Benghazi – what’s new?

posted at 8:01 am on May 9, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Not much, if you listen to apologists for the White House and State Department, even after the testimony of two previously-excluded whistleblowers yesterday at a House Oversight Committee hearing on the Benghazi attack that killed four Americans.  Glenn Kessler, the Washington Post fact-checker, says that while some of what was said has already come out — somewhat reluctantly — there were in fact some new revelations.  And even what we know think as established fact has new angles that carry some big implications.

For instance, let’s look at the demonstration run amok vs terrorist attack narrative issue.  Kessler points out that we have known for months that there was no demonstration at the Benghazi consulate prior to the attack.  Earlier reports said that confusion may have come from a lack of information combined with demonstrations in other countries in the region.  What’s new, Kessler points out, is Hicks’ testimony that he spoke directly with Hillary Clinton on the night of the attack and briefed her:

So it is not new that there was no protest. That’s been officially well established. It is also not new that many officials knew it was a terrorist attack.

What is new is that Hicks has put a human face on previous reporting. He also disclosed he spoke directly to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton the night of the attack, presumably relaying his conclusions.

The hearings also revealed an e-mail written by Elizabeth Jones, the acting assistant secretary for Near Eastern Affairs, in which she recounted a conversation with the Libyan ambassador on Sept. 12: “When he said his government suspected that former Gadhafi regime elements carried out the attacks, I told him that the group that conducted the attacks Ansar Al Sharia is affiliated with Islamic terrorists.”

One generally presumes that top government officials have access to classified information and firsthand accounts not available to the media. But in this case either their judgments were colored by media accounts as well — or they took advantage of the media’s reporting to obscure some politically difficult news.

Kessler’s avoiding a conclusion here.  If the State Department thinks CNN has better info in Atlanta than its own people on the ground in Libya, then why bother having people on the ground at all?

There’s also the matter of Susan Rice directly contradicting the Libyan president on the nature of the attacks on September 16th.  By that time, everyone should have known it was a terrorist attack, but Rice went on five talk shows to blame it on a demonstration.  Meanwhile, Mohamed Yusuf al-Magariaf went on American television to correctly state that terrorists had conducted the attack, and he even knew who they were.  That rebuke from an American diplomat had a direct impact on the US ability to investigate the issue, and on al-Magariaf’s ability to lead:

While the political fallout long has been clear from Rice’s appearance on the Sunday shows, what’s new is Hicks’ description of the diplomatic impact — that Libyan cooperation into the probe was greatly hindered because the president of Libya, Mohamed Yusuf al-Magariaf, who also appeared on Face the Nation, was so angry that Rice disagreed with his description of a “preplanned” attack.

Magariaf was “insulted in front of his own people,” Hicks said. “His credibility was reduced. His ability to lead his country was damaged.”

Hicks’ description of his reaction to Rice’s comments — “I was stunned. My jaw dropped. And I was embarrassed” — is also rather telling, given that previously administration officials had asserted that Rice’s remarks reflected a consensus that no one would dispute at the time.

Another witness attacked the integrity of the Accountability Review Board, on which apologists relied yesterday, calling it an attempt to cover up for the top brass:

Nordstrom suggested the board’s report attempted to protect higher-ranking officials, and specifically faulted it for not looking at the key role played by Under Secretary for Management Patrick Kennedy in failing to deliver the request for more security to Clinton.

He said a similar failure occurred in the 1998 bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Kenya, which killed 19 Americans.

“[The ARB] has decided to fix responsibility on the assistant secretary level and below,” said Nordstrom. “And the message to my colleagues is that if you’re above a certain level, no matter what your decision is no one’s going to question it.

“I look back and I see the last time we had a major attack was East Africa. Who was in that same position, when the unheeded messengers … were raising those concerns? It just so happens it was the same person. The under secretary for management was in that same role before.

“There’s something apparently wrong with the process of how those security recommendations are raised to the secretary.”

There was also the matter of the State Department’s counterterrorism chief, who got cut out of the Benghazi loop almost immediately after the attack began:

Thompson described how his request for a specialized emergency response team was rebuffed by officials at the White House. He said he got the idea the officials weren’t sure what was happening in Benghazi and therefore weren’t sure if the “FEST” team of special operations forces and intelligence personnel was a suitable option.

Thompson was told FEST wasn’t “on the menu“:

Mr. Thompson, the deputy coordinator for operations, testified that he thought the U.S. needed to activate an interagency advisory group called the Foreign Emergency Support Team, but was told that top State Department officials had already determined that sending the team wasn’t “in the menu of options.”

The State Department has said that the team, based in the U.S., wouldn’t have arrived in Libya in time to make any difference. Daniel Benjamin, the head of counterterrorism at the time of the September attacks and Mr. Thompson’s former boss, has said that the question of whether to deploy the team was posed early, and the State Department made the correct decision against sending it.

But that presumed that State knew at the moment just how long the attack would last:

[Thompson] also said he considered the response inadequate because “one definition of a crisis is you do not know what’s going to happen in two hours.”

So yes, there was quite a bit new at the hearing — and all of it pointing to a political whitewash during and after the attack.  What’s not new is the apologists’ refrain:


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 3

mark81150 on May 9, 2013 at 12:09 PM

That is an amazing story, thanks for sharing. Can’t imagine what it must have been like to be in your situation, and seriously don’t think I could do the same.

rightmind on May 9, 2013 at 12:25 PM

mark81150 on May 9, 2013 at 12:09 PM

From the depths of my heart, thank you.

