State Dep’t rep: “We had the correct number of [security] assets in Benghazi”

posted at 4:41 pm on October 10, 2012 by Allahpundit

Three pitiful minutes from today’s House Oversight hearing, revolving around whether a cable that “requested” more security in Libya was enough of a clue to State that … more security was being requested. Eric Nordstrom, who was on the ground, didn’t think the number was “correct”; neither did Andy Wood, who told CBS the other day that if the embassy in Tripoli had had a bigger security detail, some members surely would have joined Chris Stevens on his trip to Benghazi. But don’t miss the forest for the trees: State’s negligence here doesn’t depend on the precise number of security personnel needed under normal protocols, it derives from the glaring fact that Libya’s security situation was the opposite of “normal” and had been for the better part of a year. In Wood’s memorable phrase, Al Qaeda is more established there than we are. This was no time for a “light footprint” or even an average one. If the Department couldn’t provide Stevens with security equal to the task of handling an all but inevitable terror attack, they should have pulled him from the country. But then, we’re dealing here with people who can’t bring themselves to describe the attackers as “terrorists” even now. Like I said, pitiful.

After you watch Charlene Lamb’s testimony, watch Shep Smith try to control his anger over State’s blindness to the plain truth about Libya. Exit question: Are House Democrats right that reduced congressional funding for embassy security contributed to Stevens’s fate? Exit answer: No. But even if they were, more Democrats voted for that reduction than Republicans did.



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 2

jake49 on October 10, 2012 at 5:46 PM

Too many books and finals, too little sweat and fear.

Limerick on October 10, 2012 at 5:47 PM

Lamp, slaughtered. Sheeple fired! What will all this useless folks do for a living? Obvious ineptness will not bode well on a job application under job skills. Ms Lamb sell your home now take an apartment and get a job at the local food stop place. Firing this lot would be a pleasure.

Bmore on October 10, 2012 at 5:48 PM

Imagine if they started kidnapping ambassadors.
And that may have been their intent.

tomg51 on October 10, 2012 at 4:48 PM

I think you may have just nailed it.
They don’t know how Stevens made it to the hospital. A dead hostage is not nearly as good as a live one, so if the intent was to kidnap, it would make sense that the bad guys would have hauled him into the hospital.
Good catch Tom.

JusDreamin on October 10, 2012 at 5:48 PM

LAMB……. appropriate name for one offered up for slaughter.

GarandFan on October 10, 2012 at 5:49 PM

The State Department personnel would not say the word, “terrorists”…

d1carter on October 10, 2012 at 5:50 PM

LAMB?…I beg to differ!…that’s a COW!

KOOLAID2 on October 10, 2012 at 5:51 PM

I thought that Clinton was the rep of the State Dept? Is this not an important enough incident to warrant her voice??…..speaking of warrants.

Mimzey on October 10, 2012 at 5:51 PM

Sheppard Smith is funny. My Mother adores him or I might expand on my criticism.

Bmore on October 10, 2012 at 5:53 PM

BTW, Barry, wasn’t one of your early promises that the buck will stop on your desk once again? Second thoughts, maybe?

Limerick on October 10, 2012 at 5:53 PM

LFRGary on October 10, 2012 at 5:36 PM

missed the testimonies, thanks for that

DanMan on October 10, 2012 at 5:54 PM

I have not posted this one ,I finally found it,this is the day after!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Briefing by Senior Administration Officials to Update Recent Events in Libya

Special Briefing
Office of the Spokesperson
Via Teleconference
Washington, DC
September 12, 2012
******************

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Thank you, Operator, and thanks to all of our journalists for joining us on this very, very difficult day. We thought it was important to give you a little bit more information about what we knew when we knew it to help shape your understanding of the tragic events in Benghazi. Here with me I will hereafter be Senior Administration Official Number One. That’s [title withheld]. I also have with me [Senior Administration Official Two], hereafter Senior Administration Official Number Two. And we also have [Senior Administration Official Three], hereafter Senior Administration Official Number Three.

Let me just give you some framing points. First of all, we want to make clear that we are still here today operating within the confusion of first reports. Many details of what happened in Benghazi are still unknown or unclear. The account we’re going to give you endeavors to reconstruct the events of last night to the best of our ability now. And again, this reflects our current accounting of events. These are first reports, and so the facts could very well change as we get a better understanding.

