Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Seems there is a news topic or so missing - here's one « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3 4 ... 6

dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46214
Offline
« #15 : October 11, 2012, 11:27:09 PM »

If this is accurate - and considering the source it needs to be verified - this just pisses me off. Folks died due to neglect


U.S. Consulate in Benghazi Bombed Twice in Run-Up to 9/11 Anniversary
Jihadists twice set off explosives at the consulate prior to the incident that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens, and announced threats on Facebook about escalating attacks on Western targets in the run-up to the 9/11 anniversary, according to whistleblowers reaching out to House Republicans.
What neglect? Seems like the jihadist were efficient at communicating their goals to me.
Not responding to the requests for security increases springs to mind.  Not responding upon discovery of the attack, which went on for hours - during which the US was aware is very likely if not already proven.

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

NovaBuc

****
Starter

Posts : 842
Offline
« #16 : October 12, 2012, 02:01:21 AM »


 In retrospect we know what happened, but at the time it wasn't quite so clear. The security issue is a double edged sword and a complex one - it is likely any increased security would have been in Tripoli where the main body of State Dept folks were. Based upon Chaffetz' mind-boggling statement about Kennedy using 'classified photos' (they weren't) leading to admissions that the Benghazi complex was a joint effort with 'another government agency' (which is most likely the CIA - something that we likely didn't want known), it's unclear if the additional security requested by the folks there (and recommended by Lt Col Wood) would have been there in Benghazi and not in Tripoli. Not to mention there were conflicting statements if the budget cuts had any detrimental effect on the security. During her testimony, Miss Lamb said it both was and wasn't. I suspect the truth is not so cut and dried on that end.

 I wish Issa would have done the prudent thing knowing there were areas of sensitivity and secrecy that would likely be discussed and had the hearings behind closed doors. In having it in front of the cameras, it turned into a political grandstand with several members of congress trying to score points either against the state department or other congress members. That sort of thing doesn't get the answers to the questions that need to be asked about this incident.

dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46214
Offline
« #17 : October 12, 2012, 11:03:49 AM »

What is clear is that on the anniversary of 9/11, with the President of Libya tell all who would listen it was a terrorist attack unrelated to a stupid movie trailer, being in contact with the consulate during the attack prior to the murders, perhaps the assumption that if things are clear it is terrorism until proven otherwise. 

I wonder if there had been an instant response by air upon the initial advice from the Consulate, via jet fighter or helicopter, would the Ambassador and others be alive today.  Now that isn't clear.  The prior paragraph is extraordinarily clear. 

What isn't clear is why does the administration continue to offer differing versions of their knowledge - the old who knew what when - but before they put out a final version - they need to all be on the same page.  And that page should likely match up with the sworn testimony. 

As far as keeping this behind closed doors - at the very least there are different stories from State, CIA, and the Executive Branch.  That is bad.  It needs to be reconciled among all elements of the government, if possible.  Then, if possible, provide the truthful response - I don't know that is possible at this point. 
« : October 12, 2012, 08:00:26 PM dbucfan »

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

Bayfisher

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4630
Offline
« #18 : October 12, 2012, 01:37:41 PM »


CBWx2

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5931
Offline
« #19 : October 13, 2012, 01:52:15 AM »


 Hearings today were a disaster. The representative from Utah thought the State Department was showing classified information (it was a commercially available satellite photograph) and in the ensuing discussion/argument, it was revealed that 'not all of the security forces at Benghazi compounds' were under operational control of the State Department. Nice job outing the CIA folks over there, this is why these hearings are normally conducted behind closed doors without the media or CSPAN present.

Wonder why CSPAN and the media were present? "Hackjob" Issa using his position for nothing more than to give the Romney camp some talking points yet again.


dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46214
Offline
« #20 : October 13, 2012, 10:56:45 PM »

Anyone seen a second source on this - if accurate it will be the focus of the balance of the election I suspect

POSTED ON OCTOBER 13, 2012 BY JOHN HINDERAKER IN LIBYA, OBAMA ADMINISTRATION SCANDALS, OBAMA FOREIGN POLICY
WHAT HAPPENED IN BENGHAZI
The State Department has released a transcript of a briefing that two high-ranking department officials gave to a number of reporters via conference call on October 9 (Tuesday). I am not certain about this, but I believe the transcript was only made public today. You should read it in its entirety; it is the most detailed description I have seen of the events in Benghazi on September 11.

