Advertisement

Archive for Friday, October 26, 2012

Editorial: Libya questions

October 26, 2012

Advertisement

Have President Obama, Vice President Biden, Secretary of State Clinton and members of their inner circle deliberately lied or at least tried to mislead the American public about the deadly Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya?

Information now is available indicating the White House and top security officials knew of the attacks, with some individuals actually watching a live broadcast of the attack from drone video cameras. Also, emails report the attack was well-planned and carried out by terrorists, not a spontaneous mob in response to an anti-Muslim online film made in the United States.

The attack lasted seven hours, and a U.S. ambassador was killed along with three other Americans. No military assistance was ordered, which might have been possible from bases in Italy or from U.S. Navy vessels in the Mediterranean Sea.

For the next 14 days, Obama and his aides maintained the deadly action was merely a reaction to the film in question. They refused to acknowledge it was a terrorist attack, perhaps because Obama has made one of the pillars of his re-election effort that al-Qaida has been seriously wounded and is on the run — when, in fact, U.S. security and military officials point out that al-Qaida has been able to absorb and counter U.S. efforts and now is recovering and getting stronger in many areas.

Why hasn’t Obama been truthful, open and transparent about this deadly attack? What does he know and when did he know it? Is he trying to cover something up? Why has the so-called mainstream media been so helpful and defensive of the president?

The Nov. 6 election will be a national referendum on the Obama administration and his promise for openness and transparency, as well as on how the media have tried to protect and cover for the president.

The only news organization that has had the courage to seriously question the president is Fox News, which has been unrelenting in pointing out serious misstatements, errors or lies in the claims and facts offered by the president, vice president, his United Nations ambassador and others.

If this had been a George W. Bush fiasco or a situation such as Watergate, the mainstream media would have been going nuts. Watergate was about a bungled robbery and Richard Nixon not coming clean with the public.

The Benghazi attack resulted in an ambassador and three other Americans being killed. It showed U.S. officials had refused to supply added security personnel requested by the embassy staff before the attacks and, after the attacks, it took 14 days for the White House to acknowledge it was a terrorist action.

Compare the media reaction to Watergate to that of Benghazi. Didn’t Obama learn anything from Nixon about not telling the truth?

Did Obama pin his hopes on a friendly media and the assumption that any congressional investigation of the matter couldn’t provide answers until after the Nov. 6 election?

The big question is how can the public have confidence in the honesty of the president, particularly when he has made so much of being open and transparent in all of his actions, when he purposefully delays, obfuscates or lies about this deadly and embarrassing attack?

Also, what does this say about the media?

Comments

Richard Heckler 2 years, 2 months ago

When did the LJW fry Bush/Cheney/Rice/Rummy over 9/11/01?

How in the world do you explain how 15 known terrorists were allowed to get by the Bush administration and take over 4 large jumbo jets simultaneously and kill over 3000 americans inside the borders of the USA?

These 15 were known to be living in Maryland a few blocks from NSA headquarters. They were known to be taking flying lessons only learning to take off and not landing....in the USA.

9/11/01 terrorists pulled off this shocking endeavor without nuclear warheads and the fastest jet bombers in the world. They had razor blades aka box knives.

What in the world were Bush,Cheney,Rice and Rummy doing? Why did they not assign an FBI terrorists surveillance team to this group 24/7.

The group in Libya was not the Taliban or the al qaeda. This group was many many thousands of miles away from the USA. People like this kill our soldiers everyday but that is okay...... this time an ambassador was killed but this is not okay.

Bring the troops home and take the USA mercenaries off the payroll. People abroad cannot appreciate the war for oil as it kills many many many thousands of innocent women,children and men who are not terrorists. Among those innocent being killed are our soldiers.

Flap Doodle 2 years, 2 months ago

"...President Obama, perhaps preoccupied with his upcoming Las Vegas fundraiser, met with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Vice President Joe Biden in the Oval Office at 5 p.m. ET, a little more than an hour after the onset of the attack. He could have given the order but did not, even after an email, in which the al-Qaida-tied group Ansar al-Sharia claimed responsibility, arrived at 6:07 p.m. ET to a distribution list that included the White House Situation Room. A Special Operations force went from central Europe to Naval Air Station Sigonella in southern Italy, just 480 miles from Benghazi. F-16s and Apache helicopters remained parked and unused at Aviano Air Base in northern Italy. Two Navy destroyers already in the Mediterranean Sea were moved off the coast of Libya on the day of the attack but were never used. The question is: Why not? Some suggest that sending nearby AC-130 gunships or Apaches would have been futile because in the chaos they couldn't have identified the attackers and might have hit innocents. A few well-timed machine gun bursts at nowhere in particular would have been sufficient to disperse the jihadists. We know there was no protest mob in the way and certainly we could have plucked those two heroic SEALs off the annex roof. But to send help would have acknowledged it was a terrorist attack. It would have destroyed Team Obama's campaign mantra that Osama bin Laden was dead, al-Qaida was destroyed and the Arab Spring was in full bloom. Better to blame a filmmaker and his obscure video..." Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/102512-630874-no-marines-with-bayonets-at-benghazi.htm#ixzz2AP84WSx2

