Libyan Debacle
If you have added confused to your thoughts about the terrible attack on our embassy in Libya, don’t feel like the Lone Ranger. Confusion seems to be the new strategy.
During the Vice Presidential debate, Biden stated “We weren’t told they wanted more security. We did not know they wanted more security there.” Excuse me - What? You weren’t aware? Surely that is only one of the many foot in mouth moments for Joe Biden. Not so says White House spokesman, Jay Carney, who doubles down on the strategy.
Via Buzzfeed The vice president was speaking about himself and the president, and the White House. He was not referring to the administration, clearly, since there was a public hearing for four-and-a-half hours where it was discussed openly by individuals working at the State Department, requests that were made. Obviously, he was referring to, he wasn’t talking about the administration writ large, he was speaking about the president, himself, and the White House.
The following timeline shows the events leading up to September 11 and some subsequent to the attack. It makes clear the environment leading up to the attack.
April 6: IED thrown over the fence of the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.
April 11: Gun battle erupts between armed groups two-and-a-half miles from the U.S. Consulate, including rocket-propelled grenades.
April 27: Two South African contractors are kidnapped by armed men, released unharmed.
May 1: Deputy Commander of U.S. Embassy Tripoli’s Local Guard Force is carjacked, beaten, and detained by armed youth.
May 1: British Embassy in Tripoli is attacked by a violent mob and set on fire. Other NATO embassies attacked as well.
May 3: The State Department declines a request from personnel concerned about security at the U.S. Embassy in Libya for a DC-3 plane to take them around the country.
May 22: Two rocket-propelled grenades are fired at the Benghazi office of the International Committee of the Red Cross, less than 1 mile from the U.S. Consulate.
June 6: A large IED destroys part of the security perimeter of the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. Creates hole “big enough for 40 men to go through.”
June 10: A car carrying the British ambassador is attacked in Tripoli. Two bodyguards injured.
Late June: The building of the International Red Cross attacked again and closed down, leaving the U.S. flag as the only international one still flying in Benghazi, an obvious target.
August 6: Armed assailants carjack a vehicle with diplomatic plates operated by U.S. personnel.
September 8: A local security officer in Benghazi warns American officials about deteriorating security.
September 11: Protesters attack the U.S. Cairo embassy. U.S. Embassy releases statement and tweets sympathizing with Muslim protesters/attackers.
September 11: U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya is attacked, Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans are killed.
September 12: Secretary Clinton and President Obama issue statements condemning both the video and the attacks.
September 12: U.S. intelligence agencies have enough evidence to conclude a terrorist attack was involved.
September 13: Press Secretary Jay Carney condemns video and violence at a news conference.
September 14: Carney denies Administration had “actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent.”
September 14: The bodies of slain Americans return to Andrews Air Force Base. President Obama again blames the YouTube video.
September 16: U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice appears on Sunday talk shows and says the attacks were provoked by the video, exclusively.
September 16: Libyan President Mohamed Magarief says, “no doubt that this [attack] was preplanned, predetermined.”
September 17: State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland refuses to call attacks an act of terror.
September 19: CNN reports having found Ambassador Stevens’s diary, which indicates concern about security threats in Benghazi.
September 19: Director of the National Counterterrorism Center Matthew Olsen tells Congress the attack in Libya was “terrorism.”
September 20: Carney tries to back up Olsen, says it was “self-evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack.”
September 20: Obama refuses to call attack terrorism, citing insufficient information.
September 21: Secretary of State Clinton, at meeting with Pakistani Foreign Minister, says, “What happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack.”
September 25: On ABC’s “The View,” Obama says, “we don’t have all of the information yet so we are still gathering.”
September 25: To the U.N. assembly, Obama blames “A crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.”
September 26: Libya’s Magarief on the “Today” show says, “It was a preplanned act of terrorism directed against American citizens.”
September 26: Published reports show U.S. Intel agencies and the Obama Administration knew within 24 hours that al-Qaeda affiliated terrorist were involved.
September 27: Innocence of Muslims filmmaker Mark Basseley Youseff (aka Nakoula Basseley Nakoula) is arrested and denied bail on the charges of “probation violation.”
September 28: Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper, Jr., issues a statement backing the Obama Administration’s changing story about the Libyan attack. Says facts are evolving.