Midas on May 9, 2013 at 12:28 PM

I believe Verbby would do what Chriss Matthews would do.. deny everything, blame their incompetence on the fact opposition to their messiah is even permitted to exit.. Attack the integrity of men who have everything to loose, nothing to gain, for telling the truth that the left does not want told.. Attack them for wanting the record straight for the dead men they knew..
mark81150 on May 9, 2013 at 12:09 PM

No idea what Matthews did/does/will say.

I, though, have not in way whatsoever ‘attacked the integrity’ of these guys…I have not criticized them in any way. To the contrary I’ve called them courageous and their testimony compelling.
I don’t question a single word of it.
Of their testimony/stories, I DO question the interpretation by some and manipulation by others.

Your story is equally compelling – and I’d differ with your assessment that you were ‘never that brave’.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 12:30 PM

Midas on May 9, 2013 at 12:23 PM

right, that’s what i was getting at

the “we wouldn’t have made it there in time” excuse is both a logical absurdity and a dereliction of duty

also, to claim that they were going on the best information they had available is laughable when they didn’t consult with hicks, our top man in libya, after the attack had finished

rightmind on May 9, 2013 at 12:33 PM

Obama will happily allow all of the blame to fall on Hillary; in fact, I’d say he’d be thrilled if this ends up driving a nail into the coffin of her political ambitions and if he doesn’t aid and abet that process. You can’t convince me for one second that he doesn’t loathe Hillary and her husband for having had the audacity to oppose him and will relish this opportunity to get even. And whom do you think the media will side with if it comes to Obama v. Hillary, hmmm?

natasha333 on May 9, 2013 at 12:33 PM

Scrumpy on May 9, 2013 at 12:15 PM

To me, it’s not an extraordinary story.. So many young men and women have given so vastly much more, it shames me, that I can’t re-enlist, even filling sandbags just so they know how much I appreciate them, and have a slight clue as to what’s in their hearts.

it just is duty, what was expected. I knew it was going to take a huge toll to tell that piece of my life, but my reasons are simple. Too take the defenders of Benghazi, and show them why in the eyes of anyone, anywhere who has sworn to die if need be for his friends in defense of this country.. it DOES MATTER, that our people were left behind..

I’m going to take a break from this, and make some coffee, and try to forget, again… I’m not ashamed of the choice I made, just worn out putting it down in detail.. maybe I should go find a veterans office and find someone to talk to.. It always feels… like;..

well, like home going there..

People you never met, but in their eyes you can tell, that we’re family to each other. There is no judging mockery there.. no person to scoff and laugh, trying to ignore the stories of those who took the oath, just family willing to listen..

Peace time, or war, people have risked much.. and our bonds go back to Valley Forge.. It’s our traditions, and our bonds in shared events that hold us together.

mark81150 on May 9, 2013 at 12:34 PM

How long until the WH’s first invocation of national security concerns or Executive Privilege as a reason to deny documents or testimony on Benghazi?

farsighted on May 9, 2013 at 12:09 PM

5… 4… 3…

petefrt on May 9, 2013 at 12:34 PM

A deal will be cut. I will go something like this…”You Republicans know that Immigration, Gun Control and Gay Marriage are far more important and are the right thing to do, so in exchange for ignoring Ben Gazi, we’ll do everything we’ve ever wanted and dreamed of doing with all three of these other issues. Deal?” Republicans: “Sound like a deal to us, where do we sign?”

oldroy on May 9, 2013 at 12:38 PM

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 12:30 PM

a gracious reply, to an ungracious remark… maybe I.. no I was to quick to lump you in with.. well my apologies then, for saying something that was not accurate, and unkind.

Clinton, Bush, made a lot of mistakes, every president does.. I can accept that, what tears me up is the unanswered pleas for backup, which never came..

to me it’s a betrayal of everything I know is right and true..

mark81150 on May 9, 2013 at 12:44 PM

Obama will happily allow all of the blame to fall on Hillary; in fact, I’d say he’d be thrilled if this ends up driving a nail into the coffin of her political ambitions and if he doesn’t aid and abet that process. You can’t convince me for one second that he doesn’t loathe Hillary and her husband for having had the audacity to oppose him and will relish this opportunity to get even. And whom do you think the media will side with if it comes to Obama v. Hillary, hmmm?

natasha333 on May 9, 2013 at 12:33 PM

Well, we know who CNN will side with. Kind of explains why they’ve been easing so many black people out the door lately. Don Lemon is safe on the gay angle though.

oldroy on May 9, 2013 at 12:48 PM

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 11:19 AM

The truth does not evolve. It does not change from minute to minute. As I tell my clients, “Just tell the truth. The truth does not change, but lies do. They have to, in order to keep pace with and keep ahead of what the other side is discovering.”

totherightofthem on May 9, 2013 at 12:49 PM

ask any of the military people you know, meet, that promise is everything..

and why I cannot just forgive this betrayal..

mark81150 on May 9, 2013 at 12:09 PM

Likewise. You do what you gotta do.

dogsoldier on May 9, 2013 at 12:51 PM

Ed,

Do you have Wes Clark’s contact information? I’m still looking for somebody who can give us some straight answers on the military’s capabilities, forces in place (particularly the 6th Fleet, which is not mentioned in any of this), response times, protocols (for a Benghazi-like situation) and the rest. He’s the straightest shooting Democrat-aligned military guy I know. And not afraid to go bold (Kosovo). Could be an interesting guest for your show. Though he could be Clinton-friendly (from Arkansas), he’s always impressed me (would have made a decent President, especially considering what we ended up with).