Let me also give you a little better understanding about our office conditions in Benghazi. The facility that we are working in is an interim one. We originally acquired the property before the fall of Qadhafi. It includes a main building and several ancillary buildings, and then there was also an annex a little bit further away.

So let me give you a little bit of the chronology to the best of our knowledge. Again, the times are likely to change as it becomes a little bit more precise, but this is how we’ve been able to reconstruct what we have from yesterday.

At approximately 4 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time yesterday, which was about 10 p.m. in Libya, the compound where our office is in Benghazi began taking fire from unidentified Libyan extremists. By about 4:15, the attackers gained access to the compound and began firing into the main building, setting it on fire. The Libyan guard force and our mission security personnel responded. At that time, there were three people inside the building: Ambassador Stevens, one of our regional security officers, and Information Management Officer Sean Smith. They became separated from each other due to the heavy, dark smoke while they were trying to evacuate the burning building. The Regional Security Officer made it outside, and then he and other security personnel returned into the burning building in an attempt to rescue Chris and Sean. At that time, they found Sean. He was already dead, and they pulled him from the building. They were unable, however, to locate Chris before they were driven from the building due to the heavy fire and smoke and the continuing small arms fire.

At about 4:45 our time here in Washington, U.S. security personnel assigned to the mission annex tried to regain the main building, but that group also took heavy fire and had to return to the mission annex. At about 5:20, U.S. and Libyan security personnel made another attempt and at that time were able to regain the main building and they were able to secure it. Then, due to continued small arms fire, they evacuated the rest of the personnel and safe havened them in the nearby annex.

The mission annex then came under fire itself at around 6 o’clock in the evening our time, and that continued for about two hours. It was during that time that two additional U.S. personnel were killed and two more were wounded during that ongoing attack.

At about 8:30 p.m. our time here in Washington, so now 2 o’clock in the morning in Libya, Libyan security forces were able to assist us in regaining control of the situation. At some point in all of this – and frankly, we do not know when – we believe that Ambassador Stevens got out of the building and was taken to a hospital in Benghazi. We do not have any information what his condition was at that time. His body was later returned to U.S. personnel at the Benghazi airport.

Later that evening, we were able to bring our chartered aircraft from Tripoli into Benghazi to evacuate all of our Benghazi personnel back to Tripoli. This evacuation, which had to occur in a couple of planeloads, included all of our American Benghazi personnel, including the three wounded, and the remains of our fallen colleagues. They are now in the process – that same staff – of being evacuated to Germany. The staff that is well is going to stay in Europe on standby for a while while we assess the security situation in the coming period. The wounded will be treated in Germany, and the remains will come home, and we’ll advise you of when that will be as soon as we know.

In the meantime, we have taken our Embassy in Tripoli down to emergency staffing levels. We have reduced the staff down to what we call emergency staffing levels. And we have requested increased support from the Libyans while we assess the security situation.

I would also like to advise you that last night, all of our diplomatic posts around the world were ordered to review their security posture and to take all necessary steps to enhance it if those were deemed necessary. I’d like to now turn it over to Senior Administration Official Number Three for some remarks on what his agency has been up to.

OPERATOR: Ladies and gentlemen, if you would like to ask a question, please press * then 1 on your touchtone phone. You will hear a tone indicating you have been placed in queue. You may remove yourself from queue at any time by pressing the # key. If you are using a speakerphone, please pick up the handset before pressing the numbers. Once again, if you would like to ask a question, please press * then 1 at this time.

And the first question is from Elise Labott with CNN. Please go ahead.

QUESTION: Well, I have a couple of questions, if you would. And again, all of our condolences on what happened today. I was wondering if you can talk about now how – I know Secretary Clinton said that this would not affect how the U.S. dealt with the Libyans, and that you would move forward. But certainly, it must make you start to think about any precipitous rush to support groups in any other countries such as Syria or the like because of the uncertainty of who is on the ground.

