Benghazi: White House Cover Up or Just Incompetence?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Wehrwolfen, Oct 26, 2012.

  1. Wehrwolfen
    Offline

    Wehrwolfen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Messages:
    2,752
    Thanks Received:
    338
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +339
    Benghazi: White House Cover Up or Just Incompetence? ​



    By EDWARD MORRISSEY, The Fiscal Times
    October 10, 2012

    For the four decades since Watergate, one axiom has proven true time and again: It’s not the crime, it’s the cover-up. Scandals in Washington mostly start as either embarrassing yet minor peccadilloes or incompetence that present a potential political problem. They turn into major scandals when politicians attempt to hide them rather than address them openly, and then get caught in lies, deceptions, and even larger crimes than the instigating event.

    Watergate certainly demonstrated this model well; rather than simply cut the bumbling political operatives loose that had been caught breaking into Democratic headquarters in 1972, the White House actively tried to hush up lower-level connections, for various reasons – including the incentive to keep quiet other abuses of power taking place in the Nixon administration.

    It’s tempting to apply this model to the fallout from the terrorist attack in Benghazi. The attack itself took place in a region known to be dangerous, where other Western nations had already withdrawn from diplomatic missions. It resulted in the death of American Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, the first such loss in 33 years, as well as three other fine Americans who tried to defend the mission. The attack was a well-planned and coordinated assault on both the consulate and a designated “safe house” that overwhelmed the security forces arrayed to protect our personnel and facility.

    Diplomatic missions face these kinds of threats at all times, especially consulates, where host countries are less likely to approve US military forces for protection. As several witnesses testified in a House Oversight Committee hearing on Wednesday, the State Department and the country accepts those risks as the price for remaining engaged. Otherwise, we would run from every troubled region in the world, and our lack of fortitude might encourage some to make more regions just as troubled.

    However, we only accept those risks when we can mitigate them with proper security for Americans dispatched to those hot spots. Clearly, that was not the case in Benghazi, especially for the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 attack. At a House Oversight Committee hearing today, State Department security expert Charlene Lamb insisted that “We had the correct number of [security] assets in Benghazi,” a remarkable statement considering the rapid destruction of consular security and the deaths of four Americans in the incident.
    View Video link:
    News Distribution Network - Shared Video
    Eric Nordstrom, one of the State Department witnesses who also testified, provided support for the Obama administration’s position – for the most part. Much was made prior to his appearance of prepared testimony that leaked to the media showing that Nordstrom never got a response to two requests for more security in Libya, specifically for Benghazi. Nordstrom tried to soften that up, but then confirmed the impression left earlier by his prepared testimony – and that the only plan in place was to hope for the best. Nordstrom explained:

    “The frustrating thing that I found is once the first teams and the first TDY-ers [temporary security forces] started to expire at 60 days there was a complete and total absence of planning that I saw in terms of what we were supposed to do from that point on. So when I requested resources, when I requested assets, instead of supporting those assets, I was criticized. And somehow it was my responsibility to come up with a plan on the ground and not the responsibility for DS [diplomatic security]. I raised that specific point in a meeting with the DS director in March, that 60 days there was no plan. And it was hoped that everything would get better.”

    After the attack, the White House went into cover-up mode. For at least the next seven days, Obama administration officials insisted that this incident started as a protest that “spun out of control,” in the words of UN Ambassador Susan Rice. Two witnesses at the hearing on Wednesday attempted to offer support for Rice, claiming that the intelligence community had told them the same thing. Lamb still refused to call the incident a terrorist attack at the hearing:

    On top of that, the administration at the very least allowed a false narrative to unfold about the nature of the attack – a narrative that had specific political benefits for President Obama. That might be coincidence, but that’s difficult to believe. At the very least, it shows a remarkable level of incompetence to send the UN Ambassador to five Sunday talk shows five days later to push the false “spontaneous protest” narrative when the White House itself had designated it a terrorist attack within the first 24 hours.

    At worst, this looks like a political cover-up intended to disguise the fact that Obama’s policy in Libya has given al-Qaeda a fresh launch and another safe haven for its operations against the US.

    Either way, this requires immediate and thorough scrutiny, from Congress and the national media. That may make some journalists uncomfortable in an election season, but we need to know the truth about national and diplomatic security – so that we don’t have even more dead Americans and further cover-ups about the circumstances of their deaths.