While this is by no means clear, it appears that the State Department may have released the transcript as part of the escalating conflict between Barack Obama and Joe Biden and the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. In their desperation to avoid responsibility for the Benghazi debacle, Obama and Biden have pointed fingers in two directions: at the intelligence community for reporting incorrectly that the incident was a protest over a YouTube video clip, and at the State Department for not providing adequate security for the Ambassador.

Here are some excerpts from the narrative:

A few minutes later – we’re talking about 9 o’clock at night – the Ambassador retires to his room, the others are still at Building C, and the one agent in the [Tactical Operations Center]. At 9:40 p.m., the agent in the TOC and the agents in Building C hear loud noises coming from the front gate. They also hear gunfire and an explosion. The agent in the TOC looks at his cameras – these are cameras that have pictures of the perimeter – and the camera on the main gate reveals a large number of people – a large number of men, armed men, flowing into the compound. One special agent immediately goes to get the Ambassador in his bedroom and gets Sean, and the three of them enter the safe haven inside the building. …

They turn around immediately and head back – or the two of them, from Building B, turn around immediately with their kit and head back to Villa C, where the Ambassador and his colleagues are. They encounter a large group of armed men between them and Building C. I should say that the agent in Building C with the Ambassador has radioed that they are all in the safe haven and are fine. The agents that encounter the armed group make a tactical decision to turn around and go back to their Building B and barricade themselves in there. So we have people in three locations right now.

And I neglected to mention – I should have mentioned from the top that the attackers, when they came through the gate, immediately torched the barracks. It is aflame, the barracks that was occupied by the 17th February Brigade armed host country security team. I should also have mentioned that at the very first moment when the agent in the TOC seized the people flowing through the gate, he immediately hits an alarm, and so there is a loud alarm. He gets on the public address system as well, yelling, “Attack, attack.” Having said that, the agents – the other agents had heard the noise and were already reacting.

Okay. So we have agents in Building C – or an agent in Building C with the Ambassador and Sean, we have two agents in Building B, and we have two agents in the TOC. All – Building C is – attackers penetrate in Building C. They walk around inside the building into a living area, not the safe haven area. The building is dark. They look through the grill, they see nothing. They try the grill, the locks on the grill; they can’t get through. The agent is, in fact, watching them from the darkness. He has his long gun trained on them and he is ready to shoot if they come any further. They do not go any further.

They have jerry cans. They have jerry cans full of diesel fuel that they’ve picked up at the entrance when they torched the barracks. They have sprinkled the diesel fuel around. They light the furniture in the living room – this big, puffy, Middle Eastern furniture. They light it all on fire, and they have also lit part of the exterior of the building on fire. At the same time, there are other attackers that have penetrated Building B. The two agents in Building B are barricaded in an inner room there. The attackers circulate in Building B but do not get to the agents and eventually leave.

A third group of attackers tried to break into the TOC. They pound away at the door, they throw themselves at the door, they kick the door, they really treat it pretty rough; they are unable to get in, and they withdraw. Back in Building C, where the Ambassador is, the building is rapidly filling with smoke. The attackers have exited. The smoke is extremely thick. It’s diesel smoke, and also, obviously, smoke from – fumes from the furniture that’s burning. And the building inside is getting more and more black. The Ambassador and the two others make a decision that it’s getting – it’s starting to get tough to breathe in there, and so they move to another part of the safe haven, a bathroom that has a window. They open the window. The window is, of course, grilled. They open the window trying to get some air in. That doesn’t help. The building is still very thick in smoke. …

Okay. We’ve got the agent. He’s opening the – he is suffering severely from smoke inhalation at this point. He can barely breathe. He can barely see. He’s got the grill open and he flops out of the window onto a little patio that’s been enclosed by sandbags. He determines that he’s under fire, but he also looks back and sees he doesn’t have his two companions. He goes back in to get them. He can’t find them. He goes in and out several times before smoke overcomes him completely, and he has to stagger up a small ladder to the roof of the building and collapse. He collapses. …

The agent in the TOC, who is in full gear, opens the door, throws a smoke grenade, which lands between the two buildings, to obscure what he is doing, and he moves to Building B, enters Building B. He un-barricades the two agents that are in there, and the three of them emerge and head for Building C. There are, however, plenty of bad guys and plenty of firing still on the compound, and they decide that the safest way for them to move is to go into an armored vehicle, which is parked right there. They get into the armored vehicle and they drive to Building C.

