What did the administration know and when did they know it?
As everyone knows by now, on September 11th, US personnel in Cairo, Egypt, Benghazi, Libya and other areas across the Middle East were attacked by Muslim terrorists who killed four American diplomats in Benghazi.
At first, the Obama administration disingenuously attempted to pass the terrorist attacks off as an understandable reaction on the part of ordinary Muslims offended by the amateurish, stupid, grotesque and childish anti-Islamic YouTube video, Innocence of Muslims. The video, the product of an as yet unnamed, probably insane and reprehensibly idiotic sub-human from California, quickly went viral, and was seized upon by the White House spokespeople as the reason for the attacks resulting in the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens. Stevens' death was the first violent assassination of a US diplomat since 1979.
In response to the attacks, for which even a grade-school child could connect the dots, seeing their occurrence on the 11th anniversary of the despicable destruction of New York's twin World Trade Center towers by 19 men, 15 of whom were Saudi Muslims, was not a coincidence. White House spokespeople were deployed to promote the administration's spin that the crowds attacking Ambassador Stevens' mission, though armed with antiaircraft weapons and rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs), were, as State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland put it in a presser on September 13, when she was asked, "Whether the Benghazi attack was purely spontaneous or was premeditated by militants," Nuland replied, "[W]e are very cautious about drawing any conclusions with regard to who the perpetrators were, what their motivations were, whether it was premeditated, whether they had any external contacts, whether there was any link, until we have a chance to investigate along with the Libyans ... [O]bviously, there are plenty of people around the region citing this disgusting video as something that has been motivating."
The next day, September 14, White House press secretary Jay Carney said at a White House press briefing that the attacks were, "In response not to United States policy, not to, obviously, the administration, not to the American people. It is in response to a video, a film that we have judged to be reprehensible and disgusting ... This is in response to a video that is offensive and — to Muslims."
A reporter asked, "At Benghazi?"
"We certainly don't know, we don't know otherwise," said Carney. "You know, we have no information to suggest that it was a preplanned attack. The unrest we've seen around the region has been in reaction to a video that Muslims, many Muslims, find offensive. And while the violence is reprehensible and unjustified, it is not a reaction to the 9/11 anniversary that we know of or to U.S. policy."
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Dr Dreadful
I agree with you that "the Administration comes out of it a loser", Clav, but fail to see how they could not have. It was a horrible situation to be in: failing to protect your own ambassador from a mob.
From a domestic perspective, saying something along the lines of "we regret any offence the movie caused, but in America, while we believe passionately in natural rights, we also remember that notably absent from that list is the right not to be offended" might have struck the right chord, though it almost certainly wouldn't have cut any ice with the Right. (Personally I would have added, "So grow the fuck up", but that's just me. :-) )
Also, in a country as anarchic as Libya currently is, the fact that some members of the mob were hefting some pretty serious military hardware perhaps isn't as remarkable as all that.
2 - Clav
Doc, I like the way you present your POV; I find myself in agreement with you often as a result of the way you express it.
"Grow the fuck up" probably would have resulted in even more turmoil with more casualties, so it's just as well it wasn't used, but like you, it has a certain je ne sais quoi about it for me.
I agree that there was no clear path out of it for the Obama boys and girls, but my contention remains that, if it is true that they knew the true nature of the events in Benghazi as soon as 24 hours later, they should have used that knowledge immediately. Instead, they were still spouting the fictitious "It's because of the video" theory a whole week after the attacks, which made them look foolish and well...like liars.
Granted, the military hardware is near ubiquitous in that neighborhood, but it still should have caught their attention that this wasn't your garden variety "protest."
3 - El Bicho
How do you know they didn't use that knowledge immediately? I'd expect misdirection rather than the CIA or military putting out press releases and giving away what they are up to.
4 - Clav
We have yet to see what the military and/or CIA were "up to," but my guess is: nothing; they received no orders.
Admittedly, the US reaction thus far is well in tune with our policy the past few years of appeasement in the region.
5 - Zingzing
This may be the only time in history the CIA was up to "nothing." given the amount of your inside knowledge, clavos, which is none, you might as well flip a coin. Yet given the choice, you say the most meddling, secretive, possibly evil organization in the us gov't was up to "nothing?" I dunno... in any other circumstance, I'd bet you say the opposite, but hey, this is politics, where logic, history and common sense have no meaning. It's all guess-work and sheer desire.
And nice use of the word "appeasement." "Diplomacy" not in your dictionary? One man's dictator is another man's statesmen, I suppose.