October 2: Carney declines to comment on reported requests from diplomats in Libya for additional security, citing the State Department’s internal investigation.
The timeline stops at October 2 and so much has happened since then including Congressional hearings.
But Wood testified that there was no way anyone who was following the events in real time could conclude the attacks were anything but a terrorist attack.
“It was instantly recognizable as a terrorist attack. We almost expected the attack to come. It was a matter of time,” Wood said. “[Al Qaeda’s] presence grows there every day. They are certainly more established there than we are.”
There are two possibilities. Either the intelligence community had a detailed picture of what happened in Benghazi that night and failed to share it with other administration officials and the White House. Or the intelligence community provided that detailed intelligence picture to others in the administration, and Obama, Biden, Clinton, Susan Rice, and others ignored and manipulated the intelligence to tell a politically convenient—but highly inaccurate—story.
Scary stuff.
Share this story:
Recent Related Posts
- States Have a Right to Protect Residents from Illegal Immigration
- Gang Immigration Bill (S.744) is Comprehensively Flawed
- They lived not only in ages past (South Sudan news)
- Hey Anglicans, hearing the Benghazi testimony, how ‘bout that IX Commandment?
- Better headgear or wii to prevent terrorism
- CNN on Syrian Chemical Weapons
- Some Light Viewing: Kontorovich on Israel & International Law
Comments
Facebook comments are closed.
15 comments
No confusion at all for me. An ambassador died and Obama lied. The question is not whether the President was informed but who runs the government? It is absolutely terrifying!
[1] Posted by Nikolaus on 10-15-2012 at 12:42 PM · [top]
It’s pretty obvious what the story is. The President/VP largely failed to ever show up for their daily security briefings up until this incident. Go to the “President’s Schedule” on the White House website, and scroll back through the weeks. It shows the President/VP barely ever showed up, mainly because Obama hasn’t been at work most of the time for more than a year and when he did go he usually doesn’t show up to work until usually 10:30 a.m. or so, and then he goes to lunch and that’s about it. Most of time he’s been campaigning, on vacation or going on junkets for trade conferences and the like. And then look after the incident, the website shows the Obama/Biden have magically been getting the briefing almost every day.
And yet the press absolutely refuses to cover this dereliction of duty. If any other prior president behaved like that they would have been all over him, but the press covers up almost everything about what Obama is (not) doing.
[2] Posted by Jim the Puritan on 10-15-2012 at 02:18 PM · [top]
It was the June 6 IED attack that did it for me. The rest of the items indicate a dangerous and deteriorating environment, but blowing a hole in the perimeter of the US Benghazi consulate’s fence should have been the event that got everyone’s attention. That no one took heed of this obvious threat is utterly criminal.
And has anyone else noted the irony of an administration that decries “outsourcing” (actually, they mean “offshoring”) the way the Obama gaggle does using a Welsh outfit to provide securrity to the US consulate? A Welsh outfit that then offshored to locals?
[3] Posted by Jeffersonian on 10-15-2012 at 02:23 PM · [top]
Jim, I’m not sure why Obama is so determined to campaign for the job if he so steadfastly refuses to do the job.
[4] Posted by Jeffersonian on 10-15-2012 at 02:24 PM · [top]
Our standards for presidential behavior have changed so dramatically over time. I remember they used to criticize Reagan as lazy because he only got into the office say at 9:00 in the morning and then went home say at 5:30 to 6:00. But even at that pace, Reagan put in more hours in one year than Obama has done in four.
I suspect Obama sees being a president as more of a personal reward or entitlement than a responsibility. He thinks campaigning and getting public acclamation from his supporters, and making public pronouncements and promises without ever doing anything to carry them through, is the job. He has behaved pretty much as a monarch or aristocrat, rather than as a responsible leader.
[5] Posted by Jim the Puritan on 10-15-2012 at 02:58 PM · [top]
I had to do a double take reading this - I am not sure some of the other attacks on the British made it into our press here although the torching of the British Embassy did. There has obviously been a lot more going on than we had been told. The attack on the British Ambassador’s car is news to me.
The contract with the Welsh company is strange - even important US firms have rigorous checks made on security contractors, not that with the numbers involved that it would have made any difference at all unless a serious number of armed troops had been deployed, and politically given the restrictions on Western troops going into Libya in the first place, that may have been not possible.
