CIA Agents On The Ground In Benghazi Were Denied Requests For Assistance

On the night of the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, CIA agents on the ground sent word back to Washington asking for assistance, requests that were largely ignored:

Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. consulate and subsequent attack several hours later on the annex itself was denied by the CIA chain of command — who also told the CIA operators twice to “stand down” rather than help the ambassador’s team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.

Former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods was part of a small team who was at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When he and others heard the shots fired, they informed their higher-ups at the annex to tell them what they were hearing and requested permission to go to the consulate and help out. They were told to “stand down,” according to sources familiar with the exchange. Soon after, they were again told to “stand down.”

Woods and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the consulate which at that point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The rescue team from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight.

At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Spectre gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights. The fighting at the CIA annex went on for more than four hours — enough time for any planes based in Sigonella Air base, just 480 miles away, to arrive. Fox News has also learned that two separate Tier One Special operations forces were told to wait, among them Delta Force operators.

It also appears that officials back in Washington were monitoring the entire attack during the seven hours over which it unfolded:

Fox News has learned that there were two military surveillance drones redirected to Benghazi shortly after the attack on the consulate began. They were already in the vicinity. The second surveillance craft was sent to relieve the first drone, perhaps due to fuel issues. Both were capable of sending real time visuals back to U.S. officials in Washington, D.C. Any U.S. official or agency with the proper clearance, including the White House Situation Room, State Department, CIA, Pentagon and others, could call up that video in real time on their computers.

Meanwhile, the family’s of the four men who died are starting to speak out about the manner in which this entire event has been handled:


When it’s been nearly two months and we still haven’t gotten a straight story, it’s hard not to sympathize with Mr. Woods.

Update: Jake Tapper at ABC News has a report of his own on this news.

FILED UNDER: National Security, Quick Takes, Terrorism, ,
Doug Mataconis
About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May 2010. Before joining OTB, he wrote at Below The BeltwayThe Liberty Papers, and United Liberty Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. michael reynolds says:

    Get back to me when an actual news source has something to say.

  2. Geek, Esq. says:

    Tapper is just quoting Fox News.

    On Friday, Fox News Channel’s Jennifer Griffin reported that sources on the ground in Benghazi told her “that three urgent requests from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. Consulate and subsequent attack nearly seven hours later were denied by officials in the CIA chain of command — who also told the CIA operators to ‘stand down’ rather than help the ambassador’s team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.”

    Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on Thursday addressed the “Monday morning quarterbacking” about why the U.S. military didn’t act sooner. He said military assets had been moved, but that the attack on the consulate in Benghazi was over before there was enough good information about what had actually happened. Not knowing exactly what was going on had he and other military leaders feel that “we could not put forces at risk in that situation”

    On Benghazi, Tapper has largely been following Fox News, Breitbart and TheBlaze for his cues.

  3. michael reynolds says:

    @Doug Mataconis:
    Unless I missed something that was not a second source, it was a story about a grieving man reacting to the same Fox report.

    Show me NYT or one of the networks or one of the better UK papers and it may be interesting. “News” from Fox? Fox does news like Pravda did news.

  4. Michael,

    You’re right, unless it comes from MSNBC or Al Gore’s silly little network it’s not really news, right?

  5. I just find it amusing that all the Obama defenders are willing to accept the government’s incoherent version of events, and not at all willing to consider the possibility that they screwed up and are trying to cover that fact up.

    If this was Bush, you people would be all over it (as would I)

  6. Geek, Esq. says:

    As opposed to the “Obama killed Ambassador Stevens” line you’re helping promote here via Fox&Co.

    Also, nice of you to amplify and distort even the Fox News spin on this.

    Fox News ‘reported’:

    Both were capable of sending real time visuals back to U.S. officials in Washington, D.C. Any U.S. official or agency with the proper clearance, including the White House Situation Room, State Department, CIA, Pentagon and others, could call up that video in real time on their computers.

    So, there COULD have been a video signal sent of the attack, which COULD have been monitored.

    What does Doug report:

    It also appears that officials back in Washington were monitoring the entire attack during the seven hours over which it unfolded:

    I know you really, really want to find a way to blame this on the President, but really.

  7. Modulo Myself says:

    But there was assistance coming. An American team had landed at the airport, amidst much confusion, after the first attack. So this isn’t about Obama’s response. It’s about proportion and what they thought would work versus the consequences of overreaction.