    Read more at Benghazi: White House Cover Up or Just Incompetence?
     
  2. Roudy
    Offline

    Roudy Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    37,603
    Thanks Received:
    5,716
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +14,579
    Coverup, lies. I can't believe this asshole traitor is running for a second term.

    [​IMG]
     
  3. BlindBoo
    Offline

    BlindBoo Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2010
    Messages:
    19,621
    Thanks Received:
    2,195
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +4,394
    "Obama administration officials insisted that this incident started as a protest that “spun out of control,” in the words of UN Ambassador Susan Rice"

    Except that Ambassador Rice never insisted that. (unless "putting together the best information that we have available to us today our current assessment...") is insisting.

    Meet the press Transcript:

    GREGORY: Well, let’s talk-- talk about-- well, you talked about this as spontaneous. Can you say definitively that the attacks on-- on our consulate in Libya that killed ambassador Stevens and others there security personnel, that was spontaneous, was it a planned attack? Was there a terrorist element to it?

    MS. RICE: Well, let us-- let me tell you the-- the best information we have at present. First of all, there’s an FBI investigation which is ongoing. And we look to that investigation to give us the definitive word as to what transpired. But putting together the best information that we have available to us today our current assessment is that what happened in Benghazi was in fact initially a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired hours before in Cairo, almost a copycat of-- of the demonstrations against our facility in Cairo, which were prompted, of course, by the video.


    And where did this information come from? President Obama? Nope. The CIA.

    “Talking points” prepared by the CIA on Sept. 15, the same day that Rice taped three television appearances, support her description of the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate as a reaction to Arab anger about an anti-Muslim video prepared in the United States. According to the CIA account, “The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the U.S. Consulate and subsequently its annex. There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.”

    David Ignatius: Benghazi intelligence revealed - The Washington Post
     
  4. Wehrwolfen
    Offline

    Wehrwolfen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Messages:
    2,752
    Thanks Received:
    338
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +339
    Obama was considered inexperienced before he was elected, some even considered him inept and incompetent then. After 4 years Obama has proven himself to be all of the above. It has cost Americans their jobs, an increased Economy and ultimately the lives of even those who tried to improve foreign relations in his name.
    I'm still struck by Obama's statement: "Judge me by those that surround me." After 4 years I can only say, We have Mr. President we have and find those that surround you lacking and just as you, incompetent and inept.
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2012
  5. bigrebnc1775
    Offline

    bigrebnc1775 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    Messages:
    64,004
    Thanks Received:
    3,798
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Location:
    Kannapolis, N.C.
    Ratings:
    +4,830
    How about cover up of the incompetence of a president?
     
  6. Claudette
    Offline

    Claudette Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    19,719
    Thanks Received:
    3,037
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +7,757
    The whole incident is a disgrace. We have a dead ambassador and three others. They requested help and were denied.

    Jesus. Incompetence doesn't even begin to describe the absolute uncaring idiocy of the Obama State Department.
     
  7. bigrebnc1775
    Offline

    bigrebnc1775 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    Messages:
    64,004
    Thanks Received:
    3,798
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Location:
    Kannapolis, N.C.
    Ratings:
    +4,830
    We haven't had an Ambassador killed since Carter. Even in those country's less friendly with America.
     
  8. Wehrwolfen
    Offline

    Wehrwolfen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Messages:
    2,752
    Thanks Received:
    338
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +339
    Yes, I agree. I left out deceitful liar as part of that statement.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. GoneBezerk
    Offline

    GoneBezerk BANNED

    Joined:
    May 14, 2011
    Messages:
    7,603
    Thanks Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +495
    It's both....first it was incompetance ignoring the terrorist threat in Libya and denying the Ambassador the security he asked for months ago.

    It became a cover up once they realize they fucked up ignoring the Ambassador and needed to cover their own asses.

    Obamination is all about himself and his handlers are all about him. He does not give a shit about YOU. Anyone that believes he cares about YOU is an idiot.
     
  10. asaratis
    Offline

    asaratis Uppity Senior Citizen Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    12,288
    Thanks Received:
    2,655
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Stockbridge
    Ratings:
    +4,527
    Obama=FAILURE
    What he fucks up...he will spin and cover up!
    What he does good...doesn't exist!


    FUCK OBAMA~!
     

Share This Page