Quotes of the day

posted at 8:31 pm on September 29, 2012 by Allahpundit

The Obama administration’s shifting accounts of the fatal attack on the American diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, have left President Obama suddenly exposed on national security and foreign policy, a field where he had enjoyed a seemingly unassailable advantage over Mitt Romney in the presidential race…

The Benghazi attack calls into question the accuracy of intelligence-gathering and whether vulnerable American personnel overseas are receiving adequate protection. Even allies of the president like Senator John Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat and the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, have petitioned the White House for more information about how the government protects diplomatic installations abroad…

[F]urther details about the attack could lay bare lapses in security that could damage the administration. CNN has reported, from a diary belonging to J. Christopher Stevens, the American ambassador killed in the attack, that he harbored worries about his security. Mr. Williamson, who served as special envoy to Sudan under President George W. Bush, said it was unlikely that Mr. Stevens would not have relayed those concerns to the State Department.

***

The top U.S. intelligence authority issued an unusual public statement on Friday declaring it now believed the September 11 attack on U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, Libya, was a “deliberate and organized terrorist attack.”

Shawn Turner, spokesman for Clapper’s office, said that in the immediate aftermath of the attack, U.S. agencies came to the view that the Benghazi attack had begun spontaneously after protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo against a short film made in California lampooning the Prophet Mohammad…

In an apparent reference to a series of contradictory statements by some top Obama administration officials, Turner said intelligence agencies’ “initial assessment” had been passed on “to Executive Branch officials and members of Congress, who used that information to discuss the attack publicly and provide updates as they became available.”…

Within hours of the attacks ending, some government sources in Washington were already acknowledging they might well have been planned and organized in advance, and that members of two militant factions, Ansar al Shariah and al Qaeda’s North Africa-based affiliate, known as al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, may have been involved.

***

This, more than anything, is the problem with the administration’s response. It wasn’t that they failed to provide enough information to the public, but that they provided incorrect information and did so long after it was clear to many in the intelligence community that the political narrative was false.

There are two possible explanations. Either the information widely available to intelligence professionals was not shared with those speaking on behalf of the president. Or those Obama administration officials had the accurate information and chose not to provide it…

Some of the misleading information provided to the public could not possibly have been a result of incomplete or evolving intelligence. The information about security for the ambassador and the compound, for instance, would have been readily available to administration officials from the beginning. And yet when Susan Rice appeared on five political talk shows on September 16, she erroneously claimed that the two ex-Navy SEALs killed in the attack were, along with several colleagues, providing security. They were not. Why did she say this?

These questions, and many others, deserve answers. And soon.

***


***

Am I crazy or is today’s NBC Nightly News broadcast actually almost fair in Obama vs. Romney terms? … The network isn’t exactly harsh on Obama regarding the highly suspicious intelligence-agency blame-taking on Libya misdirection–but Andrea Mitchell does offer only two alternatives: 1) “a coverup” 2) “trying to avoid acknowledging mistakes this close to an election.” … Is MSM Guilt finally kicking in?

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

***

“Nobody died in Watergate.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 6 7 8

John the Libertarian on September 30, 2012 at 2:07 AM

I understand!!..You make a point!..:)

Dire Straits on September 30, 2012 at 2:11 AM

witch-hunt.

John the Libertarian on September 30, 2012 at 2:07 AM

Witch hunt? That’s one way to describe USC’s corruption…

Gohawgs on September 30, 2012 at 2:23 AM

http://youtu.be/fJZ-uoXnfWg

Dire if your still here this one’s for you

“clink”

jrsrigmvr on September 30, 2012 at 2:23 AM

Has anyone seen the Pop Tart Thief?

Grace is going to help me catch her for free. But I will pay others to help hunt the thief down.