    Fox’s audience is basically of the opinion that there should have been gunships firing away and carpet bombing and who knows what else. Maybe there should have been–but pretending that it was a major obvious screw up by the Obama administration not to turn the area into a charnel house is basically a way of saying Obama hates America.

    The people who died that day where all professionals. They died horribly but they also know what they were getting into. I doubt in their more rational moments that any of these men believed that anything should go when their lives stood on the line.
    .

  8. Gromitt Gunn says:

    @Doug Mataconis: I’m willing to listen to Condi Rice http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/10/25/1089691/condi-rice-pours-cold-water-libya/

    Or does she not have enough insight into the workings of the State Dept?

  9. Geek, Esq. says:

    Also, requests were not sent to “Washington” they were sent up the CIA chain of command INSIDE LIBYA.

    When he and others heard the shots fired, they informed their higher-ups at the annex to tell them what they were hearing and requested permission to go to the consulate and help out. They were told to “stand down,” according to sources familiar with the exchange. Soon after, they were again told to “stand down.”

  10. rudderpedals says:

    Yeah, it’s sourced by the Daily Caller and FOX, Michael, wake up and smell the facts cuz we’re all amazed you’re not jumping the gun you partisian!!1!

    With the Benghazi posts it’s just not practical to have an irony meter anywhere nearby.

  11. mantis says:

    @Doug Mataconis:

    I just find it amusing that all the Obama defenders are willing to accept the government’s incoherent version of events, and not at all willing to consider the possibility that they screwed up and are trying to cover that fact up.

    No, we’re just not willing to assume that, like assholes like you are.

    But I’m sure Fox’s anonymous sources are completely unimpeachable and informed.

    Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on Thursday addressed the “Monday morning quarterbacking” about why the U.S. military didn’t act sooner. He said military assets had been moved, but that the attack on the consulate in Benghazi was over before there was enough good information about what had actually happened. Not knowing exactly what was going on had he and other military leaders feel that “we could not put forces at risk in that situation”

    Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey said there are reviews under way and it wasn’t helpful to provide “partial answers.” However, he did say he was confident that ”our forces were alert and responsive to what was a very fluid situation.”

    Panetta said the US military had responded quickly by deploying forces to the region. “We had FAST platoons in the region. We had ships that we had deployed off of Libya. And we were prepared to respond to any contingency. And certainly had forces in place to do that.” But Panetta said the “basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on; without having some real-time information about what’s taking place.”

    I don’t know if what Dempsey and Panetta are saying is factual, but I’m a bit more inclined to believe it than an I am to believe Mr. X talking to Fox News.

    Now tell me, what information do you have to contradict Panetta? What information do you have that leads you to believe they should have sent forces in?

  12. Tillman says:

    I think a skeptical look at any action by an American administration is a worthy cause, as the government has proven time and again that it will conceal things it has no business concealing. Usually screw-ups, sometimes really dumb things, but there’s the occasional datum that falls into the 1% of “really important.”

    Benghazi, as tragic as it was, doesn’t fall into the 1%. I know enough to know that if the government was attempting to cover this up, it could’ve done a far better job. That’s taking into account basic human incompetence too.

  13. Tillman says:

    I just find it amusing that all the Obama defenders are willing to accept the government’s incoherent version of events, and not at all willing to consider the possibility that they screwed up and are trying to cover that fact up.

    The thing is, the Obama defenders aren’t reacting to you “considering” the possibility. You were considering the possibility weeks ago. Now they are reacting to you assuming a cover-up.

  14. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    So, until Rachel Maddow gives it her imprimatur, it’s meaningless?

    Drudge broke the Lewinsky story, and was right.

    The National Enquirer was the only media following the John Edwards story — and were right.

    The mainstream media bit, and bit hard, on the fake Bush Texas Air National Guard memo. Dan Rather and Mary Mapes are STILL in denial.

    So far, the accounts from Fox are very plausible. And, as Doug noted, the story from the Obama administration keeps “evolving.” They spent a couple weeks blaming it on Romney’s comment (which echoed their own position) and a stupid YouTube video.

  15. anjin-san says:

    Al Gore’s silly little network

    Well, perhaps one day Gore will reach the stature that Doug Mataconis has achieved in life, and we can start to take him seriously.

    Do you realize how much you sound like Jenos when you throw these pathetic quips out?

  16. michael reynolds says:

    @Doug Mataconis:

    You’re right, unless it comes from MSNBC or Al Gore’s silly little network it’s not really news, right?