6 - Baronius
This is a bit off-subject, and I'd love to just bash away at the administration on this, but why in the world does the White House press secretary exist anyway? It's ridiculous, no matter who is in the White House. The position is half governmental, half partisan, which means they can't be trusted for facts or opinions. And no one person has answers to every question in real time. That's why the press secretary always looks foolish. There are about a thousand agencies, each with their own press secretaries, each with developing stories and changing policies. Sure, if one person could act as a clearinghouse for all that information, it'd be impressive, but they can't. And every day the press secretary proves it.
Of course, the blame also has to fall on the media outlets for being so lazy. It's a lot easier to pass along an official administration response than actually find out the real answer to a question. And there's a lot of clout in occupying one of the chairs in the press room. Being a senior White House correspondent is as tough as being a model, and requires just about the same skill set.
So yeah, the administration should be held accountable if they're knowingly spreading falsehoods, and this article makes a good argument that they are. But on the breaking story, we had no reason to go to Jay Carney in the first place.
7 - Dan(Miller)
Well, yeah. But President Obama's masterful address at the United Nations doubtless calmed all Islamic discontent and we can now look forward to a new day dawning, when there will be peace everlasting.
8 - zingzing
see, for that joke to be funny, someone might have to think that one man could in one speech actually create peace in the middle east. of course, that won't happen, so the joke is nothing but relishing human misery for the sake of scoring political points. yay, dan! we all prove we're pieces of shit at various points in our lives, and that's one of yours. good for you, dan, good for you. tomorrow, it may be my turn, but the night belongs to you.
9 - roger nowosielski
How many men does it take, zing? A whole battalion? After all, aren't we talking about one of the leaders of the Western world?
So what exactly is your point, other than that Rome wasn't built in a day?
10 - Zingzing
What if most of my point was that Rome wasn't built in a day? You and I and Dan all know that a speech by the president wasn't going to solve the problems in the middle east. So what's you're point, other than duh?
The other portion of my point was that Dan seems to be reveling in the death and destruction of those less fortunate than him. It's only by lucky chance that he finds himself in a more stable situation. most of us commenting here are so damn lucky. To laugh at another's misfortune seems a bit crass to me, given the scale of human suffering in some parts of the world. Some man dan's age is waking up to find his grandchildren dead right now and Dan seemingly finds that humorous.
It takes more than one man, Roger, and it takes more than a battalion, it takes entire nations and entire religions and cultures to put this kind of bullshit to bed. What's going on in the middle east was made by history, not men now living, and its solution will take everyone involved putting it to rest. One man can cause it to erupt, but it's everyone who has to keep the peace.
11 - Clav
More on the administration's lies from The Washington Examiner.
Newsweek's senior national security correspondent, Eli Lake discusses the timeline of when US intelligence agencies uncovered evidence of terrorist involvement in the attacks.
12 - John Lake
Number one, it might have been less than prudent to blame al Qaeda, or major organized groups for the attack, particularly in view of the fact that many demonstrators were making reference to the reprehensible video.
Number two, as “Dreadful” points out, it is highly likely these days that even the man in the Libyan street has access to military weapons. In that light, pointing prematurely to one group or another would be indeed careless and counter-productive.
We have a case wherein a government representative carefully weighs her words, clearly stating that the video responsibly was only a starting point, clearly saying that the investigation was ongoing, and still the Republicans rant and rave about administration early perceptions.
As to irresponsible, anyone accusing Ms. Rice of deliberately disseminating false knowledge is irresponsible by any standards.
Politics should be kept current, not stored for decades to be brought out at four year intervals.
13 - Clav
Sorry, John, but the evidence refutes your defense of the administration, to wit:
It "might have been less prudent to blame Al-Qaeda??" How so? Intelligence services (ours) are saying they were involved; the more we expose them to the vast majority of Muslims who are peaceful citizens of their respective countries, the more we neutralize and weaken Al-Qaeda's influence and power in the Muslim world; without the support of their fellow Muslims Al-Qaeda will become a nonentity.
As seductive as Doc's speculation is, there is no real, provable evidence; it's just speculation, If you know of such evidence, please, share it with us.
The "government's representative" (Ms Rice) would have been far more prudent and served her country better had she just kept quiet until more accurate information was available; she wasn't even on the scene to be able to observe firsthand the events which were the subject of her intemperately speculative (and false) remarks, which, as I pointed out in the article, were immediately refuted by the president of Libya’s General National Congress, Mohammed el-Megarif.
As to her irresponsibility in making those remarks: are you so naive as to ignore the swiftness with which she was fired after making them; a swiftness and decisiveness heretofore
uncharacteristic of her boss and his administration?