And then I was wondering if you could talk a little bit more about Chris Stevens’ personal security and how his personal detail could have been separated from him. I mean, his personal detail’s number one responsibility is to protect their package, and so it just seemed – I just would like more clarity on how he got out of the building and then went back to find him. Why didn’t he just keep staying in the building looking for him? Thank you.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Let me start with the last question first, Elise. I think you can understand that I’m not going to go into detail about how his security detail was organized. I think in the accounting that I gave, I made clear that security personnel were endeavoring to get him out of the building when they got separated by the incredibly thick smoke and fire – if you’ve seen the pictures from the building you can have some sense of how awful the conditions were – and that they then turned right back around, got more help, and went back in to look for him. So this was really a quite – a heroic effort.

With regard to your larger question, as the Secretary said very clearly today, we are as committed today as we have ever been to a free and stable Libya. That is still in America’s interest. And we are going to continue to work very strongly to help them have the future that they want and they deserve. I would simply note how quickly and how strongly senior members of the Libyan government came forward to condemn this attack, to offer all support to us.

I’d also like to underscore that it was Libyan security forces that stood with ours in defending our buildings. We also had some – one of the local militias who is friendly to the Embassy came to assist as well. And I think that really speaks to the relationship that we’ve built with Libya. Thank you.

OPERATOR: Andrea Mitchell with NBC News is next. Please go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you for doing this and especially at such a terrible time for all of you. Can you expand on the regular security for the Ambassador? I know you don’t usually talk about security, but you can imagine how people want these details now in terms of, was it diplomatic security? Were they all RSOs? How long had he been in Benghazi? Give us a little bit more of his movements that day.

And secondly, there’s a lot of reporting now on this being linked to a terror attack, an organized terror attack – possibly al-Qaida sympathetic or al-Qaida linked. Can you speak to that?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL THREE: Operator, is the call ongoing?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: I’m sorry, it looks like I had a – I was on mute there for a while. I was going on and on on mute. I apologize. So Andrea, to your first question: Frankly, we are not in a position to speak any further to the perpetrators of this attack. It was clearly a complex attack. We’re going to have to do a full investigation. We are committed to working with the Libyans both on the investigation and to ensure that we bring the perpetrators to justice. The FBI is already committed to assisting in that, but I just – we’re – it’s just too early to speak to who they were and if they might have been otherwise affiliated beyond Libya.

With regard to Chris’s trip to Benghazi, as you know, he made regular and frequent trips to Benghazi so that he could check up on developments in the east. You know that he had been our representative – the Secretary’s representative and the President’s, to the Transitional National Council before the fall of Qadhafi and had spent a lot of time in Benghazi and built deep contacts there. So this was one of his regular visits that he made periodically.

With regard to the security arrangements, I think you will understand that we never talk in detail about how our security is arranged. And we particularly don’t talk about security arrangements for – personal security arrangements for senior level personnel.

What I can tell you is that security in Benghazi included a local guard force outside of the compound on which we rely, which is similar to the way we are postured all over the world. We had a physical perimeter barrier, obviously. And then we had a robust American security presence inside the compound, including a strong component of regional security officers. But I’m not going to go any further than that on the specifics.

Next question, operator.

(A lot More……)
==================

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2012/09/197694.htm

Victoria Nuland
Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
September 13, 2012

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2012/09/197729.htm
=====================================================

Victoria Nuland
Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
September 14, 2012

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2012/09/197784.htm
=====================================================

canopfor on October 1, 2012 at 10:22 AM

canopfor on October 10, 2012 at 5:59 PM

There is a fifty minute video from the Benghazi consulate that the government has but won’t release it to the House committee…

d1carter on October 10, 2012 at 6:03 PM

AD: OUR AMBASSADOR To the UN, Susan Rice at her first Sunday interview .. “the tape”
Jumps to State Dept saying we never said it was BC of the tape/spontaneous.
Jump to Susan Rice’s SECOND declaration, followed by State rep denying it ….
you get the idea, for ALL FIVE of Rice’s declarations !!

One could add those from Zero and Hillary, too.

No otherl voiceover necessary, just them.

pambi on October 10, 2012 at 6:05 PM

Yes, Ms. Lamb is an ugly, slovenly, slack-jawed pig of a woman, but that’s hardly the issue.

The issue is that this debacle VASTLY exceeds Watergate both in terms of administration spin, and in the “bumps in the road” it caused.

We like to blame the media for its lack of our response, but what has OUR response been. If it is limited to an angry response to the HotAir choir, then we bear some of the blame.

Call your Congressman and your Senator, demand that they push this issue and don’t let it be smothered!