Here’s what I’ve got:

Wesley K. Clark & Associates
501-244-9522
501-244-2203 (fax)
wes@wesleykclark.com

IndieDogg on May 9, 2013 at 12:53 PM

So indeed we learned nothing new. The initial reports were based on assumptions informed by real events that had occurred. As additional details became known, the analysis of what went on evolved.

But because the information and reports did indeed evolve, conspiracists insist this somehow proves many many many people in the administration, the state department, congress, and the military are ‘lying’ – they have all participated in a great ‘cover up’.

Yet there is still zero evidence.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 11:19 AM

BS. See the email dated 12 September 2012 from Greg Hicks’ superior, Beth Jones, acting secretary of state for Near Eastern Affairs.

She – SPECIFICALLY -stated that the assault on the Benghazi consulate was a TERRORIST ATTACK carried out by AQ-related Muslim extremists.

In the email, Ms Jones states – UNEQUIVOCALLY - that she had spoken with the Libyan ambassador to Washington and ‘told him that the group that conducted the attacks, Ansar al-Sharia, is affiliated with Islamic terrorists.’

Resist We Much on May 9, 2013 at 12:57 PM

Where are the Flag Officers????

Where are the operations officers????

Where are the signals officers?????

Where are the aircrews??????

Where are the corpsmen/medics/physicians that cared for the wounded?????

Where are the SURVIVORS????

ted c on May 9, 2013 at 12:59 PM

mark81150 on May 9, 2013 at 12:09 PM

Thank you.

Thank you for what you did 30 years ago, and thank you for sharing that story AND ITS IMPORTANCE AND RELEVANCE TO BENGHAZI today.

Those at the highest levels of our government LEFT PEOPLE TO DIE and then LIED about it.

ITguy on May 9, 2013 at 1:00 PM

ask any of the military people you know, meet, that promise is everything..

and why I cannot just forgive this betrayal..

mark81150 on May 9, 2013 at 12:09 PM

Likewise. You do what you gotta do.

dogsoldier on May 9, 2013 at 12:51 PM

Never leave a man behind….do what you gotta do…AMEN!

“This is the first time in my career that a diplomat has more balls than somebody in the military.”

What a sad day in this nation’s history! To the ‘MILITARY’S defense, it was not the U.S. military that failed the men fighting for their lives in Benghazi but rather whoever this individual is who gave that order to ‘Stand Down’…it is a shame that any military member obeyed that order.

easyt65 on May 9, 2013 at 1:01 PM

mark81150 on May 9, 2013 at 12:44 PM

No need to apologize –
I’m here with thick armor and never take this stuff personally.
I appreciate being given the benefit of the doubt.
I have no issue with the essence of your concern – that anyone was intentionally not given assistance for political reason. But I don’t see that’s what happened here.
As far as errors we can all see in hindsight, I’d say there’s no doubt about that.
But I no more think the President let men die for political reasons than I think the Repubs intentionally cut State Dept security funding to bring about this result with an aim to damage the President they are so vociferously opposed to.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 1:02 PM

Remember, Benghazi was largely a CIA operation..? Anybody heard anything about this CIA mission..?

d1carter on May 9, 2013 at 1:04 PM

ask any of the military people you know, meet, that promise is everything..

and why I cannot just forgive this betrayal..

mark81150 on May 9, 2013 at 12:09 PM

People like Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, Nancy Pelosi, & Harry Reid will never….EVER…know what that is like…and no life will ever be as important as their very own.

When the President of the United States calls and tells us he needs us we answer that call…period. It is imperative for us to know that when we call he has our back. Even when we call, however, and know no one will have our back…we still go! It’s what we do!

“So Others May Live!”

easyt65 on May 9, 2013 at 1:09 PM

Anybody heard anything about this CIA mission..?

“At this point what difference does it make?”

We have to stop focusing on what happened in Benghazi so we can move forward and make sure this never happens again…or something like that…

easyt65 on May 9, 2013 at 1:12 PM

So indeed we learned nothing new. The initial reports were based on assumptions informed by real events that had occurred. As additional details became known, the analysis of what went on evolved.

But because the information and reports did indeed evolve, conspiracists insist this somehow proves many many many people in the administration, the state department, congress, and the military are ‘lying’ – they have all participated in a great ‘cover up’.

Yet there is still zero evidence.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 11:19 AM

There are no evolving facts or conspiracy theories here, but simple truth and lies. Lifted from the headlines:

Here is what we know:

- On Friday, Sept. 14, at a ceremony receiving the remains of the four slain Americans, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton mentioned the video as a proximate cause of the assault and suggested a “mob” was behind the “violent acts.”

- On Saturday, Sept. 15, talking points drafted by the intelligence community were heavily edited by officials in the White House and State Department, striking passages saying that the latter had been warned of threats in the region, references to other al-Qaeda-linked attacks in Benghazi, and the suggestion that al-Qaeda-linked extremists may have participated in the attack.

- On Sunday, Sept. 16, U.N Ambassador Susan Rice now famously went on all five Sunday news shows and claimed the attack stemmed from violent protests inspired by the video. More than a month later she acknowledged no such protests took place.

