REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Benghazi: A Conspiracy Theory With No Conceivable Motive

POSTED BY: KPO
UPDATED: Friday, November 16, 2012 06:51
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1280
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, November 15, 2012 9:05 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Someone else mystified by the apparently senseless right-wing Benghazi hysteria:

Quote:

Matt Steinglass makes a point about the whole Benghazi "coverup" narrative that I didn't have space to make in my post yesterday. He agrees that Susan Rice did nothing wrong, but says there's more to it:

This is absolutely right as far as it goes, but it doesn't go far enough. At the most fundamental level, the reason it is absurd to suspect the existence of a "cover-up" over the Benghazi attack is that such a cover-up could not have had any conceivable goal. Back to the beginning: the underlying accusation about Benghazi is that the Obama administration deliberately mischaracterised the terrorist attack there as having grown out of a spontaneous demonstration because that would be less politically damaging. Such a cover-up would have made no sense because the attack would not have been less politically damaging had it grown out of a spontaneous demonstration. The attack on the Benghazi compound would not have been any less politically difficult for the administration if it had grown out of a riot, nor would any normal voter have expected it to be less politically damaging, nor would any normal campaign strategist have expected any normal voter to have expected it to be less politically damaging.

As best I can tell, the suggestion from the right has been that Obama didn't want to admit that Benghazi was a terrorist attack because....well, I'm not sure, exactly. Something about how this would blow a hole in his claim to be decimating al-Qaeda via drone attacks. Or maybe it would remove some of the luster from being the killer of Osama bin Laden. Or something. But one way or another, the story is that Obama was deeply afraid of admitting that terrorists are still out there and want to do us harm.

This has never made a lick of sense. If anything, the continuing existence of terrorists justifies his drone attacks. And it certainly wouldn't do him any harm in an election. The American public routinely rallies around a president responding to a terrorist attack.

Dave Weigel has more here, responding to Sean Higgins, who manages to read all the transcripts of Rice's Sunday show appearances and still claim that she somehow misled the public. "There is considerable evidence that they knew even the day of the attacks that there had in fact been no protests and that the attacks were planned," says Higgins. "Who knew what when and whether the administration was trying to cover it up is precisely what Congress is trying to determine."

Actually, there's considerable evidence that on September 15, when Rice taped her appearances, the CIA told her there had been protests in Benghazi earlier in the day. The CIA turned out to be wrong about that, but it simply makes no sense for them to have made this up. If it does anything at all, it only makes their response look worse. This whole thing is a conspiracy theory with no conceivable motive. It's a wild, scattershot attack hoping to take down someone, somewhere, just to claim a scalp. It's disgusting.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2012 9:15 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

I assume the desired narrative is that there was either incompetence in the response or incompetence in being vulnerable to the attack at all, and that the President is supposed to be responsible for that incompetence.

If this was a spontaneous riot, one might argue it was difficult to prevent or predict. If it was a riot, one may imagine justifiable hesitancy about a response that might lay low many civilians.

If this was, rather, a planned attack, possibly following some sort of infiltration, then it is a failure. If the response to the attack was bungled, then it was additionally a failure. And these are failures more difficult to justify.

I think saying, "We were infiltrated, we had poor security, and we bungled our response" is a narrative that would reflect poorly on the President and his administration.

I do not think it would have changed election results.

--Anthony


Note to Self:
Raptor - woman testifying about birth control is a slut (the term applies.)
Context: http://tinyurl.com/d6ozfej
Six - Wow, isn't Niki quite the CUNT? And, yes, I spell that in all caps....
http://tinyurl.com/bdjgbpe
Wulf - Niki is a stupid fucking bitch who should hurry up and die.
Context: http://tinyurl.com/afve3r9

“The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget.” -T. S. Szasz

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2012 9:23 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


The infiltration angle is new to me; are you sure you're using the right word? An intelligence and security failure no doubt. But why the anger at Susan Rice, the ambassador to the UN?? Because the right is feverishly imagining cover-up conspiracies, that don't make any sense.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2012 9:26 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

I do not understand the anger.