Longing4Lincoln on October 10, 2012 at 6:05 PM

Maybe if Obama had just gone over there himself and bowed to the imaginary crowd protesting the video nobody has seen, this never would have happened.Oh wait he has been bowing for 3 and a half years!Americans died,Obama lied!

redware on October 10, 2012 at 6:05 PM

I can’t watch Mr. Smith’s histrionics, he’s suppose to be the straight news guys, not a commentator.

Cindy Munford on October 10, 2012 at 4:49 PM

Maybe he lost someone on 9/11.

Every real American should be hopping mad about the lack of security in Libya. They have no problem with people flying civilian there but not safe in Iraq. Excuse me.

Who in hades is making these stupid decisions? Obviously this is purely political. These decisions were made by political appointees against the advise of career people no doubt.

Steveangell on October 10, 2012 at 6:06 PM

The former regional security officer in Libya, Eric Nordstrom, recalled talking to a regional director and asking for twelve security agents.

“His response to that was, ‘You are asking for the sun, moon and the stars.’ And my response to him – his name was Jim – ‘Jim, you know what makes most frustrating about this assignment? It is not the hardships, it is not the gunfire, it is not the threats. It is dealing and fighting against the people, programs and personnel who are supposed to be supporting me. And I added (sic) it by saying, For me the Taliban is on the inside of the building.

novaculus on October 10, 2012 at 6:10 PM

Where’s Hillary..?

d1carter on October 10, 2012 at 6:11 PM

High Drama. That’s all I can say. Sorry Mom. Had it not been for you I would have opted for Drama Queen.

Bmore on October 10, 2012 at 6:13 PM

“We had all of the resources we needed to cover our asses, uh assets.”

PackerBronco on October 10, 2012 at 6:13 PM

Sir, we had the correct number of lifeboats aboard the ship. I am sure of that.
–J. Bruce Ismay

spiritof61 on October 10, 2012 at 6:15 PM

Whom to contact : http://oversight.house.gov/committee-members/

Where’s Hillary..?

d1carter on October 10, 2012 at 6:11 PM

I’m praying that Issa et al are sifting through emails &/or tapes that he can use to convict her of lying before congress. Hey, they’re so incompitant @ State, it could happen.

pambi on October 10, 2012 at 6:15 PM

Where’s Hillary..?

d1carter on October 10, 2012 at 6:11 PM

Staring at Aguilera’s cleavage, if I’m not mistaken.

spiritof61 on October 10, 2012 at 6:17 PM

I’m with Shep, this is despicable and it’s difficult to understand the depth of incompetence when it came to protecting our citizens. At least a lot of the major outlets are asking the questions now. (Now that it’s staring them in the face and they can’t avoid it.) Thanks to Hotair for keeping up with the breaking news!

scalleywag on October 10, 2012 at 6:17 PM

LFRGary on October 10, 2012 at 5:36 PM

Good piece! Keep ‘em coming…

d1carter on October 10, 2012 at 6:17 PM

How pathetic are these people? I mean, really. They would deny a request for more protection on the anniversary of 9/11.

mbabbitt on October 10, 2012 at 6:19 PM

I watched the entire hearing and got a few things out of it.
1. Ms. Lamb was forced to name 2 higher ups who agreed to kill any more security
2. The Embassy asked and begged for more security
3. Nothing the Embassy could do would have resulted in more security
4. State Dept was vested in two fictions, that local security was sufficient and that Al Qaeda was dead in the region.
5. That States story line about there being only one intel position, the ‘it was a spontaneous attack over a video’ talking point, for the first week after the attack was complete BS.
6. Ms lamb is being groomed as the sacrificial ‘lamb’…(pun intended)
7. That State is lying like a rug and that the President will not take any responsibility for the mess or the coverup.

JIMV on October 10, 2012 at 6:25 PM

I can’t view the first video. Maybe its just as well, this whole thing makes my blood boil.

magicbeans on October 10, 2012 at 6:26 PM

We’ve become a laughing stock in the Middle East. Not to mention an easy target.

scalleywag on October 10, 2012 at 6:26 PM

The entire hearing will be on C-span again at 9PM EST…

Another question…Where is Hillary? This is a State Dept debacle and she cannot be found.