- In the two weeks following the incident, President Obama himself singled out the video as a contributing factor to the attack on four separate occasions (Sept. 18 on “Late Show With David Letterman”; Sept. 20 during a forum with Univision; and twice on Sept. 25, once on the daytime talk show “The View” and again that afternoon at his speech before the United Nations General Assembly).

Why was this ridiculous video meme invented after they knew it was a terrorist attack? I’ll tell you why, because they left four Americans to die and they wanted desperately to deflect from that fact. This is really rather simple and only those who can’t seem to stop sucking this administrations c0ck refuse to see. A stand-down order was given and Americans were left to die as a result. The only open questions are why, and by whom.

Quite frankly if this doesn’t concern you you are clearly an imbecile and deserve whatever horrors might be visited upon you in the future by our government. If this administration won’t even allow forces to be sent in to rescue an ambassador, who will they stand up for? Certainly not you.

NotCoach on May 9, 2013 at 1:12 PM

Resist We Much on May 9, 2013 at 12:57 PM

Do you have a link to the full email?
It has already been widely reported that Ansar al-Sharia released a statement the day after the attack offering praise and approval for it.
And worth noting that they in their statement mentioned the video.
So they seemed to making some of the same assumptions in the early moments.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 1:14 PM

I was never privy to the inner workings of operations, staff.. and can only rely on the insights of those who were.

But I can tell you in absolute certainty, I would refuse an order to stand down. In 1980, the military was still recoiling from Vietnam, and the ways things were allowed to spiral so wrong in isolated cases. The training on the UCMJ and lawful orders was strict.

I would refuse an order to kill noncombatants, as I would to fire on civilians. They taught us when the integrity of the service was much more important than blindly following orders. Our personal honor was not subject to corruption by a bad officer. We were each responsible for our actions..

When, did the officer corp stop teaching that?

They did in the ranks, there would be no more Mi Lei’s.

If in the situation, that you could act to save lives, and were already in process to act on that very natural instinct..

being told “never mind, stand down” when you could still monitor the pleas for help?

How do you reconcile these things?

mark81150 on May 9, 2013 at 1:17 PM

and 30 years later, I still wake up from it.

and why I cannot just forgive this betrayal..

mark81150 on May 9, 2013 at 12:09 PM

Well said. Excellent story.

John the Libertarian on May 9, 2013 at 1:24 PM

Yet there is still zero evidence.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 11:19 AM

You appear not to understand that testimony IS evidence. Statements made by Obama, Rice and Hillary publicly are evidence. They conspired to cover up what happened. They lied about it.

There is evidence that Zero went to bed. He said so and so did others in the WH.

They claimed there were no assets that could get there “in time.” I say horseshit. Orders were given to “stand down.” The WH denies it. Well, I am going to believe the military people and Hicks on this.

As I have said repeatedly, those folks who were told not to go? I would have hung up and gone anyway. But then I’m old fashioned that way.

dogsoldier on May 9, 2013 at 1:26 PM

mark81150 on May 9, 2013 at 1:17 PM

The correct response in that situation is “Say again. Not understood. Interfere… ease …. peat.. “

dogsoldier on May 9, 2013 at 1:29 PM

Verb, you are really off base here. Not only does the email clearly state that the state dept knew that Ansar al-sharia members were involved in the attacks and that they are Islamist terrorists, but Carney, Clinton, Rice and others kept saying that they had absolutely NO knowledge of any terrorist involvement for weeks. This was a blatant lie as they had many pieces of info that Islamist terrorists were involved starting the night of the event. This is beyond any dispute.

Ta111 on May 9, 2013 at 1:29 PM

I think the Repubs intentionally cut State Dept security funding to bring about this result with an aim to damage the President they are so vociferously opposed to.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 1:02 PM


10 Reasons Why The ‘Blame Benghazi On Budget Cuts’ Meme Doesn’t Pass The Smell Test

As for Beth Jones, her opinion was not the only one that said it was a terrorist attack that had nothing whatsoever to do with the video. Her email was read aloud and placed into the Congressional record.

There was NEVER any demonstration – Many Democrats now admit this.

Those on the ground KNEW that it was a terrorist attack and that the ties to Ansar al-Sharia were UNDENIABLE.

Hillary Clinton was told at 2:00 AM by Greg Hicks that it was a terror attack. Within 2 hours, not only did the Libyan contingent know that the attack was connected with AAS, they learned that AAS had control of Stevens’ body.

Also, take a look at the evolution of the talking points:

http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-talking-points-evolution.html

They edited out the truth and left the lie about the video. The originals of each can be found as exhibits in the report recently released.

Resist We Much on May 9, 2013 at 1:47 PM

‘Stand Down’…it is a shame that any military member obeyed that order.

you watch too many movies, as a soldier you obey orders without question at that moment, later on you may get a chance to play what-if.

aceinstall on May 9, 2013 at 1:49 PM

We’ll be decades dealing with the aftermath of Obama’s cowardice.

mark81150 on May 9, 2013 at 11:27 AM

I think we’re still cleaning up after Carter.

the_souse on May 9, 2013 at 11:35 AM

No doubt. The present state of Iran is all on Carter. He gave the Shah the bum’s rush and engineered the triumphant return of Khomeini. He thought islamism in Iran would be a counterweight to the Soviet Union’s communism. Idiot.

Not much different from the REB giving Mubarak the bum’s rush knowing that the MoBro would likely end up in power. Ditto Lybia.

slickwillie2001 on May 9, 2013 at 1:50 PM

Where are the Flag Officers????