SparkPlug on September 30, 2012 at 2:44 AM

Adios: vaja con dios

jrsrigmvr on September 30, 2012 at 3:06 AM

The picture tells us that they are reciting words provided by others.

jake49 on September 30, 2012 at 3:11 AM

Here’s something interesting: In 2004, Democrats made similar claims about “skewed samples” as polls moved towards Bush after the convention.

http://www.mydd.com/2004/9/18/rapid-poll-movement-is-a-general-election-myth

http://web.archive.org/web/20040923100547/http://www.emergingdemocraticmajorityweblog.com/donkeyrising/archives/000687.php

libfreeordie on September 30, 2012 at 3:50 AM

Pure, statistical analysis of polls and partisan bias over the last 50 years. Not for those trying to find a way to pre-emptively frame Obama’s second win as fraudulent or for those invested in the poll bias myth. Also not for people who enjoy data, facts and objective analysis.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/29/poll-averages-have-no-history-of-consistent-partisan-bias/?hp

libfreeordie on September 30, 2012 at 3:59 AM

Also not for people who enjoy data, facts and objective analysis.

libfreeordie on September 30, 2012 at 3:59 AM

So what’s your interest ?

gh on September 30, 2012 at 4:28 AM

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/29/14154102-drug-overdose-may-have-killled-woman-who-won-1-million-in-lottery-but-kept-getting-welfare?lite
Posting without comment. She was 25 years old.

bayview on September 30, 2012 at 2:09 AM

Goodness goodness gracious…

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on September 30, 2012 at 5:08 AM

There’s only one question, is this pattern of his, ineptness or just accidental?

Don L on September 30, 2012 at 5:33 AM

two more American troops have been murdered by those our Mad Hatter generals call their “partners in peace”. Our generals are murdering their own troops.

VorDaj on September 30, 2012 at 6:56 AM

There’s only one question, is this pattern of his, ineptness or just accidental?

Don L on September 30, 2012 at 5:33 AM

The pattern does not start after the attack, but before it, all the way to US backing to bring down Kadaffy.

Which faction was backed, who was backed in that faction, what did they get in assistance, how they were treated before, during and after the tyrant’s downfall… all of that is part of the pattern and we know zero about it.

What was John Christopher Stephens doing in Libya? What was his background? Why him and not some other person? What had he done to make him so valuable in that position that it was obvious he should be in it? Again, questions that haven’t been asked and yet are necessary to fill out the pattern.

Why was security so lax on 9/11? George W. Bush had an excuse on not knowing it was an important day to al Qaeda… after that it is a day of special meaning to them that comes about like clock-work: every year. Why was security so lax on that day, and not just in Benghazi? Why was Ambassador Stephens out in the field in a non-safe house without a pretty good sized security detail on such a day as 9/11? This is part of the pattern.

Had anyone paid attention to the prior infiltration of al Qaeda in to Libya? Was anyone tracking those elements and their factions? The people in the raid had been infiltrated over months, information we get from the Libyan government, not our own, so how did the US miss this? Why didn’t anyone catch the plus-up in people, equipment, arms and operational capability of al Qaeda in Libya? That is the job of a few INTEL agencies, DoD and the State Dept: how did they ALL miss this? This is part of the pattern.

How did Ambassador Stephens get into a position with such lax security in one of the few cities that would be hazardous for a company of Marines to go through? Why was such a flimsy safe-house chosen? Why did security at State Dept. overlook the reports from Stephens and his security detail about what was building up on the days before and the day of the attack? This is part of the pattern.

After the attack and assassination of Ambassador Stephens in an act of Private War by al Qaeda, why wasn’t the military used to go in and clean-up the place and extricate the remains? And by clean-up I mean ‘sanitize’ as in get an INTEL unit on the ground to recover info, take loads of pictures and videos and then call in an airstrike to level what was left? Anyone with half a brain could see that no DoJ contingent could: a) get to Libya quickly, b) be safe in one of the most unsafe cities for US Citizens on the planet, c) do their job after so much evidence is lost to the elements and picking over by other groups. If you can’t secure the site, can’t get an INTEL team to scrub it, then you firebomb the place to oblivion to make sure the INTEL is destroyed and can’t be used against the US. This is a major part of the pattern, too.

Only with these can you make sense of what happened afterwards.

Who was Ambassador Stephens?

Why was he hung out to dry? Because he was – no amount of lack of oversight going through State, INTEL and DoD should have gotten him into that place at that time with so little protection. EVER.