cowboy 2 years, 2 months ago

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/17/1145757/-Libya-Another-Act-of-Terror-Obama-s-Rose-Garden-Speech-9-12-2012

Video of Obamas statements the day after attack.

The writer , Dolph , displays his complete ignorance of the actual event , much as Romney did during the second debate with the above editorial. The desperate behavior of low information voters such as this writer has brought out many conspiracy theories the past day in an attempt to make something of nothing. How pathetic these attempts are. Issa's " investigation" has again exposed operatives in Libya whose lives are in danger due to the indiscriminate release of classified cables.

Politicizing the deaths of American personnel is the lowest form of politics and the LJW's publisher spewing this drivel is an embarrassment.

cowboy 2 years, 2 months ago

The video speaks for itself , the father , obviously grief stricken understandably , states that the option of strikes from the air could have killed innocents complicated the possible response. The rabble rousers Glenn "batsh!t crazy " Beck and Rush , and will continue to pound this drum hoping to stir up some manure. To actually think that the president would get down to the level of approving a couple more security personnel is ludicrous. There may be some responsibility laid at some low level as the facts come out but the truth is these are risky situations and they can explode at any moment , blaming the victims instead of the instigators seems a common republican MO these days.

You might notice that the only sites promoting this are the known whack job right bloggers. Tells you a lot.

notajayhawk 2 years, 1 month ago

"much as Romney did during the second debate"

Must have been past cowboy's bedtime when the moderator admitted she made a mistake and that Romney was actually correct.

notajayhawk 2 years, 1 month ago

Ho hum - bozo ignores reality because it's not what Rachel Madkow told him to believe.

jimmyjms 2 years, 2 months ago

When did the "award winning" LJW turn the regular editorials over to Dolph? This piece is muddled, factually inaccurate, and blindly partisan.

Psst, Dolph: Condi Rice disagrees with you:

http://mobile.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/10/25/condi-rice-downplays-benghazi-criticism

Phillbert 2 years, 2 months ago

And Dolph has become a full-fledged member of the Tin Foil Hat Brigade. Maybe he's hoping Rupert Murdoch will buy what's left of the LJW after he's done running it into the ground.

Phillbert 2 years, 1 month ago

I guess all that "growth" is why the paper gets smaller and smaller, they've laid off reporters, and they just emptied out their bigger building downtown and put it up for rent.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 2 years, 2 months ago

What happened is quite clear-- the Libyan dictator was deposed, leaving a security vacuum in that country, with lots of heavily-armed militias, some of them quite radical in their desire to inflict harm on foreigners, especially Americans, who they believe, with good reason, are at war with Arabs and Muslims. One of those militias attacked the US consulate and overran the security forces that were there to protect it, killing four Americans (along with several of the Libyan security forces attempting to defend them.)

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 2 years, 2 months ago

"why wasn't there more security at the consulate?"

Hindsight says the ambassador should have been living in a heavily guarded bunker, or not in Libya at all. But he chose to be highly visible and engaged with the Libyan people, the vast majority of whom appreciated his efforts. He paid the price.

Everything else you refer to is nothing but the same partisan crap purely for the sake of partisanship, which is sadly what the Republican Party has devolved to over the last 30 years.

notajayhawk 2 years, 1 month ago

"What happened is quite clear-- the Libyan dictator was deposed, leaving a security vacuum in that country, with lots of heavily-armed militias, some of them quite radical in their desire to inflict harm on foreigners, especially Americans, who they believe, with good reason, are at war with Arabs and Muslims."

Putting aside for a moment that Odumbo is largely responsible for that vacuum after acting (unilaterally, without Congressional notification) to depose Khadaffi, and that he did it in typical liberal hit-and-run-smile-for-the-cameras fashion, leaving nobody in charge, who, exactly, is responsible for the Libyans' beliefs about America? I thought the Nobel apology-prize winner had improved our image and made peace with our noble Arab brethren. (When they're burning Obama in effigy, bozo, do you think it's because they can't tell the difference in appearence between Obama and Bush?)