Where are the operations officers????

Where are the signals officers?????

Where are the aircrews??????

Where are the corpsmen/medics/physicians that cared for the wounded?????

Where are the SURVIVORS????

ted c on May 9, 2013 at 12:59 PM

That’s an awful lot of questions there pal. I’m sure the Republicans in congress are asking the same thing right now. Oh. Yeah. They’ll be right on these questions. Should hear something about all of these people in Feb. of 2025 after Hillary leaves office. Most of these folks will be philosophical about it by then. They’ll say things like: “Coverups are just a part of life, don’t you know.”

oldroy on May 9, 2013 at 1:55 PM

Hillary to her VP Joe Biden in Dec 2024: “Remember when the Repubs were trying to pin the deaths of Chris Stevens on my incompetence and then they folded?” Joe Biden: “Yeah, good times. Do I get to run for President next time Ma’am?”

oldroy on May 9, 2013 at 1:58 PM

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 1:14 PM

based on what we see now it’s clear that our intelligence and diplomatic personnel had a more accurate understanding of the causes and nature of the attack even as it was ongoing, and in the days after

somehow this understanding morphed into being about a video, and a spontaneous protest rather than a coordinated, planned assault, with all references to ansar al-sharia scrubbed. this lie was peddled for 2 weeks, during election season, before it became completely and totally unsustainable

so our information concerning the causes of the attack somehow went from mostly accurate, to wildly inaccurate, back to the same mostly accurate facts they were initially, and you choose to believe that the most likely explanation for this is, well we did the best we could with what we had.

ok.

rightmind on May 9, 2013 at 1:59 PM

Peace time, or war, people have risked much.. and our bonds go back to Valley Forge.. It’s our traditions, and our bonds in shared events that hold us together.

mark81150 on May 9, 2013 at 12:34 PM

Thank you. And that’s why the forces who were told to stand down were so furious. And why at least 2 men ignored orders and went to help thier fellow Americans in Benghazi.

What I fear is twofold. That the our troops will lose confidence that we have their back, no matter what. Or conversely, that they’ll become more and more likely to disobey orders, because so many of their missions are corrupted by the politicians. Once soldiers believe they can make their own rules, our democracy faces another threat.

hawksruleva on May 9, 2013 at 2:01 PM

I think the Repubs intentionally cut State Dept security funding to bring about this result with an aim to damage the President they are so vociferously opposed to.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 1:02 PM

Resist We Much on May 9, 2013 at 1:47 PM

RWM –
That is b.s. quote you’re attributing to me.
Not at ALL what I was saying – and not like you to pull a rogerb…I am surprised.
The quote in full…which shows my position is 100% the opposite of what your out of context snippet attempts to portray.

But I no more think the President let men die for political reasons than I think the Repubs intentionally cut State Dept security funding to bring about this result with an aim to damage the President they are so vociferously opposed to.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 1:02 PM

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 2:07 PM

“So Others May Live!”

easyt65 on May 9, 2013 at 1:09 PM

From the Ohio Militia Regiments in 1862 to the back streets on a mid sized American town, my family has lived that creed,

The US has it’s own code, lived by it’s own military, law enforcement class. Some called it American Samurai.. others, those damned rednecks..

Service, quiet, unheralded,.. but service all the same from one generation to the next.. Not the politicians kind, but the whisper of checking on the elderly neighbor, watching each others children at play.. helping someone without thought, just because they need it..

Why the left cannot see that inside us, is maddening..

We can never be outraged about something just because it’s wrong, it’s gotta be because “he’s black, or we just hate”.. “politicizing”.. from the president who dragged the grieving parents of dead children around as a cheap emotional prop..

and telling us, a reasoned opposition based on reality (it doesn’t work),..and our guaranteed rights..

are “wanting more dead children.”

You cannot argue with a ammoral demagogue, and the left just smiles and nods..

their “politicizing” is principled, and we’re just trailer trash bitter clingers.. and MSNBC loves THAT kind of smear..

Just once..

Verbby, wonder how decades of being vilified for cheap political theater has radicalized us? Not in the Chechen way… but made us all too ready to believe you are the face of evil, when teaching half the country, that opposition to their wants is done by racist haters, woman bashers and just plain crazy wingnuts..

when our traditions and principles have NOT changed in these long years.. when YOUR grandparents probably shared them.. when almost every democrat did.. and then the 60′s came..

and the democrat party began it’s shift hard left..

You get tired of doing everything by the rules… only to find out the other side changed them, subverted the ref’s and tells everyone they can..

we just love dirty air, filthy water, and oodles of dead kids..

and oh.. we want to make key parts of your lives illegal.. while importing 30 million illegals to register and vote in states that forbid voter ID..

Ha ha..

if you dislike what we have remained..

imagine how completely alien you’ve become to us. The only safe race to mock, is white Christian males.. and oh.. our women are Stockholm syndromed into obedience.. and they’re (Maher) c*nts.. ok to wave the liberal male hate flag at..

You really need a reality check on just how polarized your party’s nasty politics has become.

Romney is a religious nutjob for suggesting couples marry young and have children, as many as they like.. and oh.. he kills steel workers wives for fun with cancer..

You call our indignation an irrational hatred for “this” president, as if we loved the last two better..