They drive to the part of the building where the agent had emerged. He’s on the roof. They make contact with the agent. Two of them set up as best a perimeter as they can, and the third one, third agent, goes into the building. This goes on for many minutes. Goes into the building, into the choking smoke. When that agent can’t proceed, another agent goes in, and so on. And they take turns going into the building on their hands and knees, feeling their way through the building to try to find their two colleagues. They find Sean. They pull him out of the building. He is deceased. They are unable to find the Ambassador. …

At this point, the quick reaction security team and the Libyans, especially the Libyan forces, are saying, “We cannot stay here. It’s time to leave. We’ve got to leave. We can’t hold the perimeter.” So at that point, they make the decision to evacuate the compound and to head for the annex. The annex is about two kilometers away. My agents pile into an armored vehicle with the body of Sean, and they exit the main gate. …

[T]hey take fire almost as soon as they emerge from the compound. They go a couple of – they go in one direction toward the annex. They don’t like what they’re seeing ahead of them. There are crowds. There are groups of men. They turn around and go the other direction. They don’t like what they’re seeing in that direction either. They make another u-turn. They’re going at a steady pace. There is traffic in the roads around there. This is in Benghazi, after all. Now, they’re going at a steady pace and they’re trying not to attract too much attention, so they’re going maybe 15 miles an hour down the street.

They come up to a knot of men in an adjacent compound, and one of the men signals them to turn into that compound. They agents at that point smell a rat, and they step on it. They have taken some fire already. At this point, they take very heavy fire as they go by this group of men. They take direct fire from AK-47s from about two feet away. The men also throw hand grenades or gelignite bombs under – at the vehicle and under it. At this point, the armored vehicle is extremely heavily impacted, but it’s still holding. There are two flat tires, but they’re still rolling. …

As the night goes on, a team of reinforcements from Embassy Tripoli arrives by chartered aircraft at Benghazi airport and makes its way to the compound – to the annex, I should say. And I should have mentioned that the quick reaction – the quick reaction security team that was at the compound has also, in addition to my five agents, has also returned to the annex safely. The reinforcements from Tripoli are at the compound – at the annex. They take up their positions. And somewhere around 5:45 in the morning – sorry, somewhere around 4 o’clock in the morning – I have my timeline wrong – somewhere around 4 o’clock in the morning the annex takes mortar fire. It is precise and some of the mortar fire lands on the roof of the annex. It immediately killed two security personnel that are there, severely wounds one of the agents that’s come from the compound.

At that point, a decision is made at the annex that they are going to have to evacuate the whole enterprise. And the next hours are spent, one, securing the annex, and then two, moving in a significant and large convoy of vehicles everybody to the airport, where they are evacuated on two flights.

Barack Obama, meanwhile, was jetting off to Las Vegas for a fundraiser.

It was obvious to the reporters on the call that this narrative blows Obama’s evasions sky high:

First question is from the line of Anne Gearan with the Washington Post. Please go ahead.

QUESTION: Hi. You said a moment ago that there was nothing unusual outside, on the street, or outside the gates of the main compound. When did the agents inside – what – excuse me, what did the agents inside think was happening when the first group of men gathered there and they first heard those explosions? Did they think it was a protest, or did they think it was something else?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: The agent in the TOC heard the noise, heard the firing. Firing is not unusual in Benghazi at 9:40 at night, but he immediately reacted and looked at his cameras and saw people coming in, hit the alarm. And the rest is as I described it. Does that help?

This exchange is priceless:

OPERATOR: The next question is from the line of Brad Klapper with AP. Please, go ahead.

QUESTION: Hi, yes. You described several incidents you had with groups of men, armed men. What in all of these events that you’ve described led officials to believe for the first several days that this was prompted by protests against the video?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: That is a question that you would have to ask others. That was not our conclusion. I’m not saying that we had a conclusion, but we outlined what happened. The Ambassador walked guests out around 8:30 or so, there was no one on the street at approximately 9:40, then there was the noise and then we saw on the cameras the – a large number of armed men assaulting the compound.