14 - El Bicho
When was she fired? All I find are links of Repubs calling for her resignation as late as Friday
15 - John Lake
I didn't actually say it was "less prudent" to blame al Qaeda.My sentiments (above) were that it might be "less than prudent", given the general principle that one should be hesitant to blame others without due consideration.
In fact a reasonable person would conclude that following the ouster of Qaddafi, there would be plentiful weapons around and about.
If Ms. Rice has been removed, I haven't heard of it yet. I seem to remember that the administration was solidly behind her.
16 - Clav
Well, Señor El Bicho, you're right: apparently it was just projected wishful thinking on my part that Susan Rice had been fired; she hasn't, despite her recent ill-considered remarks to the media jackals at the UN building. Not yet. We'll see what happens in January if Obama is fired in November.
17 - zingzing
heh. right wing projection and wishful thinking seems to be their chosen mode of engaging reality these days.
i read somewhere that canada has banned fox news from the airwaves for lying. i dunno if it was an onionesque article or not. are there any canadians around here anymore?
18 - John Lake
Don't count on Mr. Obama being 'fired' in November. the Republicans fail to consider the new more sophisticated and informed voter, this the result particularly of the Internet and to some extent of national news sources which have thus far been reliable.
19 - Clav
Those new more sophisticated and informed voters, and even more so us old, uninformed and stupid voters are looking at the sorry mess that is our economy.
We're doing the math...
20 - Clav
To Glenn and others who scoffed at my observation that if the income tax burden for the wealthy becomes too onerous, they may leave, here's some food for thought...
21 - Clav
Yet more evidence that the administration was behind the eight ball even before the attacks (not "riots" or "demonstrations") in Benghazi on 9/11.
Increasingly, it looks as if Ambassador Stevens and his colleagues died because their country wasn't paying attention.
Some interesting quotes from the Washington Post article linked above:
"In Libya, security was lax before attack that killed U.S. ambassador, officials say...The two U.S. Benghazi compounds that came under attack the night of Sept. 11 proved to be strikingly vulnerable targets in an era of barricaded embassies and multibillion-dollar security contracts for U.S. diplomatic facilities in conflict zones, according to interviews with U.S. and Libyan officials and eyewitnesses in recent days."
"On the eve of his death, U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens was ebullient as he returned for the first time in his new role to Benghazi, the eastern Libyan city that embraced him as a savior during last year’s civil war. He moved around the coastal town in an armored vehicle and held a marathon of meetings, his handful of bodyguards trailing discreetly behind.
But as Stevens met with Benghazi civic leaders, U.S. officials appear to have underestimated the threat facing both the ambassador and other Americans. They had not reinforced the U.S. diplomatic outpost there to meet strict safety standards for government buildings overseas. Nor had they posted a U.S. Marine detachment, as at other diplomatic sites in high-threat regions."
And:
"The two U.S. compounds where Stevens and three other Americans were killed in a sustained, brutal attack the night of Sept. 11, proved to be strikingly vulnerable targets in an era of barricaded embassies and multibillion-dollar security contracts for U.S. diplomatic facilities in conflict zones, according to interviews with U.S. and Libyan officials and eyewitnesses in recent days."
"Eager to establish a robust diplomatic presence in the cradle of the rebellion against Moammar Gaddafi, the ousted autocratic leader, U.S. officials appear to have overlooked the stark signs that militancy was on the rise...The attack marked the first violent death of a serving ambassador in a generation...It also raised the prospect that a country Washington assumed would become a staunch ally as it recovered from its short civil war could turn into a haven for fundamentalists."
22 - Zingzing
There seems to be a voter registration fraud blowing up... Strategic allied Consulting... 7 states at least... At least it appears that state GOP orgs are firing the company. Acorn for the right wing?
23 - Zingzing
(and this time it's real instead of trumped up nonsense...)
24 - Clav
Yay zing! What a good, well trained Democrat you are! Bet they teach you that when you're just a wee tadpole at your neighborhood Democratic school, don't they. Whenever you're caught with yore hands in the preacher's wife's drawers, obfuscate, counterattack and change the subject. Ah, you Dems are sooo good at those distraction tactics, sooo good! You poor backwoods Southern boys take training so well and become such good soldiers in the Democratic Army, marching to the beat of the egalitarian drums.
Sooo. Maybe voter registration isn't such a bad idea after all, huh? At least you could stop those despicable fratboy Republicans from subverting the Democratic process...
Bwahahaha!
25 - Zingzing
It was just a place to put it where people were talking, clavos.. I'm not shocked that you went overboard into conspiracy theories... Well-trained right winger that you are. "soooo" you're being an idiot. And dramatic about it as well, although I have no place to critique you on that... Bwahahawhat?
Feel free to go on about how the gov't is lying and the CIA is dormant.