On our side, outright disgust at the democrat party and it’s media bootlickers, is entirely rational.. it’s also a survival mechanism against a campaign of cultural genocide..

the “other”.. non-liberal think must be exterminated..

We can cite you chapter and verse, every time you accuse us of blind hate, a dozen more leftists doing his job of spreading his irrational hate.

do you ever even read kos or huff po comments?

mark81150 on May 9, 2013 at 2:08 PM

What’s not new is that filmmaker Nakoula is still in jail.

EconomicNeocon on May 9, 2013 at 2:09 PM

Her email was read aloud and placed into the Congressional record.

Resist We Much on May 9, 2013 at 1:47 PM

The full email?
I’m just asking…I understood it to be a partial excerpt.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 2:09 PM

Not at ALL what I was saying – and not like you to pull a rogerb
 

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 2:07 PM

 
Show me where I’ve ever misquoted you, liar.
 
I even link back to your source post. Sorry you’re ashamed of the things you say.

rogerb on May 9, 2013 at 2:09 PM

Verbacube – don’t see what she just did there? You are offering what you actually said as evidence, while denying what Hillary etc. actually said as evidence.

oldroy on May 9, 2013 at 2:10 PM

Chased itself around the mulberry tree and found it’s own tail.

oldroy on May 9, 2013 at 2:12 PM

President Obama said Tuesday that the United States had both a “moral obligation” and a “national security interest” in ending the civil war in Syria.

Sending help in Benghazi? Not so much.

can_con on May 9, 2013 at 2:18 PM

President Obama said Tuesday that the United States had both a “moral obligation” and a “national security interest” in ending the civil war in Syria.

Sending help in Benghazi? Not so much.

can_con on May 9, 2013 at 2:18 PM

Wag the dog?

oldroy on May 9, 2013 at 2:19 PM

Not at ALL what I was saying – and not like you to pull a rogerb

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 2:07 PM

 
Maybe you mean like this one:
 

Old/busted:

…I would have prefered a more vigorous defense of free speech and a more vigorous villification of the film…
 
verbaluce on September 13, 2012 at 11:52 AM

New hotness:

Whatever the real story behind this very isolated incident…

Yawn.
 
verbaluce on April 21, 2013 at 1:52 PM

 
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/04/21/8th-grader-suspended-arrested-for-wearing-nra-shirt/comment-page-4/#comment-6910500

 
Say, I wonder what “film” you were referencing there, liar?

rogerb on May 9, 2013 at 2:19 PM

Oh Great. John McCain on board for Syria intervention.

oldroy on May 9, 2013 at 2:22 PM

Apologies to all for waking rogerb.
He’s about to connect a remark I made about the Red Sox to an opinion I offered on an Astor Piazzolla record…and like, totally bust me.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 2:29 PM

Great. Syria intervention. Got to go get the weapons moved from Libya. Have to make sure the rest of the Iraqi WMD doesn’t get moved again.

oldroy on May 9, 2013 at 2:30 PM

Apologies to all for waking rogerb.
He’s about to connect a remark I made about the Red Sox to an opinion I offered on an Astor Piazzolla record…and like, totally bust me.
 
verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 2:29 PM

 
So nothing, eh liar? Just hope to laugh it off?
 
Link up.

rogerb on May 9, 2013 at 2:33 PM

Thank you. And that’s why the forces who were told to stand down were so furious. And why at least 2 men ignored orders and went to help thier fellow Americans in Benghazi.

What I fear is twofold. That the our troops will lose confidence that we have their back, no matter what. Or conversely, that they’ll become more and more likely to disobey orders, because so many of their missions are corrupted by the politicians. Once soldiers believe they can make their own rules, our democracy faces another threat.

hawksruleva on May 9, 2013 at 2:01 PM

agreed…. completely.. it’s not just being nice to let our services know, no matter what,.. no more unaccounted for MIA’s no more men left on foreign soil,.. because serving isn’t just taking a job as some on the academic left seem to think..

You know this one..

The greatest fear in young men training for combat, is not death. It’s dying forgotten, wasted for nothing. Name unremembered, parents with no son to bury.. as if you’re thrown away..

You personalize these when old hands teach you to take your second dog tag, and place it inside your boots laces.. so if your heads blown off,

they can send you back home to your family,

How many college leftists have that epiphany of mortality at 19?

It’s not a video game, not COD or Halo.. not some grand adventure, it’s a calling.. one done with all the solemn respect the generations before you deserve..

But to many on the left, we aren’t capable of emotion..

I promise you, when they were told to stand down, and leave those men behind.. the emotion ran hot, and the empathy for brother,.. well..

You know exactly what I mean.

Like being told to leave a brother or sister in a burning house.. and then cleaning up the remains..

why

don’t

they

get

that?

mark81150 on May 9, 2013 at 2:34 PM

Wonder if we have any openly gay ambassadors that would like to serve at a new mission in Damascus?

oldroy on May 9, 2013 at 2:35 PM

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 2:07 PM

I copied the quote from someone else. If it took you out of context, I apologise.

Nevertheless, the entire ‘Blame Benghazi on Budget Cuts’ meme is demonstrably false – for many reasons, not least of those being that the Ryan Budget was never passed the Senate and signed into law.

Resist We Much on May 9, 2013 at 2:39 PM

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 2:09 PM

The entire email was entered into the CR…and a copy of it was given to Congressman Elijah Cummings. No one has claimed that it is a forgery or only a part of the email. The silence should give you more comfort in accepting it.