So Hillary Clinton and the State Department unequivocally reject the account that Barack Obama and Joe Biden have given. It is hard to imagine what “intelligence” reports Obama could have received that blamed the YouTube video. He is lying, evidently.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/10/what-happened-in-benghazi.php

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46214
Offline
« #21 : October 13, 2012, 11:10:07 PM »

it is in the AJC as well - http://blogs.ajc.com/jamie-dupree-washington-insider/2012/10/10/state-department-defends-libya-security-choices/

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

Bayfisher

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4630
Offline
« #22 : October 13, 2012, 11:18:19 PM »

Yeah, that "hackjob" Issa fighting for killed Americans.  Reading a CBW post is like trying to throw with the opposite hand.  You know it is never going to be genuine. 

CBWx2

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5931
Offline
« #23 : October 14, 2012, 01:52:20 AM »

Yeah, that "hackjob" Issa fighting for killed Americans.

That's what he's doing?  ::)


Bayfisher

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4630
Offline
« #24 : October 14, 2012, 02:43:18 AM »

Yeah, that "hackjob" Issa fighting for killed Americans.

That's what he's doing?  ::)
This admin screwed up and still have their stories mixed up.  Everyone in the world sees it but you apparently. Who are you defending in this situation?  Your vote? I don't care who goes down for this mess.  I hope it starts at the very top.  I hope it embarrasses America and people go to jail because that means it won't happen again.  This admin has made America look weak and disorganized.  Something that would never happen under other Presidents.  I can't remember anyone in my time raising another flag on American soil. Especially one from the same group that killed thousands of Americans. 

dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46214
Offline
« #25 : October 14, 2012, 10:51:56 PM »

Readers tell NYT to get their crap together



OCTOBER 11, 2012, 2:50 PM
Why Wasn’t Libya Hearing on Page A1 of The Times?

By MARGARET SULLIVAN
Stories about Wednesday's Congressional hearing on Libya were prominently displayed on the front pages of major newspapers throughout the United States on Thursday morning.

The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post, for example, both led with the story, meaning that editors placed it in the primary news position on their front pages.

But The New York Times was not among them. The six stories on The Times's front page included one on affirmative action at universities, one on Lance Armstrong's drug allegations, two related to the presidential election, one on taped phone calls at JPMorgan Chase, and one on a Tennessee woman who died of meningitis. The major artwork on Page A1 was from Syria, and the only mention of the hearing on Libya came in a one-paragraph summary at the bottom, leading readers to a well-displayed story on Page A3.

I talked with Jill Abramson, the executive editor, about the decision, which she said she may have set in motion while running the morning news meeting on Wednesday.

"I said that I wanted us to weigh the news value against the reality that Congressional hearings are not all about fact-finding," she said. In other words, they are often deeply politicized.

She described The Times's Libya coverage in recent weeks as "excellent and very muscular," and she said that for her and the managing editor Dean Baquet, "it's been one of the absolute key stories - getting to the bottom of what happened and why."

She suggested that she puts more emphasis on The Times's original reporting. "We have done a lot on the security issues in Libya and will continue, with our own reporters, to pursue this," she said.

Mr. Baquet, who ran the afternoon news meeting at which the decision was made, said the reasoning was simple enough: "I didn't think there was anything significantly new in it," he said.

Like Ms. Abramson, he was wary of the political nature of the hearing, noting that "It's three weeks before the election and it's a politicized thing, but if they had made significant news, we would have put it on the front."

And, he added, "There were six better stories."

But many readers wrote to me Thursday morning in dismay. They were disturbed not only by the lack of Page 1 coverage, but also by what they see as not enough attention paid to Libya and the events surrounding the fatal attack on the United States Consulate in Benghazi.

This e-mail, from Brendan DuBois of Exeter, N.H., was typical:

After a day of Congressional testimony where two public officials outlined the numerous times that their request for extra security for our diplomatic offices in Libya were ignored, time and time again, no doubt contributing to the slaughter of four Americans on 9/11/12, and when it was clear that the days of stories coming from the White House that the attack began after a nonexistent spontaneous demonstration outside of the U.S. Consulate ...

The lead story in today's paper is about Lance Armstrong. Lance Armstrong!

The Libya story isn't even on Page 1. It's on Page 3.

What does this say about The Times's news judgment?

Another reader, Sharon Hastings of St. Petersburg, Fla., wrote as follows (her e-mail is abridged here):

I am writing to say how shocked I am at The NYT's coverage of the Benghazi events and, more so, the coverage of the hearings. This is a major scandal and The Times has more often than not buried the story. The hearings, which made major revelations, are presented as simply partisan wrangling. The major elements on the story this morning are not brought up until the end of the story.