If someone infiltrated the group under attack, the attack would have been facilitated.

One of the things to do when you get creamed is to wonder if someone inside your group intentionally or unintentionally aided the enemy.

--Anthony


Note to Self:
Raptor - woman testifying about birth control is a slut (the term applies.)
Context: http://tinyurl.com/d6ozfej
Six - Wow, isn't Niki quite the CUNT? And, yes, I spell that in all caps....
http://tinyurl.com/bdjgbpe
Wulf - Niki is a stupid fucking bitch who should hurry up and die.
Context: http://tinyurl.com/afve3r9

“The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget.” -T. S. Szasz

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2012 9:51 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

The infiltration angle is new to me; are you sure you're using the right word?


Yes, he is. There was apparently a mole on Steven's staff that directed Al Qaeda members to Steven's hiding location. Had the mole not been on Steven's staff, Steven's and the two former marines would still be alive.

As of yet, I am uncertain that assigning more security detail to Steven's staff would have made a difference, unless additional security would have replaced the local security that was being used. I am also uncertain that we can blame the president for someone failing comprehensively in a background check that the president did not conduct himself.

I am disappointed in the cover-up theories that have been discussed. The theories I have heard mostly focus on the attack itself and somehow demonstrate that Obama has committed treason. Incompetence is neither a cover-up nor treason.

What WOULD be a cover-up/conspiracy is trying to bury the news to prevent an impact on election results, which is an angle on the theory I have seldom overheard. Or, another cover-up/conspiracy would be if someone within our own government or with a connection to certain foreign governments had set up the attack to deliberately make Obama look bad and cost him the election, but once again that is not one of the common stories.

Either of those are far more likely that what people are accusing Obama of, and there is more evidence for them.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2012 10:07 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


The way I heard it, there was an earlier attack, and the Ambassador and some staff were moved to a "safe house" at that time, which gave those who were behind the attack a clear view of exactly where the embassy's safe house was.

A probing attack to gauge response vectors doesn't require an infiltrator; it just requires a few observers. Any decent criminal will do this kind of probe on the police, too, to see how they react and where they go under certain circumstances. If and when you can set up the circumstances to your liking, you already know in advance what the response will be, so you can plan around that.

As I understand it, that's what happened here. An early probe was made of our defenses and reactions, and the response was duly noted and used in the later attack.

The main failure here was to (a) not have multiple safe places to evac to, and (b) follow a defined pattern of behavior instead of mixing it up.

Our staff relied on human nature in their response, and we seem surprised that anyone would take that into account in an attack.

Say what you will about jihadis, but they aren't dumb and they don't lack strategic skills.



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2012 10:14 AM

FREMDFIRMA



Well, firstoff they used the consolate as a C3 center to forment terrorism and the overthrow of the legitimately elected government of the country it was in, at which point invoking any sense of diplomatic protection is pure bunk.

Secondly, they apparently had some captured/kidnapped militia in-custody and were "interrogating" them and I think we all know what THAT means in this day and age.

Those two factors being in play, the place being attacked was an inevitability, not a risk, and frankly I got no sympathy whatever for any just-following-orders folk who got it in the neck over this.

Third and last, the difference between a couple squads and a couple platoons when you're facing upwards of 5000 potential hostiles in essentially negligable, it woulda been the Battle of Mogadishu all over again, and remember how that went for us.

-Frem

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2012 11:54 AM

M52NICKERSON

DALEK!


Quote:

Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
There was apparently a mole on Steven's staff that directed Al Qaeda members to Steven's hiding location. Had the mole not been on Steven's staff, Steven's and the two former marines would still be alive.



It is not even clear if Stevens was the target of the attack. He died of smoke inhalation for the fire that was set. It seems more like an attack on Western assets than anything else.

