Tuesday, May 07, 2013

Blaming HRC for Benghazi (?)

I think this is the right take.

When it first became clear that the CIA’s Benghazi talking points had been altered, many of us viewed the White House as the prime suspect. After all, it served President Obama’s political purposes to claim, at the height of a political campaign in which he was taking credit for the fall of al Qaeda, that the death of a U.S. ambassador was down to spontaneous outrage over a video, rather than pre-planned terrorism.

Note the bold text.

Things change, although nap-time Obozo is hardly cleared of malfeasance.

It turns out, however, that the State Department was the prime culprit. It was State that pushed back hard against the original talking points. The White House, probably for the political reason cited above, took its side.

Why did State want the talking points changed? Because it had ignored warnings about rising terrorist activity in Libya and had reduced security rather than beefing it up, as our embassy requested.

The Madistan gang thinks that this is all about killing off the Hildebeeste's election chances.

Not really; it's about who failed to do what to protect a US ambassador.

Big difference.

As far as nap-time Obozo goes:

...Her culpability during the attacks is doubtful in my opinion, but I would still like to know what she was doing during those tragic hours....

The emerging facts make it clear that Mr. Pantywaist needed his beauty rest and did not (or refused to) allow SF troops from Tripoli to get to Benghazi.

So.  Hillary and Obozo lied.  US people died.



25 comments:

Anonymous said...

"The emerging facts make it clear"

No. They don't.

"even in the most outrageous Hollywood-style scenarios -- transporting troops by Avis rental cars, parachuting in to the Benghazi zoo -- C-110 could not have gotten there in time to stop the second attack. And if the 40-man team had gotten there in time, they still couldn't have saved the two lives, because they would have been armed with rifles and light-machine guns, which do not stop mortars...

"'The person in the interview is a clown and I am incredibly disappointed in the news for not using Google,' Birdzell writes. The military is huge and complex. Knowing a few good acronyms can take you a long way on Fox News.

Unknown said...

And, I might point out that I am quite pleased to be regarded as the official spokesperson for the Madistan mindset.

Anonymous said...

Hillary has proven, beyond a shadow of doubt, that she's not the person Americans want answering the emergency phone call at 03:00.

State Dept. Effe ups created this situation and prevented it's timely closure, for political purposes.

Then Obama lied through his teeth, again.



Anonymous said...

If they knew it was so dangerous there, why the hell did they go out that night?

Dad29 said...

Well, Anony 9:54, I used to believe that.

But:

The deputy of slain U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens has told congressional investigators that a team of Special Forces prepared to fly from Tripoli to Benghazi during the Sept. 11, 2012 attacks was forbidden from doing so by U.S. Special Operations Command Africa

I saw the essay you quote. That's from a guy who WAS NOT THERE--and presumably, from his perch in the US, doesn't know what forces were where.

Or do you think the Embassy deputy was making it up about SF in Tripoli?

Dad29 said...

Cite: http://www.bob-owens.com/2013/05/obama-admin-told-special-forces-team-in-libya-to-stand-down-and-not-rescue-benghazi-consulate-survivors/

Anonymous said...

"they would have been armed with rifles and light-machine guns, which do not stop mortars"

That has got to be the most militarily ignorant statement ever issued.

Unless we were unable to stop mortar teams in Afghanistan with our rifles and light-machine guns. And yet another example of a candy assed civilian talking crap out of their pie hole because they were to cowardly to actually do the time in uniform.

Anonymous said...

Another report stated that they only carried 9mm side arms.

Anonymous said...

"Another report stated that they only carried 9mm side arms"

Yep, our special operations soldiers are known to go to duty stations with just a pistol.....what are you, brain dead or just an idiot?

Anonymous said...

Here you go, moron:

U.S. military officials confirmed late Monday that a four-man Special Operations Forces team was denied permission to leave the US Embassy in Tripoli following reports that the consulate in Benghazi had been attacked.

The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the team was reviewing security at U.S. embassies throughout the Middle East and was not prepared for a combat assault mission, being armed with only 9mm sidearms.

Anonymous said...