    Did I suggest MSNBC? Did I cite Current TV — which I’ve watched for all of maybe 5 minutes?

    I said NYT, a major network, any actual news source. Actual reporters with some record for being right.

    Fox is not a news source. Fox is a Republican propaganda tool run by Roger Ailes. Jon Stewart has built an entire career out of puncturing Fox’s 24 hour-a-day lie factory.

    I have doubts about the official version of events in Libya. I don’t think they matter worth a damn, but yes, I have doubts. When I get some data I’ll look at it. When I’m shown Roger Ailes’ latest b.s. I’ll pass.

  17. Todd says:

    The minute Mitt Romney held that press conference while the attack was still ongoing, anything about this story became “political” .. and must be viewed through that lens.

    It’s obvious that mistakes were made at some point along the line, and we should definitely get to the bottom of it. But stepping back and being objective, when we’re talking about security tactics at our overseas diplomatic missions, isn’t the proper place for these details to be aired, in a closed classified briefing?

    Just the fact that it’s only a couple of weeks before the election would cause me to take anything reported in the press with a huge grain of salt. That the Romney campaign embraced this so eagerly, and so early, only reinforced that impulse.

    If the President is forced to make an address, or do a news conference about this topic in the next two, that’s an indication it’s a real problem for him. As long as it stays in the world of Drudge/Fox News, then it’s unlikely to much impact outside of those who are already committed to defeating the Obama administration.

  18. An Interested Party says:

    You’re right, unless it comes from MSNBC or Al Gore’s silly little network it’s not really news, right?

    Of course no one said any such thing…it isn’t surprising that you would believe disreputable news sources as the above statement indicates that you like to make shit up…

    If this was Bush, you people would be all over it (as would I)

    But Fox News wouldn’t…

    Drudge broke the Lewinsky story, and was right.

    The National Enquirer was the only media following the John Edwards story — and were right.

    Ahh, so that makes both unimpeachable sources…

  19. Just Me says:

    If this was Bush, you people would be all over it (as would I)

    Bingo! The reality is that this story has stunk of cover up since the beginning.

    Now what mistakes were made and at what levels are yet to be determined (I don’t necessarily believe Obama was there saying “no” at every miss step, but he is the president and these are his appointments running these offices), but it has stunk.

    There is no way in the universe if this had been Bush, McCain or I even believe any democratic president not named Obama the media would have been ripping him a new one since day one. He would have been hounded over reports coming out of Libya, State and the CIA.

  20. JEBurke says:

    @michael reynolds: Wait, you realize, don’t you, that there is no dispute that a response by the military was considered and rejected, although some preliminary steps were taken (eg, moving an SOF team to Sigonella)? How do we know that? Secretary Panetta said so at the news conference yesterday at which he decried “Monday morning quarterbacking.” He said that he, General Dempsey and General Ham made the decision not to send help because of uncertainty and concern about the risk to rescuers.

    Now, that decision might turn out to be defensible when we know all the details. However, it cannot be pretended that no decision was made. And most important, the Administration has now spent six weeks doing its damnedest to keep the country from knowing any details.

    As for sources leaking to Fox, there would be no need for anyone to try to get this story out if the New York Times, the Washington Post and other media were not obviously and deliberately keeping the lid on this scandal to protect Obama through election day. Watch, whoever wins, come November, the full horrific nature of this failure will be reported.

  21. JEBurke says:

    @mantis: You realize, I hope, that Panetta was not denying that requests for help were made but indirectly acknowledging that they were made and denied, with a full explanation as to why declined.

  22. JEBurke says:

    @Tillman: Not possible to maintain a coverup when four people died and scores of people know what did happen. This notion that high government officials are such geniuses that they could not be party to a messy, failed coverup is just silly.

  23. Todd says:

    The idea the big papers like the New York Times and the Washington Post are somehow “suppressing” this story is ridiculous. You know they’re sniffing around, and as soon as (if) there’s something to it, that’s verifiable, of course they’ll run with it … it’ll attract eyeballs … and that’s what they’re “biased” towards.

    The biggest difference between real media, and the right wing echo chamber is journalism. Most stories that go up on a site like Breitbart or The Blaze are not much more credible than the National Enquirer. I think the real goal is to shape the way Fox covers a story. If you ever look at Fox over time, during a “breaking news” event, they usually play it relatively straight as it’s happening, but then hours later, or especially by the next day, they’re pushing the harder right perspective. As much as Conservatives claim to hate the “lamestream” media, it’s pretty obvious that their ultimate goal with the “propaganda” they spread is to to get exactly those mainstream media outlets to pick up the story … and to tell it “their” way.