It might not even been that coordinated since mortars were not used until hours later at the CIA annex.


I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.
...and now a Fundie!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=53359

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2012 12:07 PM

STORYMARK


And after weeks of complaining that they have not heard the real story, today, as the Benghazi hearings start - many GOPers have skipped the hearing, to appear on Fox to complain some more about not hearing what they just bailed on.

Assholes.




Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2012 12:47 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


I'm still thinking that a lot of the concern is that with U.S. military forces on high alert around the 9/11 anniversary, and with a mix of heavily armed al Qaeda-connected militias and U.S. civilian government employees in areas of Libya with no effective Libyan government security, the nearest quick reaction forces that could respond to a good-sized attack in Tripoli or Benghazi were in Italy and the U.S.

I believe that this was probably done at the request of the State Department so the U.S. could show confidence in the Libyan government's ability to handle any such problems. This despite the fact that the Libyans don't have much in the way of organized military or police forces, Just militias that are pretty soft in their loyalty to the government. Maybe State thought they'd get lucky, or that Stevens was so well-liked in Libya that no one would try and hurt him.

When the attack on Benghazi started, it could be that State wanted to downplay it as much as possible, hoping that it wouldn't be serious, and then got stuck with the "demonstrations caused by an anti-Muslim video" line.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2012 12:56 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


... or it could have had something to do with the President's desire not to put "boots on the ground" and have a military presence in the country that could be seen as an occupying force.

And stationing a carrier battle group off the shores of Tripoli isn't a cheap endeavor, either, and would have led to lots and lots of carping by the right about how wasteful the president was being.



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2012 12:58 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
And after weeks of complaining that they have not heard the real story, today, as the Benghazi hearings start - many GOPers have skipped the hearing, to appear on Fox to complain some more about not hearing what they just bailed on.

Assholes.




Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"




You didn't honestly believe for even a moment that anyone in the GOP has the slightest interest in FACTS, did you? They've said over and over that they're not going to be beholden to fack-checkers! At this point, I take them at their word.



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2012 12:59 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht


Incompetance, negligence, and deception (its an insignificant youtube video that only 40 people saw). A screwup of notable proportions.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2012 1:17 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
... or it could have had something to do with the President's desire not to put "boots on the ground" and have a military presence in the country that could be seen as an occupying force.


That could be. He might have taken a calculated risk than nothing would occur to help the Libyan government look like it was functional. Unfortunately, that wasn't the case.

Quote:

And stationing a carrier battle group off the shores of Tripoli isn't a cheap endeavor, either, and would have led to lots and lots of carping by the right about how wasteful the president was being.


Who are you and what have you done with Mike? You're proposing that the war-mongering Republicans would complain about rattling the saber near the Muslim world?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2012 2:37 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
... or it could have had something to do with the President's desire not to put "boots on the ground" and have a military presence in the country that could be seen as an occupying force.


That could be. He might have taken a calculated risk than nothing would occur to help the Libyan government look like it was functional. Unfortunately, that wasn't the case.

Quote:

And stationing a carrier battle group off the shores of Tripoli isn't a cheap endeavor, either, and would have led to lots and lots of carping by the right about how wasteful the president was being.


Who are you and what have you done with Mike? You're proposing that the war-mongering Republicans would complain about rattling the saber near the Muslim world?




I'm proposing that the Republicans would complain no matter what this president did.

Why, just the other day you were whining about it being so very "convenient" that the Petraeus story didn't leak before the election, and then when you found out that Eric Cantor had the information more than a week before the election and DIDN'T leak it, you called him "honorable" for it. So it's abundantly clear to everyone here that you have two very distinct sets of standards, one for Republicans and another for Democrats.

Whatever the Democrat does, you'll bitch about it. Whatever the Republican does, you'll applaud it.



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2012 2:39 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Quote:

And stationing a carrier battle group off the shores of Tripoli isn't a cheap endeavor, either, and would have led to lots and lots of carping by the right about how wasteful the president was being.


