Smoking Gun: "We had no actionable intelligence"

[J.E.D]

 

[J.E.D]

.....

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

It turns out that you're thread title is misleading as your link proves nothing of the sort (big surprise). Nowhere in the article you cited does it say that Americans were warned of the attack; only that, "Mabrouk said it was not the first time he has warned foreigners about the worsening security situation in the face of the growing presence of armed jihadist groups in the Benghazi area".

I've read that quote over and over again and have yet to find the part where Americans were warned of this specific attack. Perhaps you could point it out for me? I'll wait

More details emerge on U.S. ambassador's last moments - CNN.com

Benghazi, Libya (CNN) -- Three days before the deadly assault on the United States consulate in Libya, a local security official says he met with American diplomats in the city and warned them about deteriorating security.
Jamal Mabrouk, a member of the February 17th Brigade, told CNN that he and a battalion commander had a meeting about the economy and security.

He said they told the diplomats that the security situation wasn't good for international business.

"The situation is frightening, it scares us," Mabrouk said they told the U.S. officials. He did not say how they responded.

Yep, I read that passage. Maybe it's just me, but I see no specifics about this particular attack in that quote -- just a vague warning about growing tensions in the region. Perhaps you could point out the relevant passage for me? Thanks.

It is vague and I can't account for why. But "The situation is frightening, it scares us...." seems to sound the alarm. Also, seven heavily armed Americans were sent to regard the situation. So clearly there was "actionable intelligence" and we were lied to once again.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I'll give you an example of what I'm looking for, folks:

According to a senior Libyan military official, the US was warned about the attack on their embassy days before the attack. The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said that he provided them with intelligence that local extremists were planning on attacking the US embassy in Libya, and that despite his warnings, the US chose not to increase security.

Now go and find me a verifiable quote like that from a reliable source and I'll concede that US official dropped the ball. I'll wait.

With all the billion pumped into homeland security to prevent something like this, someone did dropped the ball. You are not making a case for but against the incompetence of the obama administration.

 

[J.E.D]

More details emerge on U.S. ambassador's last moments - CNN.com

Benghazi, Libya (CNN) -- Three days before the deadly assault on the United States consulate in Libya, a local security official says he met with American diplomats in the city and warned them about deteriorating security.
Jamal Mabrouk, a member of the February 17th Brigade, told CNN that he and a battalion commander had a meeting about the economy and security.

He said they told the diplomats that the security situation wasn't good for international business.

"The situation is frightening, it scares us," Mabrouk said they told the U.S. officials. He did not say how they responded.

Yep, I read that passage. Maybe it's just me, but I see no specifics about this particular attack in that quote -- just a vague warning about growing tensions in the region. Perhaps you could point out the relevant passage for me? Thanks.

It is vague and I can't account for why.

I can -- they had no specifics.

But "The situation is frightening, it scares us...." seems to sound the alarm. Also, seven heavily armed Americans were sent to regard the situation. So clearly there was "actionable intelligence" and we were lied to once again.

Perhaps you don't understand what "actionable intelligence" implies. I'll give you a hint: it involves more than vague (your words) warnings. Saying that the US "lied" because they had only vague warnings is a bit unfair, no?

 

[tinydancer]

How's an IED being thrown at the Consulate on June 6th for being more specific? And that since then 3 other embassies have been attacked.

The U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was attacked on June 6th when an IED was thrown over the perimeter


Following the June attack there were three other attacks on western diplomatic targets in Benghazi before the deadly assault on the U.S. Consulate

Benghazi outpost was targeted before deadly attack as US rushes spies and drones to Libya | Mail Online

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Yep, I read that passage. Maybe it's just me, but I see no specifics about this particular attack in that quote -- just a vague warning about growing tensions in the region. Perhaps you could point out the relevant passage for me? Thanks.

It is vague and I can't account for why.

I can -- they had no specifics.

But "The situation is frightening, it scares us...." seems to sound the alarm. Also, seven heavily armed Americans were sent to regard the situation. So clearly there was "actionable intelligence" and we were lied to once again.

Perhaps you don't understand what "actionable intelligence" implies. I'll give you a hint: it involves more than vague (your words) warnings. Saying that the US "lied" because they had only vague warnings is a bit unfair, no?

Stop being a fucking hack and only regarding part of the context of what I said. It can be vague for various reasons; such as the Libyan President not wanting to get into too many specifics or b/c it's simply a poorly written article.

Now regard this dickface, instead of being a hack.

But "The situation is frightening, it scares us...." seems to sound the alarm. Also, seven heavily armed Americans were sent to regard the situation. So clearly there was "actionable intelligence" and we were lied to once again.

 

[J.E.D]

Yep, I read that passage. Maybe it's just me, but I see no specifics about this particular attack in that quote -- just a vague warning about growing tensions in the region. Perhaps you could point out the relevant passage for me? Thanks.

It is vague and I can't account for why.

I can -- they had no specifics.

But "The situation is frightening, it scares us...." seems to sound the alarm. Also, seven heavily armed Americans were sent to regard the situation. So clearly there was "actionable intelligence" and we were lied to once again.

Perhaps you don't understand what "actionable intelligence" implies. I'll give you a hint: it involves more than vague (your words) warnings. Saying that the US "lied" because they had only vague warnings is a bit unfair, no?

Hi, you have received -211 reputation points from TheGreatGatsby.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
If you ever give me such a hack response again; I\'ll just put your hack ass on ignore.

Regards,
TheGreatGatsby

pnwed

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Turns out that 72 hours before the attack of the Libyan Consulate in Bhengazi; US diplomats were warned of the impending attacks.