Why was INTEL left and is still left laying around in Benghazi for al Qaeda elements to find? Or street peddlers if it comes to that?

Answer the above and then the actions afterwards will be in perspective, make sense and become clear.

Ineptness cannot explain it all or even a tiny fraction of it.

There is, indeed, a pattern here.

And the questions fill them in even better than the excuses because no matter how you answer them, the pattern becomes very clear because THEY MUST BE ASKED IN THIS FORM. Any other series of events wouldn’t leave such questions… this one does.

And it stinks.

ajacksonian on September 30, 2012 at 7:00 AM

Our generals with their orders to the troops are co-conspirators with those they call “Our Partners in Peace” and hence are guilty of murdering their own troops.

VorDaj on September 30, 2012 at 7:06 AM

The crowds appeared to demonstrate a near-religious fervour, several women fainting in the scrum, but many of their ranks were bused in direct from jobs at state enterprises and handed red T-shirts to wear for the occasion.

No, not an Obama rally. It’s describing a rally for another well-known socialist, Hugo Chavez.

Flora Duh on September 30, 2012 at 7:55 AM

Ineptness cannot explain it all or even a tiny fraction of it.

There is, indeed, a pattern here.

And the questions fill them in even better than the excuses because no matter how you answer them, the pattern becomes very clear because THEY MUST BE ASKED IN THIS FORM. Any other series of events wouldn’t leave such questions… this one does.

And it stinks.

ajacksonian on September 30, 2012 at 7:00 AM

You’re right. Obama is the Butcher of Benghazi:

What if that ambassador fella…what if he was killed by weapons sent there by Barack Obama?  Just like you said in that off-handed way.  And what if there are tens of thousands of those weapons being used by al Qaeda right now?  Maybe on their way to the Israeli border?  And not just guns ‘cause that’s not all we were sending into Libya you know.  We’re talking some high powered take down an airliner kinda stuff.
And take it a bit further.  We did that.  And we did it knowingly.  We did it willingly.  The Obama White House.  Their hand picked stooges in the military, in State.  They did that.

Now let me go one little step more here.  What if that ambassador…well…let’s say he came across certain information…damaging to the administration.  Why is he flying into that consulate in Benghazi?  Cover of night. No security precautions.  Anti-Western sentiment reaching critical levels.  It’s almost like he was trying to keep his whereabouts unknown to his own government.  Right?  And that bullsh-t little YouTube video thing? It had been out for…what – months?  Nobody gave a sh-t about it.  NOBODY.

Naturally Curly on September 30, 2012 at 8:25 AM

Be careful out there, boys and girls, Yesterday, The Islamic Circle of North America started following me on Twitter.My take.

kingsjester on September 30, 2012 at 8:50 AM

kingsjester on September 30, 2012 at 8:50 AM

We face the greatest threat from those within our country who find the protection of free speech inconvenient.

BigAlSouth on September 30, 2012 at 9:42 AM

It is high time some one starting asking questions about Obama. This nonsense of taking everything he says at face value is just getting to be too absurd.

Terrye on September 30, 2012 at 11:46 AM

It is high time some one starting asking questions about Obama. This nonsense of taking everything he says at face value is just getting to be too absurd.

Terrye on September 30, 2012 at 11:46 AM

Have not seen nor am waiting for the media to do their job.

bayview on September 30, 2012 at 12:00 PM

“Even allies of the president like Senator John Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat and the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, have petitioned the White House for more information about how the government protects diplomatic installations abroad…”

Oh please, spare us the sleight of hand and the machinations of ginned-up outrage.

Make no mistake, Jean Kerée knows plenty about lying to the American people AND the military.
However, as long as the Senate has the attention of Øb☭ma, they should ask him in no uncertain terms, why the hell “Lybia” and Egypt were any of OUR business. Egypt WAS, but only if said intervention was to support Mubarak, NOT radical Islamists!
“Oh what tales we weave when first we practice to deceive”
~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on September 30, 2012 at 12:12 PM

Comment pages: 1 6 7 8