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 2 years, 1 month ago

We can argue the wisdom of aiding the Libyans in overthrowing Ghaddafi, or the way it was implemented, but Romney is advocating doing exactly the same thing in Syria, which will create exactly the same security vacuum that could imperial any US personnel who are there, and Romney would be equally helpless in providing the iron clad security you now want to pillory Obama for not providing in Libya.

But I understand that your concern is the promotion of a juvenile game of partisanship, and the actual policy couldn't matter less to you.

Ken Lassman 2 years, 2 months ago

Or could it be that they are doing what they say they are doing: gathering the facts, identifying the perpetrators and preparing to bring them to justice? Could it be that unlike media representations of such investigations, these things take time and are not/should not be done under the lights of the media and turned into the political circus that the Republicans want it to become?

Too bad the timing tempts the Republicans: it's tantalizing to jump to conclusion before the process plays itself out legitimately, but it's also wrong to do so, and I'd say that even if it had occurred during a similar time before the Gore-Bush campaign or any other presidential race you want to choose. There may be legitimate missteps and illegitimate coverups, or there may have not been--it's really too early to come to an informed conclusion either way. But it is clear that jumping to conclusions right now is just so much political grandstanding, which has characterized too much of this campaign season.

notajayhawk 2 years, 1 month ago

"Your comments are nothing but partisan crap.

"

Mr. Pot? Mr. bozo Pot? Your call to Mr. Kettle is holding on line one.

repaste 2 years, 2 months ago

"Also, what does this say about the media?" Self awareness is a wonderful goal. Dolf = media.

jhawkinsf 2 years, 2 months ago

Here's my prediction. After the election and Obama wins, it will come out that there are many questions that have been left unanswered. Republicans will launch full scale investigations. Democrats will stall. Republicans will subpoena and Democrats will claim executive privilege. Threats of impeachment will be made. The administration will suggest the impeachment threat is racially motivated.

Meanwhile, nothing will get done in Washington. The business of running the country will take a back seat to this drama. The deficit will rise. The economy will recover, ever so slowly. We'll muddle along in foreign policy, with no real direction. Then, four years from now, Democrats will blame Republicans and Republicans will blame Democrats. We'll all be four years older though none of us will seemingly be four years wiser. Let the election of 2016 begin.

Flap Doodle 2 years, 1 month ago

"...After the election and Obama wins..." You go off the tracks at that point.

beatrice 2 years, 1 month ago

And in four years, Iran will be four years closer to having a flux capicitor.

oldbaldguy 2 years, 1 month ago

this was a screw up, they happen in every administration. i doubt that anybody could have rode to the rescue of the ambassador in time to save him. there should have been a large security force in libya or no one should have been posted at the consulate in benghazi.

John Hamm 2 years, 1 month ago

And the Liberals continue their Lemming Like march ignoring facts, documentations, videos and eMail calling them fabrications, irrelevant or "well you're just stupid to think that."

notajayhawk 2 years, 1 month ago

Good editorial, but sadly a waste of time. Unfortunately, the readers of this newspaper predominantly ARE the 47% that Romney was talking about. Obama could go on TV tonight and say "I lied, I knew it was an attack, I knew beforehand and did nothing to defend them, and now, because I'm a coward, I'm not going to do anything in retribution either," and the pablum eaters would immediately find a way to blame Bush, praise Obama for his honesty, and insist they knew this all along but that it's all irrelevant.

Luckily, as always, their voices and votes are what's really irrelevant.

beatrice 2 years, 1 month ago

And Romney could tell us he hides his money in offshore accounts in the Cayman Islands in order to avoid paying taxes, and plenty of Republicans would still vote for him.

Oh wait...

somedude20 2 years, 1 month ago

"They refused to acknowledge it was a terrorist attack" Big Fat Lie....make the fat lie do push-ups until it becomes the truth

and in other news: "House Republicans cut the administration’s request for embassy security funding by $128 million in fiscal 2011 and $331 million in fiscal 2012....Last year, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned that Republicans’ proposed cuts to her department would be “detrimental to America’s national security” — a charge Republicans rejected. Ryan, Issa and other House Republicans voted for an amendment in 2009 to cut $1.2 billion from State operations, including funds for 300 more diplomatic security positions. Under Ryan’s budget, non-defense discretionary spending, which includes State Department funding, would be slashed nearly 20 percent in 2014, which would translate to more than $400 million in additional cuts to embassy security."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/19/1147325/-House-GOP-Paul-Ryan-Cut-400M-from-Embassy-Safety-Funding

Trumbull 2 years, 1 month ago

I watched the video. Seems to support there is no cover up. He said information is still being gathered, and it was not just the result of a mob action.

I suppose others can watch and decide for themselves.

jafs 2 years, 1 month ago

Yep.

I watched it too - seems like a very straightforward and reasonable thing to say under the circumstances.

Wonder how they get conspiracy theories out of it?

notajayhawk 2 years, 1 month ago

Don't bother, Jonas. It's not as if they'll peel their hands back from their eyes to look. If you really want to see their tiny little heads explode, ask why - if Obama knew it was more than a mob action the next day, as he claims - he criticized Romney for calling it an attack, and he hasn't done a damned thing about it almost six weeks later. Maybe his position will "evolve" and he'll give us a nice little bombing raid the night before the election.

Trumbull 2 years, 1 month ago

How do you know he hasn't done a damned thing about it? Do you talk regularly with the President?

You are caught up in this Lybia openning. The GOP's big chance to take a terrible event and use it for political advantage. In the video, President Obama say's this was more than a mob action and that more evidence is being gathered. Has it occured to you that releasing information to the public might not be wise when you are running down the bad guys? There may be more to it than you realize.

notajayhawk 2 years, 1 month ago

"Big Fat Lie....make the fat lie do push-ups until it becomes the truth"

Boy, the irony just drips right off the page coming from someone citing the Daily Kos. lolol

jafs 2 years, 1 month ago

There is one valid question buried in the morass of partisan nonsense, and attempts to blame Obama.

It is "If embassy personnel requested more security, why wasn't it provided, and who made that decision?"

Obviously, funding plays some part, but there are also decisions to be made, and an obviously dangerous place would seem to need more security than one that's not obviously dangerous - it's just common sense.

Richard Heckler 2 years, 1 month ago

Clinton advised BUSHCO of the 9/11/01 people whom were suspect. Had the FBI been given the authority 9/11/01 likely would have been disabled. The FBI is quite capable.

The war for oil control is fueling hard feelings toward the USA and likely was fueling 9/11/01 and likely fueled the Libya incident and Yemen bombing of USA military barracks.

Our solders and their families are paying a high price for the effort known as war for oil control.

Richard Heckler 2 years, 1 month ago

The Iraq to Israel oil pipeline is likely creating hard feelings toward the USA gov't and Israel.

The plan envisages the reconstruction of an old pipeline, inactive since the end of the British mandate in Palestine in 1948, when the flow from Iraq's northern oilfields to Palestine was re-directed to Syria.

Now, its resurrection would transform economic power in the region, bringing revenue to the new US-dominated Iraq, cutting out Syria and solving Israel's energy crisis at a stroke.

It would also create an end less and easily accessible source of cheap Iraqi oil for the US guaranteed by reliable allies other than Saudi Arabia - a keystone of US foreign policy for decades and especially since 11 September 2001.

Until 1948, the pipeline ran from the Kurdish-controlled city of Mosul to the Israeli port of Haifa, on its northern Mediterranean coast.

The revival of the pipeline was first discussed openly by the Israeli Minister for National Infrastructures, Joseph Paritzky, according to the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz .

The paper quotes Paritzky as saying that the pipeline would cut Israel's energy bill drastically - probably by more than 25 per cent - since the country is currently largely dependent on expensive imports from Russia.

US intelligence sources confirmed to The Observer that the project has been discussed. One former senior CIA official said: 'It has long been a dream of a powerful section of the people now driving this administration [of President George W. Bush] and the war in Iraq to safeguard Israel's energy supply as well as that of the United States.

'The Haifa pipeline was something that existed, was resurrected as a dream and is now a viable project - albeit with a lot of building to do.'

The editor-in-chief of the Middle East Economic Review , Walid Khadduri, says in the current issue of Jane's Foreign Report that 'there's not a metre of it left, at least in Arab territory'.

To resurrect the pipeline would need the backing of whatever government the US is to put in place in Iraq, and has been discussed - according to Western diplomatic sources - con't http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/apr/20/israelandthepalestinians.oil

Flap Doodle 2 years, 1 month ago

Is a nine year old article about a pipeline in another country off-topic for a column about Libya? I say YES!

Richard Heckler 2 years, 1 month ago

The question becomes why are any USA diplomats stationed in these war zones? The angry people cannot attack the CIA,Dept of Defense or congress which makes all other USA officials a target of the angry people.

The Libyan people cannot be all that excited over having family members killed anymore than our soldiers are excited about killing their innocent children,women and men.

Would any of us want to be living in Libya watching tons of death and destruction? viewing our children being mutilated by weapons of mass destruction?

There is no evidence that additional security would have prevented this Libyan incident. That is an assumption pure and simple.

Flap Doodle 2 years, 1 month ago

There may have been AC-130s in Libya that were not allowed to support the consulate. The current resident of 1600 Penn. Ave. wrote off American lives and fled to a fund-raiser in Vegas.

beatrice 2 years, 1 month ago

What a shame all these GOP junior detectives now active on this thread weren't on the case when America was being told about WMDs. Just think of the American lives that could have been saved.

beatrice 2 years, 1 month ago

When all else fails, blame Clinton. Got it.

beatrice 2 years, 1 month ago

Why, if it were my son I would hope Mitt Romney would make a political issue out of it rather than respecting his sacrifice and service to the country. After all, presidents are supposed to keep all Americans safe all around the world at all times. When Americans are killed in other countries, it is a perfect time for finger pointing and division, just as Romney has proven.

beatrice 2 years, 1 month ago

You mean, like be the president when the largest terrorist attack on American soil took place? Yes, I'll be honest -- I didn't think it was a time to score political points by blaming the president for something he likely couldn't have stopped. I thought it a time for Americans to come together against those who would want to harm us.

Flap Doodle 2 years, 1 month ago

The 9/1/01 attacks didn't go on for seven hours, now did they?

jafs 2 years, 1 month ago

No they didn't.

And, they killed far more people.

What's your point?

beatrice 2 years, 1 month ago

Romney made a lot of money as a business man, so of course he knows about foreign political affairs!

Armstrong 2 years, 1 month ago

As proven by his thrashing of Barry in the three debates. Thanks for pointing that out bea.

Armstrong 2 years, 1 month ago

You have zero credebility in anything you post. Stay off Mom and Dads computer

Trumbull 2 years, 1 month ago

"The attack lasted seven hours, and a U.S. ambassador was killed along with three other Americans. No military assistance was ordered, which might have been possible from bases in Italy or from U.S. Navy vessels in the Mediterranean Sea."

FOX is really harping on this. Can someone advise what could have been done to assist with a time period of seven hours? Has a rescue/aid mission like this ever been done in such a short time span?

Centerville 2 years, 1 month ago

Obama did say, as he glanced at those barbarians streaming into the compound, 'Don't shoot back. We will investigate and find out who is doing this and bring them to justice." So, see, everything's fine.

Trumbull 2 years, 1 month ago

Politicians have been using the events in Libya since the conflict began to critique the current administration. Any event, outcome, action taken, or non-action, can and will be used. I do not trust or believe FOX or the GOP's spin and conspiracy on any matter now-days. It began with the WMD (which makes Libya miniscule by comparison), the conduct of the GOP during the debt ceiling crisis, their obstructionism makes me think of them as villians and traitors to the US.

As just a small glimpse of an example, just take a look here at Newt, and his Libya advice. Are we to trust the likes of them?

Liberty275 2 years, 1 month ago

I really don't understand why we were hearing about a video days after the attack. I'm not sure Obama could have effectively thwarted this attack, but the administration should have come clean a lot sooner than it did.

Obama has been surprisingly effectively at foreign policy and protecting Americans abroad, but he really dropped the ball on this one. IMO, the ball was dropped every minute we had an ambassador in a virtual war zone without a company of marines.

Hindsight is 20/20

FUWBG 2 years, 1 month ago

Do you want to know why security at the Benghazi consulate was diminished? Are you curious why the "hired security" guards weren't among those killed in the attack? Are you wondering what's really being covered up? What if........

This should really get you libs fired up!!!

Centerville 2 years, 1 month ago

Sorry, libs, but the news this morning isn't any better. And all the rest of us: think of how this would have played out even 15 year ago (or even three years ago in that love-is-blind atmosphere), if all we had were liberal press stooges in charge of everything we learn about it. Timing is everything and this episode reveals our president for all that he is.

Centerville 2 years, 1 month ago

FUWBG: Maybe this also explains Obama/Biden's grade-school rudeness toward the SEALs' families.

Centerville 2 years, 1 month ago

There was an armed drone and an armed, of course, C-130 in the vicinity. One of the SEALs had fixed the target for them. These strikes are surgical. It's been suggested that Zip didn't want to hurt any innocent bystanders, I defy anyone to say there was anyone innocent in that crowd of vermin.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.