Benghazi attack - Terrorists or unruly crowd?

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

That it WAS a 'spontaneous' thing-a-bobber? Which on the face of it is a crazy argument anyway, and his comment was ludicrous.

I agree that it is relatively minor, but his behavior through this whole thing is mystifying. Will you call him and tell him to clean this up?

Pete

Sorry but that latest report out of Libya is that it was a spontaneos affair and that the salfists or al queda simply took advantage of the demonstration that was beginning. Any more tempests for your teapot?

[merrylander]

But John, Romney is a bishop, surely he would not play dirty?

[piece-itpete]

I was going to capitalize 'relatively'. Compared to say the war in Afghanistan or 9-11, it is.

You guys can hem and haw if you wish, the Pres has handled it poorly regardless...

I don't like butter on both sides Bob, it gets all over your hands

Pete

[whell]

Originally Posted by Boreas

As the facts are assembled, it's looking like it began as a more or less spontaneous demonstration, inspired by the one in Egypt. Then (probably) the Ansar al-Shariah used the demonstration as a cover for a guerrilla attack on the consulate. The guerrilla attack was also inspired by the video.*

So, what we have is an effort on the part of the Administration to keep the country informed on the situation, within the confines of national security considerations, when and as information became available.

The fact of the matter is NOBODY in the Administration EVER said anything which was incorrect. They just gave us the information piecemeal. The Right, especially Romney, chose to politicize the issue. If the Administration had waited until they had all the facts assembled before issuing a public statement the Right would have politicized that too by condemning them for their silence.

The Right plays the game SO dirty that it's a profound mystery to me that anyone supports you.

John

* Someone, I think it was MPHolland, recently pointed out that I said virtually the same thing at the time of the event, except, given the date and given that the Administration had just taken out yet another al Qaeda #2 who was Libyan, I wrongly assumed that it was an al Qaeda "anniversary party". It was a pretty lucky guess.

Another one of your factually challenged posts.

First, the response from everyone from the Administration to Intelligence to the SOS had been all over the map from the get go. The last official statement from James Clapper called the attack "a deliberate and organized terrorist attack carried out by extremists."

Second, the statement from "American Intelligence Officials" simply suggests that there is a lack of intelligence on whether the attack was pre-planned or whether it was spontaneous. After more than 30 days, I find that lack of information the most disturbing news of all.

Third, its worth noting that the military and the FBI couldn't get their act together to get the FBI investigative team into Benghazi until October 4th. With the "crime scene" unsecured 3 weeks and no opportunity to timely interview witnesses, one wonders what useful intelligence the investigation might yield anyway.

Finally, while those same intelligence officials revised their statements suggesting a lack of evidence about a coordinated attack, they also saw fit to caution that this "new" position could change as more information became available. This would be in line with the "all over the map" communications we've had on this to date.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/us...-scrutiny.html

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by whell

Another one of your factually challenged posts.

First, the response from everyone from the Administration to Intelligence to the SOS had been all over the map from the get go. The last official statement from James Clapper called the attack "a deliberate and organized terrorist attack carried out by extremists."

Second, the statement from "American Intelligence Officials" simply suggests that there is a lack of intelligence on whether the attack was pre-planned or whether it was spontaneous. After more than 30 days, I find that lack of information the most disturbing news of all.

Third, its worth noting that the military and the FBI couldn't get their act together to get the FBI investigative team into Benghazi until October 4th. With the "crime scene" unsecured 3 weeks and no opportunity to timely interview witnesses, one wonders what useful intelligence the investigation might yield anyway.

Finally, while those same intelligence officials revised their statements suggesting a lack of evidence about a coordinated attack, they also saw fit to caution that this "new" position could change as more information became available. This would be in line with the "all over the map" communications we've had on this to date.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/us...-scrutiny.html

Nothing in the article you linked to, and certainly nothing in your post, contradicts anything I've said.

“A demand for an explanation that is quick, definite and unchanging reflects a naïve expectation — or in the present case, irresponsible politicking,” James R. Clapper Jr., the director of national intelligence, said at an intelligence symposium on Oct. 9.

And this is exactly what the Right was demanding from the very first hours after the attack. No, they're not "naive". They're callously opportunistic and counting on the naivete of the American people.

So, whell, are you naive or are you callously opportunistic?

John

[whell]

Originally Posted by Boreas

So, whell, are you naive or are you callously opportunistic?

John

I don't know. Do you still beat your wife?

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by whell

I don't know. Do you still beat your wife?

That was weak, whell. Scraping bottom? Ducking once again?

[Wasillaguy]

Oops! Someone (everyone) forgot to mention the extremists who claimed responsibility like 2 hours after it started.

[bhunter]

Originally Posted by Wasillaguy

Oops! Someone (everyone) forgot to mention the extremists who claimed responsibility like 2 hours after it started.

I'm sure there will be an excuse for the administration changing the emphasis to a movie trailer.

(Reuters) - Officials at the White House and State Department were advised two hours after attackers assaulted the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11 that an Islamic militant group had claimed credit for the attack, official emails show.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...89N02C20121024

[Wasillaguy]

Never let a crisis go to waste, right?
Hype it all up and try to gain support for regulating the internet. Free speech is the problem.