JIMV on October 10, 2012 at 6:36 PM

Where are the survivors of the Benghazi attack…shouldn’t someone be talking to these people.

d1carter on October 10, 2012 at 6:39 PM

Just enough assets to get 4 Americans killed.

Did anyone ask her where Huma is?

Philly on October 10, 2012 at 6:42 PM

I was watching Fox and when Ms. Lamb made that ‘correct number’ statement, I choked and blew cold beer out my nose.

The State Department has significantly exceeded it’s correct number of ignorant assets.

WestTexasBirdDog on October 10, 2012 at 6:46 PM

Show a little appeasement and weakness and a lack of resolve and enemies will strike. That’s what I think.

scalleywag on October 10, 2012 at 6:50 PM

It is a sad day when even a doofus like Shep Smith has a better grasp (such as that is) on what happened in Benghazi than what the State Dept. or our President does.

That is where we are at now…A State Dept. run foreign policy.

This is what it looks like.

William Eaton on October 10, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Both State and Obama know what is going on..the problem is what is happening is a direct refutation of their failed policies and that cannot be admitted.

JIMV on October 10, 2012 at 6:58 PM

The president said he was considering a response to these attacks, but as far as I can see all he’s been doing is fundraising and talking about Big Bird. Who can take him seriously? I bet al Qaeda loves watching him do the View and Glamour Magazine and party with Beyonce and turn down meetings with foreign leaders. Why should they take him seriously?

scalleywag on October 10, 2012 at 6:58 PM

Looking at her another farm animal rather than a lamb comes to mind.

Aviator on October 10, 2012 at 6:59 PM

When is Hillary going to testify? When is Susan Rice going to testify? Kennedy?

Philly on October 10, 2012 at 7:06 PM

As always, stupid fat bureaucrats sitting on their fat asses in Washington think they know more than the people on the ground …

Fools.

RockyJ. on October 10, 2012 at 7:09 PM

The entire hearing will be on C-span again at 9PM EST…

Another question…Where is Hillary? This is a State Dept debacle and she cannot be found.

JIMV on October 10, 2012 at 6:36 PM

I don’t want to sound like a complete crank….but for those who think the Clinton’s are capable of anything no matter how sinister here is a hypothesis:

Considering Hillary is running the State Dept. could this be Clinton’s ultimate revenge to screw over Obama? She must know some “important” info that prevents Zero from throwing her under the bus over this disaster. I mean who the hell ignores pleas for help on security from a known hot spot of jihadist activity (hell even Shep knows this!) right before 9-11? Hillary is not that stupid! Basically she just looked the other way or did not speak out for more security or for her people…knowing what the outcome would probably be.

Let me say I don’t believe that is the case…for I have no evidence to prove it, but I have a hard time accepting that she or her husband are that dumb. Sinister maybe…but not dumb. Just some food to chew over…:)

William Eaton on October 10, 2012 at 7:18 PM

“We had the correct number of [security] assets in Benghazi”

These liberals are always the same. No deviation.

“We have the correct teachers in these failing schools”

“The Death Panel gave the correct amount of medical care”

“We delayed doing anything about that huge oil spill in The Gulf a couple of years ago for the correct amount of time”

“We walked the correct number of guns across the Mexican border”

“We prosecuted Jon Corzine the correct number of times”

and so on

jaime on October 10, 2012 at 7:48 PM

I saw the questions being asked Ms Lamb. If she is indicative of the level of professionalism in the State Department, she has to be an appointee of Obama because I have seen a box of rocks with more intelligence. Obama has surrounded himself with babbling fools to enhance his “omnipotence”. She is dumb enough to be Joe Biden’s sister.

volsense on October 10, 2012 at 8:02 PM

I can’t decide which scenario causes Barry more damage: Having Hill stay in her post or demanding her resignation, which also will cause a firestorm.

LOL.

Philly on October 10, 2012 at 8:07 PM

WOW, stunning. This confirms what I thought from the beginning. The CIA was hung out to dry by this crew. This is a all State Department operation. Which brings up a whole host of questions, not one which will reflect well on this group. And we are not even close to fining out how bad this. The worst is yet to come.

flackcatcher on October 10, 2012 at 8:23 PM

It needs to come out now. We’re sick of the lies. The victims deserve justice and we need to hear the truth.