Listen up you little nitwit, ALL US EMBASSIES are armed with a marine platoon size armament cache. Fragmentation grenades, CN Grenades, CS Grenades, M16 Rifles, (1) M40 Rifle, side arms, and a full combat load (72 lbs total) of ammunition for each slotted security force member.

Anonymous said...

Unnnmmmhhh...apparently the embassy in Libya did not have your fantasy stash on hand.

Anonymous said...

Listen up you big f**kwad. You have no idea what arms were available in the Tripoli Embassy at the time, nor whether the four-man Special Forces team had access to whatever cache there was.

I'll take the word of multiple officials over the word of some f**kwad who thinks because he used to know somebody who wore a uniform has the knowledge to give any kind of informed "opinion".

Anonymous said...

We do know the arms were inadequate given the territory. Woefully inadequate and made known up the food chain. Full responsibility means shit to America hating Alinskyites.

Anonymous said...

Name the official bitch! Name one single solitary embassy worker or military person who says the standard combat load was not present.

I have served you little limp wrist-ed cock sucking bitch. I have my scars while the only pain you ever received was having the DNC with their hand up your ass giving you talking points.

Dad29 said...

Anony 10:29...I think the other Anony rather enjoyed that MSM hand fondling his butt. Not "pain" but "satisfaction"!

Besides all the tools available to the SF in Tripoli, they could also have brought lasers for the F-16 missile guides. And an F-16 could fly Palermo to Benghazi in what...about 1 hour?

Anonymous said...

At sea level the F16 can do 900 MPH, it is 581.5 miles from the consulate to the airbase. Given spool up time then less than an hour.

Of course that assumes a never-bothered-to-wear-a-uniform POTUS would allow it to spoil his election chances.

Anonymous said...

While I am thankful for those who have served, including very close relatives, I find it amusing that some consider their service to have made them experts on everything, and that theirs is the only sacrifice that counts.

Anonymous said...

You have those names of people who said the primary embassy in Libya had it's combat load removed before the attack?

Don't worry little man, I am sure your sacrifice of rational thought is appreciated by every democrat you blindingly pull the vote lever for.

Anonymous said...

Pull the vote lever? I've never pulled a vote lever in my life yet never missed an election since I voted against Nixon.

Who said anything about "combat loads" being removed? Your whole argument is apparently "We had four Special Forces guys in Tripoli. No way they couldn't have saved 4 lives in Benghazi if Obama had only given the green light."

And you don't know shit. Maybe you have a combat load between your ears, or in your underwear...big tough guy.

Anonymous said...

Names? Or are you too chickenshit to admit you don't have crap? A special forces team with air cover can take on anything they need to. These are special operators, they are trained to target bad guys.

You said they could not have done it with pistols, using some mysterious source that only you know. I simply pointed out what anyone with half a brain and any embassy experience knows.

Also, why the fixation on whats in my underpants? Unless that is the reason you never served. Good news, guys like you are allowed in now.

Anonymous said...

I was talking about that big turd in the back of your under pants, dick head.

"using some mysterious source that only you know."

You are so full of shit it must hurt.

I'm not a reporter so I don't have names. But here is a source that makes the report.

U.S. military officials confirmed late Monday that a four-man Special Operations Forces team was denied permission to leave the US Embassy in Tripoli following reports that the consulate in Benghazi had been attacked.

The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the team was reviewing security at U.S. embassies throughout the Middle East and was not prepared for a combat assault mission, being armed with only 9mm sidearms.

They also noted that the situation at Benghazi remained unclear and there were concerns the Embassy in Tripoli also could become a target.


"You said they could not have done it with pistols"

I did not. US Military officials quoted in the above report implied such.

"I simply pointed out what anyone with half a brain and any embassy experience knows."

If you weren't at THAT embassy on THAT night, you don't know shit.

Anonymous said...

How can I get those millions of middle easterners to direct their laughter at America's left wing instead of America?

Anonymous said...

Wow, sources back the President and yet will not give their names? OK, I'll bite.

I have an anonymous source that says anony 9:15 is a pedophile. That proves it right?

Anonymous said...

The reporter has a reputation to uphold. Clearly, you don't.