Hello,

I disagree. The 'right' (a rather large group that includes Republicans but extends beyond them) is typically impressed and overjoyed at shows of military might, particularly arrayed against middle eastern countries.

As it is, I'd be surprised if our carrier group was far away.

Military might is a point of pride for some. As is waterboarding, the Un-Torture. Rather like a nice bath, really. I still remember when I criticized Obama and this was one of the things 'the right' here failed to agree with as being a problem. That and drone strikes.

--Anthony





Note to Self:
Raptor - woman testifying about birth control is a slut (the term applies.)
Context: http://tinyurl.com/d6ozfej
Six - Wow, isn't Niki quite the CUNT? And, yes, I spell that in all caps....
http://tinyurl.com/bdjgbpe
Wulf - Niki is a stupid fucking bitch who should hurry up and die.
Context: http://tinyurl.com/afve3r9

“The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget.” -T. S. Szasz

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2012 2:42 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Quote:

Whatever the Democrat does, you'll bitch about it. Whatever the Republican does, you'll applaud it.


Hello,

I see this disease constantly, infecting our political parties.

--Anthony

Note to Self:
Raptor - woman testifying about birth control is a slut (the term applies.)
Context: http://tinyurl.com/d6ozfej
Six - Wow, isn't Niki quite the CUNT? And, yes, I spell that in all caps....
http://tinyurl.com/bdjgbpe
Wulf - Niki is a stupid fucking bitch who should hurry up and die.
Context: http://tinyurl.com/afve3r9

“The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget.” -T. S. Szasz

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2012 4:54 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
I'm proposing that the Republicans would complain no matter what this president did.



Not so much.

Quote:

WASHINGTON — Top Senate Democrats and Republicans agreed Monday on a resolution backing limited U.S. involvement in the NATO-led military campaign against Libya, days after the expiration of the legal deadline for President Barack Obama to seek full-blown congressional authorization.

Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry, D-Mass., and Sen. John McCain, the top Republican on the Armed Services Committee, introduced the non-binding resolution along with five other Republicans and Democrats.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/23/libya-resolution-senate-war-p
owers_n_865906.html

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2012 8:48 PM

FREMDFIRMA



Allow me to remind y'all this clusterfuck, mind you, is exactly what I said would happen if we got involved in the first place, the notion of which I was firmly against for exactly these reasons.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 15, 2012 11:21 PM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!




Major Paula Broadwell, US Army Intelligence, confessed during a televised speech that General "Little Butt-Sucking Chickshit" Betrayus, Obama and Hillary are guilty of warcrimes and treason to be punished by death penalty for running illegal CIA torture camps in Libya in violation of Congressional law as Regie Love performs kosher oral suction on Obama's penis:
http://piratenews-tv.blogspot.com/2012/11/general-betrayus-stars-in-sp
y-who.html

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2012 3:41 AM

JONGSSTRAW


Benghazi Schmengazi!....

My initial outrage about Benghazi in September has disappeared as I've had time to reflect on the two 9/11's. The whole thing from Obama to Rice to Petraeus is a mere amoeba in comparison to the elephantine enormity of the leadership failures and blatant criminal incompetance that happened before, during, and after 9/11/01. I will never be able to comprehend, let alone forgive, any of the known events and facts that led to 3,000 Americans being killed on that day, and the subsequent military adventures that have killed and maimed 20,000 American service personnel.



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2012 4:47 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


This whole thing is trumped-up idiocy. That's obvious because no fuss was ever made (that I'm aware of) regarding the myriad attacks on our embassies under the Dubya administration; Susan Rice had nothing to do with anything and was only saying what SHE was told; Congress did not allocate the funds for security that was requested; and so much of the rest is pure bullshit. That's my opinion, anyway. As mentioned, if you compare Benghazi to 9/11, the unnecessary war on Iraq, the clusterfuck that continues to be Afghanistan, the--what do they call them--"brown on green"?--attacks that go on almost daily IN Afghanistan, and so much more, Benghazi pales in comparison. Aaaand before, as previously, our righties jump madly on "four deaths mean nothing to you?!?!?!", yes, they mean a LOT, but I repeat: This is a trumped-up excuse to hold Obama PERSONALLY responsible for anything and everything that goes wrong in this country. Period.

