AND RELATIVELY UNPROTECTED ON 9/11?
(*TWIDDLING MY THUMBS*)
The removal of all staff from Benghazi, including a large
component of intelligence officers, would also seem to hinder their ability to
investigate the attacks and bring the killers to justice.
YEP. TO ME IT WOULD. HOW'BOUT TO YOU...?
Journalists have stayed on the case, however, and their
reporting is filling in the Administration's holes.
AND, YET... YOU DON'T SEE IT THAT WAY.
(*SHRUG*)
On Friday, our WSJ colleagues showed that starting in
spring, U.S. intelligence had been worried about radical militias in eastern
Libya. These armed groups helped topple Moammar Ghadhafi last year but weren't
demobilized as a new government has slowly found its legs.
Deteriorating security was no secret. On April 10, for
example, an explosive device was thrown at a convoy carrying U.N. envoy Ian
Martin. On June 6, an improvised explosive device exploded outside the U.S.
consulate. In late August, State warned American citizens who were planning to
travel to Libya about the threat of assassinations and car bombings.
ROB. UNLESS YOU BELIEVE THAT ALL THESE ARE RIGHT-WING WSJ
LIES... CAN YOU UNDERSTAND WHY I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU DON'T SEE WHAT I SEE
(AND HAVE SEEN ALL ALONG) SO CLEARLY?
Despite all this, U.S. diplomatic missions had minimal
security. Officials told the Journal that the Administration put too much faith
in weak Libyan police and military forces. The night of the Benghazi attack,
four lightly armed Libyans and five American security officers were on duty.
The complex lacked smoke-protection masks and fire extinguishers. Neither the
consulate in Benghazi nor the embassy in Tripoli were guarded by U.S. Marines,
whose deployment to Libya wasn't a priority.
OOH...! I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT NO MARINES ASSIGNED TO
THE EMBASSY! WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT ONE, ROB?
Rummaging through the Benghazi compound, a CNN reporter
found a seven-page notebook belonging to Ambassador Stevens. According to the
network, the diary said he was concerned about the "never-ending"
security threats in Benghazi and wrote that he was on an al Qaeda hit list.
COULD IT BE THAT STEVENS NEVER MENTIONED ANY OF HIS
FEARS TO HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON? IS THAT POSSIBLE? ROB... IF ANYONE IN THE
PRESS HAS BOTHERED TO ASK HRC, I FOR ONE AM NOT AWARE OF IT. ARE YOU? IT'S A
GOOD QUESTION... RIGHT? ME? IF FIND IT VERY DOUBTFUL THAT STEVENS FAILED TO
KEEP HRC IN THE LOOP. BUT EVEN IF HE HAD... ISN'T IT HRC's RESPONSIBILITY TO
KNOW STUFF LIKE THIS...??? (OH... WAIT... RE-READING FROM PREVIOUS
PARAGRAPHS IT'S CLEAR HRC DID KNOW ABOUT IT! AT LEAST THE STATE DEPARTMENT
OFFICIALLY KNEW ABOUT IT. RE-READ THE "DETERIORATING SECURITY WAS NO
SECRET" PARAGRAPH.)
(*SHRUG*)
Imagine the uproar if, barely a month before Election
Day, the Bush Administration had responded to a terrorist strike — on Sept. 11
no less — in this fashion.
ROB. YOU'VE TOLD ME YOU DIDN'T BLAME BUSH FOR 9/11.
FAIR ENOUGH. I ACTUALLY DID... TO A CERTAIN EXTENT... A FAR LESSER EXTENT THAN
I BLAME CLINTON... BUT IN ANY CASE I "GET" YOUR RATIONALE. BUT AS TO
THE QUESTION ABOVE RAISED BY THE WSJ... WHAT SAY YOU?
Obfuscating about what happened. Refusing to acknowledge
that clear security warnings were apparently ignored. Then trying to shoot the
messengers who bring these inconvenient truths to light in order to talk about
anything but a stunning and deadly attack on U.S. sovereign territory...
(*SHRUG*)
I DON'T KNOW, ROB. MAYBE I'M JUST A CYNIC... BUT I'M
GUESSING THE MEDIA HEAT ON BUSH WOULD HAVE BEEN A HELL OF A LOT HOTTER AND I REITERATE
MY GUESS THAT HAD THIS HAPPENED UNDER BUSH'S WATCH AND YOU AND I HAD A RIDE
TOGETHER WITHIN A FEW DAYS... WE WOULD SURELY HAVE DISCUSSED IT.
(*SHRUG*)
AND MORE IMPORTANT... MY GUESS IS THAT THE WHOLE
COUNTRY WOULD HAVE BEEN "DISCUSSING" IT.
(*YET ANOTHER SHRUG*)
Four Americans lost their lives in Benghazi in a
terrorist attack that evidence suggests should have been anticipated and might
have been stopped. Rather than accept responsibility, the Administration has
tried to stonewall and blame others.
FRANKLY I'LL STICK WITH "LIED."
No comments:
Post a Comment