It turns out that you're thread title is misleading as your link proves nothing of the sort (big surprise). Nowhere in the article you cited does it say that Americans were warned of the attack; only that, "Mabrouk said it was not the first time he has warned foreigners about the worsening security situation in the face of the growing presence of armed jihadist groups in the Benghazi area".

I've read that quote over and over again and have yet to find the part where Americans were warned of this specific attack. Perhaps you could point it out for me? I'll wait

Look retard, 72 hours before the attack the Americans were warned that armed Jihadists were running in the area. That the local Command could not provide adequate protection. The response? Nothing, no additional security, no removal of non essential staff and the Ambassador was there.

Pretty damning to an intelligent non butt sniffing Obama's ass buffoon .

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

It is vague and I can't account for why.

I can -- they had no specifics.



Perhaps you don't understand what "actionable intelligence" implies. I'll give you a hint: it involves more than vague (your words) warnings. Saying that the US "lied" because they had only vague warnings is a bit unfair, no?

Hi, you have received -211 reputation points from TheGreatGatsby.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
If you ever give me such a hack response again; I\'ll just put your hack ass on ignore.

Regards,
TheGreatGatsby

pnwed

You got it. You're the latest loser to make my ignore list.

 

[hortysir]

Sounds strangely familiar:

"We had no actionable intelligence"

 

[Peach]

Bush on 9/11/01.

 

[hortysir]

Bush on 9/11/01.

And I can't count how many times that administration was lambasted over it.

Is it okay now that it's Obama's admin?

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

A warning is a fucking warning and let's not forget.. IT WAS 9-11-- WTF kind of brain-rotted idiot would ignore a warning and not beef up security on 9-11??????????????? LIBERAL WEASELS, that's who!! OBAMA IGNORED, PEOPLE DIED.

 

[J.E.D]

Turns out that 72 hours before the attack of the Libyan Consulate in Bhengazi; US diplomats were warned of the impending attacks.

It turns out that you're thread title is misleading as your link proves nothing of the sort (big surprise). Nowhere in the article you cited does it say that Americans were warned of the attack; only that, "Mabrouk said it was not the first time he has warned foreigners about the worsening security situation in the face of the growing presence of armed jihadist groups in the Benghazi area".

I've read that quote over and over again and have yet to find the part where Americans were warned of this specific attack. Perhaps you could point it out for me? I'll wait

Look retard, 72 hours before the attack the Americans were warned that armed Jihadists were running in the area. That the local Command could not provide adequate protection. The response? Nothing, no additional security, no removal of non essential staff and the Ambassador was there.

Pretty damning to an intelligent non butt sniffing Obama's ass buffoon .

Look, dumb ass, actionable intelligence is defined as, "Having the necessary information available in order to deal with a situation at hand".

Now, since there was only vague information about unrest in the region, -- in other words, no specific threat was made -- what this Libyan official said to US officials could not be defined as "actionable intelligence". What exactly was security at the consulate supposed to do when they had no verified information about a specific attack or attackers? And how is this Obama's fault as the idiot OP would have us believe?

Put down your hatred of this president and put on your smart helmet.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

Bush on 9/11/01.

It's 2012 BOZO.. Your lame ass attempt at trying to deflect responsibility for , 4 PEOPLE , Americans who were slaughtered FAILS..

 

[J.E.D]

i can -- they had no specifics.



Perhaps you don't understand what "actionable intelligence" implies. I'll give you a hint: It involves more than vague (your words) warnings. Saying that the us "lied" because they had only vague warnings is a bit unfair, no?

hi, you have received -211 reputation points from thegreatgatsby.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
If you ever give me such a hack response again; i\'ll just put your hack ass on ignore.

Regards,
thegreatgatsby

pnwed

you got it. You're the latest loser to make my ignore list.

ooooohhhh nnoooooo!!!!!

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

It turns out that you're thread title is misleading as your link proves nothing of the sort (big surprise). Nowhere in the article you cited does it say that Americans were warned of the attack; only that, "Mabrouk said it was not the first time he has warned foreigners about the worsening security situation in the face of the growing presence of armed jihadist groups in the Benghazi area".

I've read that quote over and over again and have yet to find the part where Americans were warned of this specific attack. Perhaps you could point it out for me? I'll wait

Look retard, 72 hours before the attack the Americans were warned that armed Jihadists were running in the area. That the local Command could not provide adequate protection. The response? Nothing, no additional security, no removal of non essential staff and the Ambassador was there.

Pretty damning to an intelligent non butt sniffing Obama's ass buffoon .

Look, dumb ass, actionable intelligence is defined as, "Having the necessary information available in order to deal with a situation at hand".

Now, since there was only vague information about unrest in the region, -- in other words, no specific threat was made -- what this Libyan official said to US officials could not be defined as "actionable intelligence". What exactly was security at the consulate supposed to do when they had no verified information about a specific attack or attackers? And how is this Obama's fault as the idiot OP would have us believe?

Put down your hatred of this president and put on your smart helmet.

Propaganda from the Zombie herd who apologize to the enemy who attacked and killed 4 Americans-- OBAMA IGNORED, PEOPLE DIED.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

ABSENT LEADERSHIP---> And on the night of 9-11 as Hussein slept, his Ambassador was drug through the streets, beaten, raped, and then slaughtered.

Obama was warned and chose not to beef up security and on 9-11 NO LESS.

The bucks stop with you Mr. President.

 

[tinydancer]

One would think that after that IED was thrown into the compounds perimeter on June 6th, that security would have been truly tightened.

And considering that AQ#2 who was just assassinated by a drone attack was a Libyan you'd think they'd really rachet up security.