I put the size of this whole kerfluffle at the feat of a sour-grapes Republican party, with their puppet-in-chief leading the charge...McCain has become a sad, bitter, angry old man who's willing to lie through his teeth to get attention:
Quote:

Susan Rice should have known better and if she didn’t know better, she is not qualified. She should have known better. I will do everything in my power to block her from being the United States secretary of state. She has proven that she either doesn’t understand or she is not willing to accept evidence on its face. There is no doubt five days later what this attack was and for — look, I was on "Face the Nation" that Sunday. Right after her came the president of the Libyan National Assembly who said this was al-Qaeda. Everybody knew that. So she went out and told the American people something that was patently false and defied common sense.”

When she presented the case absolutely this was a flash mob. Look at the reruns because I happened to have been there that morning.... The casual observer knew there was no demonstration. There was no demonstration, so you couldn't have known that to start with. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/mccains-claims-a
bout-susan-rices-comments-on-the-libya-attack/2012/11/15/e6590650-2eb1-11e2-beb2-4b4cf5087636_blog.html
]
Just 'cuz, how about some facts?
Quote:

McCain’s recounting does not accurately reflect what she said.

Much of her statement is filled with caveats, such as saying this is “the best information we have to date.” McCain knocks her for not saying this was the work of al-Qaeda, but she does not dispute that possibility; she simply says it needs to be investigated.

She never uses the phrase “flash mob,” or says this is “absolutely” the case but instead says “we believe that it looks like extremist elements” appeared to have opportunistically taken advantage of a protest.

McCain also claims “a casual observer” would know there was no demonstration. U.S. officials now say there is little evidence of a protest but it was not an outlandish thought at the time. After all, it had been heavily reported by the media — including in The Washington Post — based on witness accounts. This was the headline on the Post story just days before Rice’s appearance: “Libya consulate attack came after militants joined protesters, say witnesses, officials.”

In fact, our timeline shows that the American news media did not report until Sept. 20, four days after Rice’s appearance, that there was no anti-American protest. Not until Oct. 9 did the State Department report there was no protest outside the embassy.

Indeed, while McCain in his “Face the Nation” remarks clearly labels the incident an “act of terror,” he does not argue there was no demonstration, just that the event could not have happened without planning: “How spontaneous is a demonstration when people bring rocket-propelled grenades and heavy weapons and have a very tactically successful military operation?”

Meanwhile, reporting in recent months suggests that Rice hewed rather closely to the talking points she was given before she went on the program.


There are many questions about what happened in Libya on Sept.11.

One could fault Susan Rice for not being quicker on her feet, especially when confronted by the comments of the Libyan official. But she was not directly involved in the running of the Libyan diplomatic mission or its security. She was essentially acting as an administration spokeswoman, apparently using words crafted by the CIA, to describe what was — and still is — a murky situation.

McCain mischaracterizes Rice’s words and then assumes she should have had all the information that is known now about the Benghazi attack. Her claim that there was a protest is clearly wrong, but within the context of that week, it was not off base, since it appeared in news reports quoting witnesses and even in the president’s daily briefing.

As we have written, the administration — and especially the president — appeared suspiciously reluctant to label the attack an act of terrorism. But within the context of all those statements, Susan Rice’s remarks five days after the attack appear to be a sideshow, especially because she had virtually no role in the key issues surrounding the Libyan mission.