Resist We Much on May 9, 2013 at 2:44 PM

So will the LGBT wing of the State Dept. be in charge of US diplomatic facilities in Qasyoun and Jamraya? Will they have soup and sandwiches ready for the Spetsnaz cleanup convoys? Rainbow banners that say “Welcome – please don’t bother the Rebels – Ansar Al Sharia comfort station, 1KM.”

oldroy on May 9, 2013 at 2:45 PM

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 2:09 PM

The entire email was entered into the CR…and a copy of it was given to Congressman Elijah Cummings. No one has claimed that it is a forgery or only a part of the email. The silence should give you more comfort in accepting it.

Resist We Much on May 9, 2013 at 2:44 PM

I am not NOT accepting it.
Just curious to see entire email.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 2:48 PM

This is not surprising. You refuse to accept all the clear evidence (including recent disclosures from the admin themselves) that there were lies told about Benghazi.

blink on May 9, 2013 at 2:53 PM

Closed minded people won’t accept anything that does not conform to their view of things.

More people are going to come forward. Zero’s house of cards is crumbling. Remember how the left screamed over Nixon?

No one died in Watergate.

Obama left US citizens to die. And he went to bed.

dogsoldier on May 9, 2013 at 3:03 PM

I am not NOT accepting it.
Just curious to see entire email.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 2:48 PM

Verbaluceism: Inferring the obvious is bad when the truths are inconvenient, but it is perfectly acceptable to make wild guesses and assumptions when those wild guesses and assumptions support my position. Verbaluceism.

NotCoach on May 9, 2013 at 3:15 PM

Within 24 hours of the attack, the U.S. had intercepted communications between two Qaeda-linked terrorists discussing the attack. One of the interlocutors had participated in the attack. And late in the day on Sept. 12, the C.I.A. station chief in Libya sent a cable to Washington reporting, based on eyewitness accounts, that known Islamic terrorists had conducted the attacks.

Resist We Much on May 9, 2013 at 3:20 PM

I am not NOT accepting it.
Just curious to see entire email.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 2:48 PM

NO one cares what you “accept”, you gnatbrain.

No one will show you anything, especially in the scheme of things.

Schadenfreude on May 9, 2013 at 3:22 PM

Not at ALL what I was saying – and not like you to pull a rogerb
 
verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 2:07 PM

 
Show me where I’ve ever misquoted you, liar.
 
I even link back to your source post. Sorry you’re ashamed of the things you say.
 
rogerb on May 9, 2013 at 2:09 PM

 
Apologies to all for waking rogerb.
He’s about to connect a remark I made about the Red Sox to an opinion I offered on an Astor Piazzolla record…and like, totally bust me.
 
verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 2:29 PM

 

So nothing, eh liar? Just hope to laugh it off?
 
Link up.
 
rogerb on May 9, 2013 at 2:33 PM

 
Still nothing, eh verbaluce?
 
You lied because you didn’t think it would really hurt anything.
 
You don’t realize it because your moral compass doesn’t work properly, but that’s similar to why people don’t take you seriously regarding your stated position on the Benghazi investigations. You’re comfortable casually and unabashedly lying, so you don’t mind it in others so long as they’re on your team. You may even expect it for the any-means-necessary win.
 
After all, what they said wasn’t supposed to really hurt anything.
 
If I’m wrong link up or admit you were lying.

rogerb on May 9, 2013 at 3:26 PM

Genuine on May 9, 2013 at 8:24 AM

Thanks for the list. We tend to forget (with a little media assist) that the attack in Libya is just part of an on-going war against the US.

AesopFan on May 9, 2013 at 3:28 PM

Hillary is toast.

It doesn’t matter if the press won’t report it, campaigners will.

Obama’s Reality Distortion Field won’t protect her.

itsspideyman on May 9, 2013 at 9:18 AM

All they need to show is a commercial of Hillary as “President” answering that 3am phone call….then hanging up, in fear, as you hear someone on the other end of the phone yelling “We’re under attack! We’re under attack! Send help now!”

Game over.

WisRich on May 9, 2013 at 9:28 AM

Even better, end with her muttering, “What difference does it make?”

There Goes the Neighborhood on May 9, 2013 at 3:35 PM

Schadenfreude on May 9, 2013 at 3:22 PM
blink on May 9, 2013 at 2:53 PM

You’re not following the dbl negative there..as in I do accept the email.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 3:38 PM

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 2:07 PM

I copied the quote from someone else. If it took you out of context, I apologise.

Nevertheless, the entire ‘Blame Benghazi on Budget Cuts’ meme is demonstrably false – for many reasons, not least of those being that the Ryan Budget was never passed the Senate and signed into law.

Resist We Much on May 9, 2013 at 2:39 PM

I don’t see that anyone else quoted…but apology welcome..thanks.
Also, my point was to debate the budget cuts angle…it was to show everyone’s got one.
All the ‘evidence’ everyone keeps pointing me to…none of it is what they say it is. What this ‘evidence proves’, is the ability of some to theorize, interpret, and extrapolate.
And now we have the false meme that Hicks was ‘silenced’….when he was interviewed numerous times by investigators…and was even promptly accommodated when he felt there was more he wanted to tell.
So is the cover-up here what he didn’t say to someone he didn’t speak to?

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 3:52 PM

Also, my point was wasn’t to debate the budget cuts angle…it was to show everyone’s got one.
(fixed)

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 3:55 PM

Apologies to all for waking rogerb.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 2:29 PM

LOL.