Philly on October 10, 2012 at 8:26 PM

William Eaton on October 10, 2012 at 7:18 PM

That only works if She is not running for president again and the stink can be kept off her.

The fact that requests for more security were sent and ignored is damning to Hilary more than Obama . It certainly would make me want to not work for the state department if they are going to leave me hanging in the wind.

The ads write themselves… Hilary you once asked if we wanted Obama to answer the 3 am call but were you any better?

Gracelynn on October 10, 2012 at 8:27 PM

That only works if She is not running for president again and the stink can be kept off her.

The fact that requests for more security were sent and ignored is damning to Hilary more than Obama . It certainly would make me want to not work for the state department if they are going to leave me hanging in the wind.

The ads write themselves… Hilary you once asked if we wanted Obama to answer the 3 am call but were you any better?

Gracelynn on October 10, 2012 at 8:27 PM

Oh I agree that there are lots of other possibilities right now considering what we know now. Obviously the most likely is that the State Dept. is just this inept. We need congress and the honest elements in the media to begin getting to the bottom of this. Hillary needs to be investigated on what she knew and when, but at the end of the day this all falls on Obama no matter what. These are the people he appointed. He can maybe lessen the damage by blaming others, but cannot completely avoid blame because these are his policies and his people.

William Eaton on October 10, 2012 at 8:40 PM

Ten to twenty thousand missing surface to air missiles!!!!!

talkingpoints on October 10, 2012 at 8:53 PM

Did Ms. Lamb eat the rest of the flock?

Tim_CA on October 10, 2012 at 8:55 PM

Ten to twenty thousand missing surface to air missiles!!!!!

talkingpoints on October 10, 2012 at 8:53 PM

Nevermind that, we have Arab Spring!

slickwillie2001 on October 10, 2012 at 8:58 PM

I actually watched the hearing (sad, I know) because I wanted to hear firsthand, no spin, what was presented. My takeaway: I was aghast that our government gave Charlene Lamb authority to make life or death decisions. It’s horrifying and every American should be trembling. My impression of Ms. Lamb is that she is mentally and intellectually deficient. I’m serious. I wouldn’t allow this woman to babysit my children. She is the epitome of a career government drone that advanced to her current position not through merit but by simply showing up to work every day, year after year, to file neat and timely reports. Only in government could a half-wit paper pusher be handed the ultimate power to decide (in whole or in part) if people live or die. Like I said, horrifying!

Robin888 on October 10, 2012 at 9:24 PM

Not one of the three legacy media networks led with the Benghazi story…Wow!

d1carter on October 10, 2012 at 9:42 PM

I want to see Hillary in that chair.

Hillary Clinton IS the Secretary Of State.

This is HER responsibility. Hillary is hiding..

Get Hillary Clinton in that chair now.

RockyJ. on October 10, 2012 at 11:20 PM

I want to see Hillary in that chair.

Hillary Clinton IS the Secretary Of State.

This is HER responsibility. Hillary is hiding..

Get Hillary Clinton in that chair now.

RockyJ. on October 10, 2012 at 11:20 PM

Hillary is SoS, but she has to carry out Obama’s policies and if he didn’t want armed presence at our embassies, that’s the way it was going to be. If it were her doing, Obama would have blamed her for poor judgement tossed her under the bus.

She won’t face questions because the answers sink Obama.

Adjoran on October 11, 2012 at 12:03 AM

AKA the “Redshirt”.

whatcat on October 10, 2012 at 5:09 PM

Haha – exactly!

I didn’t know there was a technical term for it.

UltimateBob on October 10, 2012 at 5:13 PM

There’s even a T-shirt

There Goes The Neighborhood on October 11, 2012 at 12:30 AM

Hillary Clinton to resign, will announce in the coming weeks. Obama administration in shambles. That is why she has gone missing, trying to put distance between her and Obama. Let the blame game begin. Suddenly have an urge for Hot Buttered Popcorn.

stormridercx4 on October 11, 2012 at 12:46 AM

“We had the correct number of [security] assets in Bengazi”
- Charlene Lamb, U.S. Department of State

For any liberals or leftists looking at this site, this is a sterling example of why centralized government planned economies (and government-centric societies, in general) never have worked, and never will. Government bureaucracies attract and retain massively stupid people like Ms Lamb. And, like turds in a pond, they always seem to rise to the top.

In the private sector, someone this stupid couldn’t be trusted to take out the trash.

SubmarineDoc on October 11, 2012 at 12:53 AM

Ambassador Stevens, victim of Obama’s Cairo Speech.

profitsbeard on October 11, 2012 at 1:57 AM

Wtf is this feckless civil service cat wrangler doing in charge of determining our security levels at ALL our embassies / consulates? Such a sensitive / critical position ought to be held by a former colonel of infantry or special forces team leader. Someone with some real damned experience on the sharp end. Someone who WON’T be swayed by lackwitted ideologically-driven garbage or phony time schedules utterly divorced from the facts on the ground.

rayra on October 11, 2012 at 2:00 AM

This woman, Charlene Lamb, is Deputy Secretary of State? God help us.

petefrt on October 11, 2012 at 6:42 AM

I can not stand Sheppard the drama queen. Fox would do well to replace him with Bill Hammer or any of the gals on the Five.

jpmn on October 11, 2012 at 6:54 AM

JIMV on October 10, 2012 at 6:25 PM

I watched as well and was startled to hear Ms. Lamb say that no decision was made without approval from the two folks she reported too.
She was simply a messanger. I am glad she had the “opportunity” to name her bosses. Those two chickens should be the folks being grilled.
Not supporting Ms. Lamb here. She is defending a VERY weak position and doing it poorly.
The fact of the matter is that two chickenshits put her out there to defend THEIR decisions. They need to see some sunlight as well.

Jabberwock on October 11, 2012 at 7:16 AM

Setting aside the growing doubts as to all their loyalty ($450 million to Muslim Bros?!) the simple conclusion to these hearings should be something like, the Secretary of State is not qualified for the job, just as she was not qualified for her previous carpet-bagged job as a Senator – although it would be difficult to pinpoint standards there, since a creature like Arlen Specter can be a Senator — and, as she proved to be, was not qualified for the job she had before that, First Lady. Her current boss, who carries the nominal title of President of the United State, is also not, when he bothers to show up, qualified for the job. While they and the others appointed by this administration are in positions of responsibility in these dangerous times, no one is safe.

curved space on October 11, 2012 at 7:20 AM

You want to know why Shep is all hot about this, got to the 37 second mark and listen to what he says about the political part. He is seeing his savior’s chances of re-election going down the tubes over this, no I don’t doubt his sincerity at the loss of life, and he doesn’t know what to do. Politics cannot be left out of this discussion, for it was politics that caused it all. Obama apologizing for every thing, his backing of the “Arab Spring” with his eyes closed about the players, his standard leftist foreign policy stance, all led to this happening. The consulate was denied extra security because the optics would have been counter to the support da One gave to the “arab spring.” For this, four people had to die. Regardless of how high the chain this decision truly goes, we all know the big names will not be harmed, it is crystal clear that the State Department doesn’t just need to be swept out, but a serious disinfecting. For those that want da One’s and Hil’s heads on a platter, ain’t gonna happen. At best he loses re-election and her political career, as far as presidential goes, is over. Sad, for either one or both should be facing some level of charges.

TQM38a on October 11, 2012 at 9:00 AM

I am just going to come out and state what many might be thinking.

This was a set up.

Just ask yourself -

Why would the Obama Administration have intel that attacks
were to be made on our embassies/consulates, etc. in the Middle East on the anniversary of 9-11 and not install adequate security?

It is my opinion that Obama was hoping that a hostage situation
would take place and he could ride in on his horse and save the
day – perhaps by trading the Blind Sheik for the hostage.

The Obama administration knowingly did nothing to protect our
people in order to set up a likely hostage scenario to occur.

Would anyone deny that our president is capable of this?

Amjean on October 11, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Is it just me or do others think Ms. Lamb seems unqualified for the job she is filling?

I’m wondering how much real security experience she has had on the ground in high risk areas.

She gives me the impression that she is just another government employee who earns more than the average citizen because she shows up for work most of the time.

God help the poor people out on our front diplomatic lines if she is in control of their fates.

BMF on October 11, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Dear Ms. Lamb:

Your security metrics are off. Which actually means you have no realistic standard to compare against.

Your CYA metrics seem just fine.

EB

EdmundBurke247 on October 11, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Comment pages: 1 2