This is deeply shameful, and it reinforces the widely held perception of The Times as deeply partisan -- especially before the election. Does The Times truly believe -- can it possibly believe -- that it is neutral in its news coverage? Either The Times is deeply deluded or extremely cynical in its claims in this regard. Sadly I suspect cynicism.

I believe that the Libya hearing story belonged on The Times's front page. It had significant news value, regardless of the political maneuvering that is inevitable with less than four weeks to go until the election. And more broadly, there is a great deal of substance on this subject that warrants further scrutiny.

I can't think of many journalistic subjects that are more important right now, or more deserving of aggressive reporting.

Copyright 2012 The New York Times CompanyPrivacy PolicyNYTimes.com 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

CBWx2

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5931
Offline
« #26 : October 15, 2012, 03:04:54 PM »

Yeah, that "hackjob" Issa fighting for killed Americans.

That's what he's doing?  ::)
This admin screwed up and still have their stories mixed up.  Everyone in the world sees it but you apparently. Who are you defending in this situation?  Your vote? I don't care who goes down for this mess.  I hope it starts at the very top.  I hope it embarrasses America and people go to jail because that means it won't happen again.  This admin has made America look weak and disorganized.  Something that would never happen under other Presidents.  I can't remember anyone in my time raising another flag on American soil. Especially one from the same group that killed thousands of Americans.

I have no problem with hearings being held and someone being held accountable. As NovaBuc pointed out, these type of hearings are usually done behind closed doors as they typically involve sensitive information that I'm sure the intelligence community would rather not be the lead story on Fox and Friends the next morning. The timing of the hearings and the fact that the media was given access is what makes this nothing more than a hatchet job by Issa, who has continuously abused his position and wasted government resources to do nothing more than prop up his party's candidates in an election year.

Your knee-jerk response reveals your true motivations here. You claim to be seeking justice for the murdered, when in reality you just want to cling to anything to get the guy out of office that you don't like. You and Issa have a lot in common.


Bayfisher

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4630
Offline
« #27 : October 15, 2012, 06:32:58 PM »

Yeah, that "hackjob" Issa fighting for killed Americans.

That's what he's doing?  ::)
This admin screwed up and still have their stories mixed up.  Everyone in the world sees it but you apparently. Who are you defending in this situation?  Your vote? I don't care who goes down for this mess.  I hope it starts at the very top.  I hope it embarrasses America and people go to jail because that means it won't happen again.  This admin has made America look weak and disorganized.  Something that would never happen under other Presidents.  I can't remember anyone in my time raising another flag on American soil. Especially one from the same group that killed thousands of Americans.

I have no problem with hearings being held and someone being held accountable. As NovaBuc pointed out, these type of hearings are usually done behind closed doors as they typically involve sensitive information that I'm sure the intelligence community would rather not be the lead story on Fox and Friends the next morning. The timing of the hearings and the fact that the media was given access is what makes this nothing more than a hatchet job by Issa, who has continuously abused his position and wasted government resources to do nothing more than prop up his party's candidates in an election year.

Your knee-jerk response reveals your true motivations here. You claim to be seeking justice for the murdered, when in reality you just want to cling to anything to get the guy out of office that you don't like. You and Issa have a lot in common.
Yes, my true motivations. Lmfao!  It is no secret that I think the current admin is terrible.  You act like you are figuring something out.  You are going to rail against Issa trying to bring down the crooked?  What does that make you?

CBWx2

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5931
Offline
« #28 : October 15, 2012, 09:06:35 PM »

Yes, my true motivations. Lmfao!  It is no secret that I think the current admin is terrible.  You act like you are figuring something out. 

I know. But apparently, you seem to think you are a moderate, so I was just taking yet another opportunity to call you on your BS.

You are going to rail against Issa trying to bring down the crooked?  What does that make you?

Issa is trying to get his party into the White House. If you think his motivations are any more altruistic than that, you are kidding yourself. The guy actually called for hearings to investigate the freaking jobs numbers and to look into the Obama administration's alleged "war on religion", for crying out loud. He's nothing more than a partisan hack, and you are justifying his antics because it suits your own political motivations.


Biggs3535

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 31617
Offline
« #29 : October 15, 2012, 09:18:06 PM »

Who gives a shizz about Issa? 

My gawd, I'm surprised you people have not found a way to tie Benghazi into being the previous administration's fault yet.

  Page: 1 2 3 4 ... 6
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Seems there is a news topic or so missing - here's one « previous next »
:  

Hide Tools Show Tools