Readers know we frown on hypocrisy. Given that McCain was so quick to excuse Condi Rice for making remarks of much greater import, it seems rather unsporting to quickly rush to judgment and mischaracterization in the case of Susan Rice.Much more, timeline, transcript of Rice's remarks, comparison of CONDI RICE's lies about NUCLEAR WEAPONS in Iraq, which didn't seem to bother McCain at the time, and much more at http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/mccains-claims-a
bout-susan-rices-comments-on-the-libya-attack/2012/11/15/e6590650-2eb1-11e2-beb2-4b4cf5087636_blog.html
]
They gave him two pinochios, by the way.

As I believe Jon Stewart remarked, now that the election is over and the GOP lost, there is only one option: impeachment. "Two word," he said, "Benghazi, Solyndra". That's about it, as far as I'm concerned.

Added to the fact that McCain was shooting his mouth off yet avoiding the meeting that would have briefed him points rather clearly to me what his motives are.
Quote:

John McCain is a grandstanding hypocrite who is still reliving the 2008 election.

There’s no other explanation for why McCain would run up and down the halls of the Senate, demanding hearings to find out what “really” happened at Benghazi and what the administration ”really” knew, while actual hearings on Benghazi were taking place this week in the very committee John McCain sits on, and he didn’t even bother showing up.

McCain is now claiming that he missed this most important hearing ever because of a “scheduling error.” Gee, what else was more important than something that McCain thinks merits “Watergate-style” hearings?

Wait for it…..

Alexander Abad-Santos of the Atlantic Wire recreated McCain’s schedule and the actual hearing schedule, and put them side by side in order to find out what “scheduling error” forced McCain to miss the Benghazi hearings that he’s been demanding for weeks. And what do you know: The “scheduling error” that prevented John McCain from attending the Benghazi hearings was John McCain’s own press conference demanding Benghazi hearings.

The man was so fixated on having Benghazi hearings that he missed the actual Benghazi hearings. http://americablog.com/2012/11/mccain-skips-benghazi-hearings-rice.htm
l


This whole thing is of little interest to me. There were screw-ups...big surprise. People died...hold those responsible accountable, for both the clusterfuck and the attack. Obama didn't know about any of this shit, and yes, he DID use the word "terror" right away, please let's NOT go down that road yet again! By all means investigate, fix whatever went wrong, and move on. Susan Rice said what she was told to say, using her as a political tool is disgusting, given her record. To make this the centerpiece of the GOP's hate-fest is simply stupid, and as Bobby Jindal said, they realy need to stop being the Stupid Party.

Tit for tat got us where we are today. If we want to be grownups, we need to resist the ugliness. If we each did, this would be a better reflection on Firefly and a more welcome place. I will try.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 16, 2012 6:51 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
I'm proposing that the Republicans would complain no matter what this president did.



Not so much.




How funny - in order to deny your hypocrisy - you omit the part of the quote about it.

Tell us again that you're not partisan. I haven't had my laugh for the morning.




Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, March 28, 2024 05:27 - 6154 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, March 28, 2024 02:07 - 3408 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Wed, March 27, 2024 23:21 - 987 posts
Elections; 2024
Wed, March 27, 2024 22:19 - 2069 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Wed, March 27, 2024 15:03 - 824 posts
NBC News: Behind the scenes, Biden has grown angry and anxious about re-election effort
Wed, March 27, 2024 14:58 - 2 posts
BUILD BACK BETTER!
Wed, March 27, 2024 14:45 - 5 posts
RFK Jr. Destroys His Candidacy With VP Pick?
Wed, March 27, 2024 11:59 - 16 posts
Russia says 60 dead, 145 injured in concert hall raid; Islamic State group claims responsibility
Wed, March 27, 2024 10:57 - 49 posts
Ha. Haha! HAHA! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHA!!!!!!
Tue, March 26, 2024 21:26 - 1 posts
You can't take the sky from me, a tribute to Firefly
Tue, March 26, 2024 16:26 - 293 posts
Tucker Carlson
Tue, March 26, 2024 16:24 - 132 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL