What You Probably Have Not Heard About Libya

[BigRob]

We have all heard the back and forth on security in Libya -- Democrats pushed the line that Republicans are hypocrites because they voted to cut (spend more than the year before but less than what was requested) funding for embassy security.

Democrats have been up in arms about this as a response, and flipping on the news tonight I saw Chris Matthews (and his two Democratic guests) making the same point.

Here is what you probably have not heard (and won't hear) from any Democrat pushing this argument:

• State Department officials testified before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that extending duty tours for security (ie more security) in Libya would have had no impact on the outcome.
• A a deputy assistant secretary in the Bureau of Diplomatic Security testified that budget considerations played no role in additional security considerations for Libya.

There you have -- admissions from the State Department that the budget issue was irrelevant in this case, and even if more security was in place, it would have had no impact.

Now, with that said -- here is what we will hear from people who try to use this issue to distract from the disaster that it was:

• Republicans are hypocrites.

 

[dogtowner]

I cannot believe HRClinton still has a job (or is not in a cell somewhere)

a particularly sad and sickening moment on our history

 

[BigRob]

Apparently in the House Foreign Affairs Committee today a Democratic Congressman passionately argued yet again that this was all the fault of Republicans for cutting funding (I'll look for the quote and video) -- never mind that the State Department is already on record stating that was not a relevant factor.

Guess his staff didn't get him the memo.

 

[Cruella]

Apparently in the House Foreign Affairs Committee today a Democratic Congressman passionately argued yet again that this was all the fault of Republicans for cutting funding (I'll look for the quote and video) -- never mind that the State Department is already on record stating that was not a relevant factor.

Guess his staff didn't get him the memo.

Hillary has 2 billion sitting in her account, it's not about the money

What they were using for security in Benghazi were Libyans, and I read where they had been arranged for by the Brits. I would like to know what kind of firepower they had, it was said they only had pistols.????

 

[Dr.Who]

I hate to help Obama but I suspect this is the elephant no one is talking about:

Hasn't it become pretty obvious by now that the ambassador was really a spy and the whole thing was the result of a prisoner exchange or whatever gone bad? The state department may be responsible for protecting its ambassadors but the CIA generally leaves its spies to fend for themselves.

 

[dogtowner]

Hillary has 2 billion sitting in her account, it's not about the money

What they were using for security in Benghazi were Libyans, and I read where they had been arranged for by the Brits. I would like to know what kind of firepower they had, it was said they only had pistols.????

doesnt matter they turn tail faster than straw hats through a mule. probably changed 'sides' almost immediatly. cheap unskilled foreign labor...

 

[dogtowner]

I hate to help Obama but I suspect this is the elephant no one is talking about:

Hasn't it become pretty obvious by now that the ambassador was really a spy and the whole thing was the result of a prisoner exchange or whatever gone bad? The state department may be responsible for protecting its ambassadors but the CIA generally leaves its spies to fend for themselves.

a spook would not be doing work like that in the black house.

i'm guessing general incompetance, the hallmark of this administration.

 

[Cruella]

I hate to help Obama but I suspect this is the elephant no one is talking about:

Hasn't it become pretty obvious by now that the ambassador was really a spy and the whole thing was the result of a prisoner exchange or whatever gone bad? The state department may be responsible for protecting its ambassadors but the CIA generally leaves its spies to fend for themselves.

There was a CIA outlet about a mile up the road. That's where the two x-Marines came from. Infact, Stevens sent emails suggesting to Hillary and Co., that he thought it would be a good idea for them to move up there, because he didn't feel safe where he was.

There are rumors that Stevens was running weapons to Syria and the CIA was holding and questening (torturing) radical Islamic suspects.

 

[BigRob]

Hillary has 2 billion sitting in her account, it's not about the money

What they were using for security in Benghazi were Libyans, and I read where they had been arranged for by the Brits. I would like to know what kind of firepower they had, it was said they only had pistols.????

The broader aim was to use contractors and try to turn as much security as possible over the Libya -- its cheaper that way, and it follows a model they have used in other hot spots in the Middle East -- like Yemen.

 

[BigRob]

I hate to help Obama but I suspect this is the elephant no one is talking about:

Hasn't it become pretty obvious by now that the ambassador was really a spy and the whole thing was the result of a prisoner exchange or whatever gone bad? The state department may be responsible for protecting its ambassadors but the CIA generally leaves its spies to fend for themselves.

If it is accurate he was involved in some CIA mission (and this is not proven at all), then it brings to light two main issues for me:

1) If he was acting as a CIA agent, then fair is fair -- he is a legitimate target.
2) How did the people who attacked the consultant find out? Who leaked the info?

Number two is frankly more important than number one.

 

[Johnny Tremain]

I cannot believe HRClinton still has a job (or is not in a cell somewhere)

a particularly sad and sickening moment on our history

A product of placing a profoundly stupid, arrogant and haughty bitch in a position of power.
She has NEVER EVER been anything but that.
And a leech riding on the back of a sex pervert to climb the old ladder of "success".
A pox on them both.

They are both everything bad modern American society can vomit up.

 

[Dr.Who]

If it is accurate he was involved in some CIA mission (and this is not proven at all), then it brings to light two main issues for me:

1) If he was acting as a CIA agent, then fair is fair -- he is a legitimate target.
2) How did the people who attacked the consultant find out? Who leaked the info?

Number two is frankly more important than number one.

In defending Rice the admin said that she put out the official non-classified CIA story. Meaning of course that there is another story - the truth. And if the story was one from the CIA that would seem to imply that it was a CIA action. Somewhere I heard it was a prisoner exchange. If that is true then that explains #2 since you can't exchange prisoners without setting up a meeting with the other side.

What is clear is that Obama has been lying about this from the beginning. Now the question is was his lie part of national security or political?

 

[Johnny Tremain]

In defending Rice the admin said that she put out the official non-classified CIA story. Meaning of course that there is another story - the truth. And if the story was one from the CIA that would seem to imply that it was a CIA action. Somewhere I heard it was a prisoner exchange. If that is true then that explains #2 since you can't exchange prisoners without setting up a meeting with the other side.

What is clear is that Obama has been lying about this from the beginning. Now the question is was his lie part of national security or political?

What the hell is the obsession by the Obama-ites about defending Rice?
WHO the hell is she?
Obama almost called McCain out for a fist-fight on this.
A sexist tirade that would have sent a Republican to feminist hell.

What devious plan do they have that she is some nefarious minion in?
She does not impress in any way whatsoever!

 

[Dr.Who]

What the hell is the obsession by the Obama-ites about defending Rice?
WHO the hell is she?
Obama almost called McCain out for a fist-fight on this.
A sexist tirade that would have sent a Republican to feminist hell.

What devious plan do they have that she is some nefarious minion in?
She does not impress in any way whatsoever!

It would appear that she agreed to carry the water by going on TV and repeating a lie in exchange for a new position. It would also seem that McCain would like his friend Kerry to have that position as Sec of State. McCain called a press conference just before Obamas to make Rice look bad for being dishonest and he told Obama straight out that he should not consider her for the position.

 

[Johnny Tremain]

It would appear that she agreed to carry the water by going on TV and repeating a lie in exchange for a new position. It would also seem that McCain would like his friend Kerry to have that position as Sec of State. McCain called a press conference just before Obamas to make Rice look bad for being dishonest and he told Obama straight out that he should not consider her for the position.

I would not choose Kerry--he is so accident-prone--hell--he got 86 Purples Hearts in his 6 months in The Nam.