It is generally up to the host government to provide security for foreign legations, security and troops from the sending nation usually only sufficient to deal with small problems which occur within the facility, not an all out external attack.
[6] Posted by Pageantmaster [KJS to Coventry] on 10-15-2012 at 04:54 PM · [top]
Some key questions need to be asked. Was the President informed of the IED attack in May (an attack on American territory) or if not, what criteria has been established for informing the President of attacks on US territory abroad including consulates and embassies? What action were taken by those informed and aware of the May attack to enhance security and if security was not enhanced, why? Remember that funding for state department wsecurity had doubled over the last number of years, even though some reductions in the growth and maybe in absolute levels of security were taken. Charlene Lamb has testified that economics was not a factor in the Libyan security? So what were the factors in establishing the Libyan security how did the various incidents from May on influence the equations for providing security? If they didn’t, then what could have happened short of the death of the ambassador to cause security to be increased? What was the ambassador doing in Benghazi? Who sent him to do what? Was additional security provided ro requested? Who was aware of his presence and did Libyans or lax embassy personnel some how tip off the isurgents?
Who was made aware of the Sep 10 threat? How was that distributed?
[7] Posted by Don+ on 10-15-2012 at 05:59 PM · [top]
RE my [7] above. May shoiuld be April 6, referring to the IED attack. The Sep 10 threat was the one posted I believe on a Jihaddist website and called for an attack agaist the consulate.
[8] Posted by Don+ on 10-15-2012 at 06:12 PM · [top]
The issue is not what the president knew, but what he should have known.
Well, there’s also the issue of lying about it for two weeks. And the issue of incompetence on the front in.
Plus there’s the media covering up for their preferred candidate.
Ya think?
[9] Posted by Words Matter on 10-15-2012 at 08:31 PM · [top]
Here is a line from Persident Obama’s theme song:
“We get up at twelve and start to work at one.
Take an hour for lunch and then at two we’re done.
Jolly good fun!”
[10] Posted by Nikolaus on 10-15-2012 at 09:09 PM · [top]
You mean like this? (August 28, 2011)
10:15 AM
The President receives the Presidential Daily Briefing
11:00 AM
The President makes a personnel announcement
12:10 PM
The President meets with senior advisors
12:30 PM
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney
12:45 PM
The President and the Vice President meet for lunch
[11] Posted by Jim the Puritan on 10-15-2012 at 09:22 PM · [top]
Well, golly gee whiz, does this mean that perhaps the Marine gua force will finally get some live rounds for their weapons? After all they ARE in ho territory, aren’t they?
[12] Posted by Fr. Chip, SF on 10-16-2012 at 12:26 PM · [top]
#2 - Jim = how do you get to the White House website? I thought it was whitehouseDOTgov, but all I get w/ that is a pic of the upgazing Obama and “STAY INFORMED -sign up to get periodic updates from Pres O and other admin officials.” Fill in your internet mailing ad, which, of course, “will not share your email add w/ persons or org’s outside the Exec Office of the Pres, and you can unsubs at any time.”
HOW THE HECK do we get to the official site??
Do you have the Pres schedule link somewhere? (If they still post it!)
Thanks!
[13] Posted by maineiac on 10-17-2012 at 11:04 AM · [top]
Hmmmm - I tried connecting to /president’s schedule and got this:
The page you’re looking for is currently unavailable to view
We’ve been upgrading our site. It is possible that this page has been moved or renamed. You can use your browser’s Back button to return to the previous page, go to the homepage, or you can browse or search for the information you’re looking for.
Granted, an apostrophe and space might not connect w/ something (realized that after I hit the search). But I wonder if it has been removed/renamed…..
[14] Posted by maineiac on 10-17-2012 at 11:09 AM · [top]
This is where I go:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/schedule
Just checked and I’m able to get on it.
If you scroll back through the months you will see all sorts of interesting things. One of the first you will notice is that the President rarely was around to get the “Daily Briefing” until after the Libya terrorist attack. Then, all of the sudden, now he’s receiving it almost every day.
[15] Posted by Jim the Puritan on 10-17-2012 at 02:04 PM · [top]
Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.
Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more explanation, and the posts here, here, and here for advice on becoming a valued commenter as opposed to an ex-commenter. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments which you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm site administrators or Gri5th Media, LLC.