posted October 14, 2012 02:16 PM            

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted October 14, 2012 02:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jwhop:
Ahhhh, O'Bomber will just throw Hillary under the bus Ami.

"Hillary never told me!"

---

He will TRY, Jwhop, but there are just so many people you can throw under the bus before people get suspicious

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted October 16, 2012 05:09 PM            

By ERIC SCHMITT and MARK LANDLER
Published: October 12, 2012 229 Comments

WASHINGTON — In the weeks leading up to the attack last month on the American diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, diplomats on the ground sounded increasingly urgent alarms. In a stream of diplomatic cables, embassy security officers warned their superiors at the State Department of a worsening threat from Islamic extremists, and requested that the teams of military personnel and State Department security guards who were already on duty be kept in service.

The requests were denied, but they were largely focused on extending the tours of security guards at the American Embassy in Tripoli — not at the diplomatic compound in Benghazi, 400 miles away. And State Department officials testified this week during a hearing by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that extending the tour of additional guards — a 16-member military security team — through mid-September would not have changed the bloody outcome because they were based in Tripoli, not Benghazi.

The handling of these requests has now been caught up in a sharply partisan debate over whether the Obama administration underestimated the terrorist threat in Libya. In a debate with Representative Paul D. Ryan on Thursday night, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. said White House officials were not told about requests for any additional security. “We weren’t told they wanted more security again,” Mr. Biden said.

The Romney campaign on Friday pounced on the conflicting statements, accusing Mr. Biden of continuing to deny the nature of the attack. The White House scrambled to explain the apparent contradiction between Mr. Biden’s statement and the testimony from State Department officials at the House hearing.

The White House spokesman, Jay Carney, said Friday that security issues related to diplomatic posts in Libya and other countries were dealt with at the State Department, not the White House. Based on interviews with administration officials, as well as in diplomatic cables, and Congressional testimony, those security decisions appear to have been made largely by midlevel State Department security officials, and did not involve Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton or her top aides.

While it is unclear what impact a handful of highly trained additional guards might have had in Benghazi were they able to deploy there, some State Department officials said it would probably not have made any difference in blunting the Sept. 11 assault from several dozen heavily armed militants.

“An attack of that kind of lethality, we’re never going to have enough guns,” Patrick F. Kennedy, under secretary of state for management, said at Wednesday’s hearing. “We are not an armed camp ready to fight it out.”

A senior administration official said that the military team, which was authorized by a directive from Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta, was never intended to have an open-ended or Libya-wide mission.

“This was not a SWAT team with a DC-3 on alert to jet them off to other cities in Libya to respond to security issues,” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the delicacy of the matter.

Security in Benghazi had been a growing concern for American diplomats this year. In April, the convoy of the United Nations special envoy for Libya was attacked there. In early June, a two-vehicle convoy carrying the British ambassador came under attack by rocket-propelled grenades. Militants struck the American mission with a homemade bomb, but no one was hurt. In late June, the Red Cross was attacked and the organization pulled out.

“We were the last thing on their target list to remove from Benghazi,” Lt. Col. Andrew Wood of the Utah National Guard, who was deployed in Tripoli as the leader of the American military security unit, told the House committee.

But friends and colleagues of Ambassador Stevens said he was adamant about maintaining an American presence in Benghazi, the heart of the opposition to the Qaddafi government.

“Our people can’t live in bunkers and do their jobs,” Mrs. Clinton said Friday. “But it is our solemn responsibility to constantly improve, to reduce the risks our people face and make sure they have the resources they need to do their jobs.”

At American diplomatic facilities overseas, the host nation is primarily responsible for providing security outside the compound’s walls. Inside the compound, the State Department is in charge, relying on a mix of diplomatic security officers, local contract guards and Marines. The Marines are responsible for guarding classified documents, which they are instructed to destroy if there is a breach of the compound. Senior diplomats are protected by diplomatic security officers, not a detachment of Marines, as Mr. Ryan asserted in Thursday night’s debate.

In deciding whether to extend a military security team, the State Department often faces a difficult financial decision at a time when its security budget is under severe pressure. The department must reimburse the Pentagon for the cost of these soldiers, an expense that can quickly run into the millions of dollars. For that reason, the State Department typically pushes to make the transition to local contractors, who are much cheaper.

In their debate, Mr. Biden responded to Mr. Ryan’s attacks by accusing him and his fellow Republicans of cutting the administration’s request for embassy security and construction. House Republicans this year voted to cut back the administration’s request, but still approved more than was spent last year.

In an agreement between the Pentagon and the State Department, the military team was extended twice — December 2011 and March 2012 — but when it came to a third extension, Eric A. Nordstrom, the former chief security officer in Libya, said he was told he could not request another extension beyond August.

Charlene Lamb, a deputy assistant secretary in the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, said at the hearing that a request from Mr. Nordstrom to extend the military team was only a recommendation and that the State Department had been right not to heed it. Ms. Lamb also testified that budget considerations played no part in considering additional security. Decisions on diplomatic security went no higher than Ms. Lamb and, in limited cases, Mr. Kennedy, officials said.

The broader strategy, Ms. Lamb said, was to phase out the American military team and rely more on the Libyan militiamen who were protecting the compound along with a small number of American security officers. Ms. Lamb said this model of relying on locally hired guards had worked at the United States Embassy in Yemen.

In a July 9 cable signed by Ambassador Stevens, the embassy requested that the State Department extend the tours for a minimum of three security personnel in Benghazi. The department had earlier approved a request for five guards for the mission, which was still in effect at the time of the July 9 cable.

Five American security agents were at the compound at the time of the assault, Ms. Lamb said, though it was later noted that only three were based at the compound and that two had accompanied Mr. Stevens from Tripoli. She said there were also three members of a Libyan militia who were helping to protect the compound.

Michael R. Gordon contributed reporting. http://www.nytimes.com /2012/10/13/world/africa/cables-show-requests-to-state-dept-for-security-in-libya-were-focused-on-tripoli.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

posted October 16, 2012 05:10 PM            

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted October 16, 2012 05:23 PM            

"I take responsibility" for Benghazi: Clinton

LIMA (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton assumed responsibility on Monday for last month's deadly attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, which has become an issue in the hard-fought U.S. presidential campaign.

"I take responsibility" for what happened on September 11, Clinton said in an interview with CNN during a visit to Peru, adding that President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden would not be responsible for specific security instructions for U.S. diplomatic facilities.

"I'm in charge of the State Department's 60,000-plus people all over the world," Clinton said.

"The president and the vice president wouldn't be knowledgeable about specific decisions that are made by security professionals. They're the ones who weigh all of the threats and the risks and the needs and make a considered decision."

It is extremely difficult for ME to believe Obama/Biden were not aware. Especially as it was 9/11

Clinton's comments followed stepped-up criticism of the Obama administration over the Benghazi attack, which Republican presidential challenger Mitt Romney has sought to use to dent Obama's foreign policy credibility before the November 6 election.

Republicans in particular have focused on the Obama administration's shifting explanations for the attack, which Clinton said in two separate television interviews on Monday were the result of "the fog of war."

"fog of the war" huh?

"Remember, this was an attack that went on for hours," Clinton told Fox News. "There had to be a lot of sorting out. ... Everyone said, here's what we know, subject to change."

The administration initially attributed the violence to protests over an anti-Islam film and said it was not premeditated. Obama and other officials have since said the incident was a terrorist attack.

"POLITICAL GOTCHA"

The Benghazi assault, and the Obama administration's response, has become a contentious election issue and Clinton's comments came a day before the second presidential debate.

"What I want to avoid is some kind of political 'gotcha' or blame game going on," Clinton told CNN.

"I know that we're very close to an election. I want to just take a step back here and say from my own experience, we are at our best as Americans when we pull together. I've done that with Democratic presidents and Republican presidents."

Romney has accused the administration of not providing adequate security to American diplomats and misrepresenting the nature of the attack, which resulted in the death of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.

Romney's criticisms have sought to undercut the foreign policy record of Obama, who has been praised for the killing of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and the withdrawal of troops from unpopular wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Those attacks sharpened after last week's vice presidential debate, when Vice President Joe Biden said "we did not know" of requests by U.S. diplomats on the ground in Libya for more security - a statement that contradicted testimony given two days earlier by State Department officials at a congressional hearing.

Clinton told the networks that Obama and Biden had not been involved in security decisions related to the consulate.

"The decisions about security are made by security professionals. But we're going to review everything to be sure we're doing what needs to be done in an increasingly risky environment," Clinton said.

Congress has increased pressure on the State Department to release information about the attack. Obama and Clinton have both vowed a full investigation.

http://news.yahoo.com/responsibility-benghazi-clinton-tells-cnn-011440847.html

posted October 16, 2012 05:48 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by AcousticGod:
Said the person who never brought proof of anything...any time or anywhere.

(You can't promote Rush Limbaugh, and then make other people out as gullible.)

---

Hey you
I agree with Jwhop. He is right 98% of the time( just like Rush)

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted October 16, 2012 05:50 PM            

I don't personally see it as damning in any regard. She's accepting responsibility, but I don't even see the need for her to do that.

posted October 16, 2012 05:58 PM            

I saw it as an attempt to take the heat off Obama and clean up Bidens remarks in the debate.

If we put ourselves in Mr. Stevens shoes, would we have expected that kind of military protection to be offered to us?

It is my understanding Stevens raised a lot of concern about their safty. That being true, I would answer yes.
Maybe not so much for himself but the staff under him.

posted October 16, 2012 06:22 PM            

Security in Benghazi had been a growing concern for American diplomats this year. In April, the convoy of the United Nations special envoy for Libya was attacked there. In early June, a two-vehicle convoy carrying the British ambassador came under attack by rocket-propelled grenades. Militants struck the American mission with a homemade bomb, but no one was hurt. In late June, the Red Cross was attacked and the organization pulled out.

“We were the last thing on their target list to remove from Benghazi,” Lt. Col. Andrew Wood of the Utah National Guard, who was deployed in Tripoli as the leader of the American military security unit, told the House committee.

But friends and colleagues of Ambassador Stevens said he was adamant about maintaining an American presence in Benghazi, the heart of the opposition to the Qaddafi government.

posted October 16, 2012 07:20 PM            

Yet, there was a call for beefed up security. Why ?

posted October 16, 2012 07:29 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by juniperb:
Yes, it is my understanding he wanted to be there too despite the crisis evolving in the M.E.

Yet, there was a call for beefed up security. Why ?

---

EVERYONE knew it was dangerous. O'Bomber wanted to act like HE got rid of all the radical Muslims threats when he killed Bin laden.

If O'Bomber gave decent security, it would look like he didn't get rid of radical Muslims.
O'Bomber cared about his image more than anyone or anything else.

O'Bombers chickens have come home to roost.

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted October 17, 2012 01:32 PM            

as for throwing hillary under the bus he did the exact opposite.

as for state dept not backing him up, obviously she/they did so, and we would have known earlier if it suited wall street for people to see obama in a more positive light...

posted October 19, 2012 03:03 PM            

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted October 19, 2012 08:08 PM            

quote:

---

Stevens wrote that the people of Benghazi want a security apparatus but “inherently fear abuse by the same authorities. This debate, playing out daily in Benghazi, has created the security vacuum that a diverse group of independent actors are exploiting for their own purposes.”

A cable signed by Stevens on the day of his murder, September 11, described a meeting with the Acting Principal Officer of the Supreme Security Council in Benghazi, commander Fawzi Younis, who “expressed growing frustration with police and security forces (who were too weak to keep the country secure)…”

---

quote:

---

Issa and Chaffetz say they’ve “been told repeatedly” that the Obama administration not only “repeatedly reject(ed) requests for increased security despite escalating violence, but it also systematically decreased existing security to dangerous and ineffective levels,” and did so “to effectuate a policy of ‘normalization’ in Libya after the conclusion of its civil war.”

---

posted October 19, 2012 11:10 PM            

But no, they actually pulled 2 security teams out. This in the face of repeated requests for more security personnel, the RPG attack on the British Ambassador's convey, the closing of the British Embassy, the closing of the Red Cross office...and they ignore requests for more security and reduce US security forces.

And then after the attack which killed 4 US State Dept personnel, including the Ambassador, O'Bomber goes into lying mode, sends his lying underlings out to blame the attacks on an internet video trailer no one has seen and tries running a cover-up and 2 weeks later, they were still lying to the American people.

"The Buck" doesn't stop with Hillary. She's not president. O'Bomber is and the buck stops on his desk...unless he's a total wuss.

posted October 20, 2012 10:11 AM            

quote:

---

Further, O'Bomber knew about the previous attacks because he gets a daily presidential intelligence briefing which would include exactly that kind of information.

---

That`s the gist of it. Plus, Stephens was clear/consise in his requests and concerns up until the day he was murdered.
AG`s link about says it all.
The admin. failed him and that`s about unforgivable.

posted October 20, 2012 11:45 AM            

quote:

---

“With the full complement of five Special Agents, our permanent presence would include eight U.S. direct hire employees.”

This would seem to suggest that Undersecretary Kennedy had approved a plan for five permanent security agents in Benghazi, but that never happened. It should be noted that there were ultimately a total of five Diplomatic Security Agents in Benghazi that night since there were two stationed at the Benghazi compound, and three escorted Ambassador Chris Stevens to the compound.

---

Five and five.

quote:

---

note the Obama administration response that “two extra DS agents would have made no difference.

---

That's a point I was making here that seems to go unnoticed.

quote:

---

Norstrom notes that the British have “a 5 person team assigned to just their head of mission, so they have made a commitment to maintain a larger presence in Benghazi than the USG,” the U.S. government.

---

And this did not apparently dissuade an attack on them either.

quote:

---

Plus, Stephens was clear/consise in his requests and concerns up until the day he was murdered.

---

I see where Stevens reported on the status of Libya's security, but I don't see where he himself asked for more security.

quote:

---

The admin failed him and that`s about unforgivable.

---

My opinion on this is that they should have pulled everyone out altogether, though I'm not certain that's something Stevens was looking for.

quote:

---

The Obama administration has waited about as long to get serious about security in Libya. Not until last month, just days before the attacks in Benghazi, did the State Department and Defense Department ask Congress to redirect $8 million in Pentagon funds to send Special Forces teams to help build a 500-strong Libyan special operations force, to be modeled on the highly capable Iraqi and Afghan special operations forces that have been created over the past decade. http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-boot-benghazi-iraq-security-20121021,0,6445384.story

---

The Obama administration quietly won Congress’s approval last month to shift about $8 million from Pentagon operations and counterterrorism aid budgeted for Pakistan to begin building an elite Libyan force over the next year that could ultimately number about 500 troops. American Special Operations forces could conduct much of the training, as they have with counterterrorism forces in Pakistan and Yemen, American officials said.

The effort to establish the new unit was already under way before the assault that killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans at the United States Mission in Benghazi, Libya. But the plan has taken on new urgency as the new government in Tripoli tries to assert control over the country’s militant factions.

posted October 20, 2012 12:25 PM            

We`ll never know.

posted October 20, 2012 02:02 PM            

It simply was a disastrous failure overall.