No need to apologize to anyone but yourself for being a dumba$$.

We all enjoy watching rogerb expose you for the dishonest POS you are. And you essentially invited him to do it, waking him up and handing him a club to beat you with.

Like many trolls here you are apparently a masochist who craves attention no matter what the price.

Or maybe you thought you could get a coward’s shot in when he wasn’t paying attention.

farsighted on May 9, 2013 at 4:19 PM

..when he wasn’t paying attention.

farsighted on May 9, 2013 at 4:19 PM

Ha.
Right.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 4:46 PM

Magariaf was “insulted in front of his own people,” Hicks said. “His credibility was reduced. His ability to lead his country was damaged.”

Good thing we got rid of that Cowboy-Imperialist policy where we were making enemies under Bush.

It’s great that we have somebody who knows what they are doing … in ticking other countries off.

Axeman on May 9, 2013 at 5:27 PM

You know the libs have always cast a dubious eye on “They hate us for our freedom!”

But look how easily they accepted “They hate us ’cause a Bush!”

Axeman on May 9, 2013 at 5:29 PM

“Death is a part of life”

Electrongod on May 9, 2013 at 8:42 AM

So I guess the Dems are done with “If it saves even one life…”, then because–hey! death is part of life.

Axeman on May 9, 2013 at 5:49 PM

Hillary is in big trouble. There are several instances of perjury in her congressional testimony, the most blatant of which is that she stated unequivocally that she had no knowledge at the time of rice’s Sunday show appearances of any evidence of it being a terror attack. We now know that she was told by Hicks that night that it was terror and her chief of staff admitted it the next day. She is toast.

Ta111 on May 9, 2013 at 6:51 PM

I think the Repubs intentionally cut State Dept security funding to bring about this result with an aim to damage the President they are so vociferously opposed to.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 1:02 PM

.
For anyone here who still had doubts (most of us didn’t, however), that remark settled it.

There’s no possible non-incriminatory way that can be interpreted.

You’re either one of the most naive, and gullible people on God’s earth, or you’ve just exposed yourself as a total apologist for the White House.
I’ve read more than enough of your comments here, to conclude it is the latter.

listens2glenn on May 9, 2013 at 10:49 PM

I think the Repubs intentionally cut State Dept security funding to bring about this result with an aim to damage the President they are so vociferously opposed to.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 1:02 PM

.
For anyone here who still had doubts (most of us didn’t, however), that remark settled it.

There’s no possible non-incriminatory way that can be interpreted.

You’re either one of the most naive, and gullible people on God’s earth, or you’ve just exposed yourself as a total apologist for the White House.
I’ve read more than enough of your comments here, to conclude it is the latter.

listens2glenn on May 9, 2013 at 10:49 PM

“Better to remain silent and thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.”

itsspideyman on May 10, 2013 at 12:14 AM

I loathe these more with each breath I take…

bladyingray on May 9, 2013 at 9:24 AM

I have run out of adjectives to describe how I feel about
these people….would get me banned anyway…

ToddPA on May 9, 2013 at 9:37 AM

I hear you, friends.

The lengths they will go to defend the indefensible, to uphold the unholy, and to uphold the interests of a political party over the United States is at the least objectionable and at the most treasonable.

Yet in their minds, their party, no matter what their actions, are in the best interests of our country.

How parochial. How blind.

At some point to only defense against such a philosophy is a relentless dispassionate pushback, and a refusal to accept press apathy and blatant subterfuge as the status quo.

There are still questions to be asked and answered in this disaster. We cannot stop asking the questions until they are all answered.

WHO issued the NOT ONE, but TWO stand-down orders?

WILL the FOURTH witness be allowed to speak?

WHERE are the survivors of the attack?

and finally WHERE was Obama?

Our four fallen patriots deserve no less than our dedication to getting to the truth.

itsspideyman on May 10, 2013 at 12:45 AM

Even if someone came out with hard evidence that Hillary and Obama conspired to keep the truth from coming out neither the media would care nor the American public ever know. Without the press reporting, nothing will happen and this will remain a “Republican Partisan attack”

Four brave Americans died and were sacrificed on the altar of political expediency. The only solace I take away from this sordid, disgusting spectacle is that Woods and Doherty reportedly took a good size honor guard with them to Valhalla; Goodonem.

E9RET on May 10, 2013 at 10:13 AM

I have no issue with the essence of your concern – that anyone was intentionally not given assistance for political reason. But I don’t see that’s what happened here.

So what reason DO you see for intentionally denying the requested assistance? We know the assistance was requested. We know it was denied (as it never showed up). What reason could there possibly be for this, other than politics? Be specific.

As far as errors we can all see in hindsight, I’d say there’s no doubt about that.
But I no more think the President let men die for political reasons than I think the Repubs intentionally cut State Dept security funding to bring about this result with an aim to damage the President they are so vociferously opposed to.

verbaluce on May 9, 2013 at 1:02 PM

Show me one shred of evidence that anyone, in either party, ever even suggested reducing state dept security funding. Just one shred.

runawayyyy on May 10, 2013 at 11:23 AM

mark81150 on May 9, 2013 at 12:09 PM

Thank you. Yet another reason why I have a problem with any POTUS not having prior service experience. Not that it guarantees a better POTUS (see Carter, Jimmy), but another qualification wicket.

AH_C on May 10, 2013 at 3:00 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3