  24. Geek, Esq. says:

    @JEBurke:

    You realize the fight at the consulate was over, and the ambassador dead, at that point, correct?

  25. anjin-san says:

    If you go to Romney’s FB page, you will see there are a lot of people who have bought the narrative that Obama watched the whole thing live in the situation room, personally denied numerous desperate pleas for help from Ambassador Stevens as the attack took place, then spent an hour chatting with Jay Z on the phone about his vacation plans before going to bed and getting a good nights sleep.

    Seeing how easily so many are manipulated does not make me very optimistic abou the future.

  26. michael reynolds says:

    Look, it’s really pretty simple from my point of view: There’s a whole lot of news on a whole lot of topics. I try to stay informed. But I don’t have time to waste on demonstrated, proven-beyond-all-doubt propagandists like Fox News. I also don’t read OK! magazine.

    When someone with some credibility reports something of interest I promise to be as fascinated as the issue demands.

    In the case of Benghazi I honestly don’t give a damn. I wouldn’t have given a damn if it was Mr. Bush — there was a surplus of bad behavior of his to focus on, this would not have made the lowest level. While this is a tragedy for the families involved, I have some breaking news: it doesn’t matter in any substantive way. Libya is a side show. We are all obsessing over this while remaining indifferent to Egypt, which matters roughly 20 times more. About 100 things in the wold matter more. This is a purely political story, which is of course why reasonable folk are extra skeptical when it comes from Pravda. I mean, Fox.

    Obviously there was a terrorist attack on our consulate. We lost.

    And? And so what? These things happen.

  27. Todd says:

    @anjin-san: Seeing how easily so many are manipulated does not make me very optimistic abou the future.

    Yes, that’s what makes me most sad too. I don’t really care when people don’t agree with me, or that they want to vote for a different candidate. That’s what makes the world go round. But it’s almost depressing the number of people who are so pissed off about stuff they’ve seen or read (usually on the Internet) that’s just objectively not true.

  28. Just Me says:

    The media showed no interest in this story when it was still all about the video and Romney gaffes.

    But then the story started to fall apart, and the media has been more than kind to Obama. How many press conferences has Obama held where he takes questions from the media? The media is being soft-outside of a few reporters sniffing the story out.

  29. wr says:

    @Jenos Idanian #13: Yes, Drudge is always trustworthy. Like Michelle’s Whitey tape. And Clinton’s black love child. I’m sure you were busy spreading both of those as far as you could.

  30. Franklin says:

    Drudge broke the Lewinsky case, and National Enquirer broke the John Edwards case. They are both now batting about .003.

  31. Franklin says:

    @JEBurke:

    [Panetta] said that he, General Dempsey and General Ham made the decision not to send help because of uncertainty and concern about the risk to rescuers.Now, that decision might turn out to be defensible when we know all the details.

    A completely rational point-of-view.

    As for sources leaking to Fox, there would be no need for anyone to try to get this story out if the New York Times, the Washington Post and other media were not obviously and deliberately keeping the lid on this scandal to protect Obama through election day.

    A completely irrational point-of-view.

    How do you deal with your personalities?

  32. Herb says:

    “I have doubts about the official version of events in Libya.”

    This is smart….

    After all, the CIA was involved, it was a messy chaotic situation half-a-world away, the dingbat challenger went political immediately. If you swallow the official version of events whole, you are just not accounting for the messiness of imperfect information or intelligence agency secrecy.

    However, if you take this doubt and turn it into the certainty there was a cover-up, well….that’s not smart.

    Jeffrey Goldberg
    was here first:

    “The embarrassment is that political culture in America is such that we can’t have an adult conversation about the lessons of Benghazi, a conversation that would focus more on understanding al Qaeda affiliates in North Africa, on the limitations and imperfections of security, and on shortfalls in our intelligence gathering, than on who said what when in the Rose Garden.”

    I bolded that last part because we could be talking about that…I mean, we’ve got CIA operators a mile away with SEAL training? They obviously didn’t know about the attack until it was under way (a shortfall in intelligence gathering!) and were not asked to assist. Even if they were, we may be reading about a dozen dead Americans instead of 4.

    But nope, let’s not talk about any of that. Gotta reach for the cover-up nonsense.

  33. bandit says:

    Like the incompetent assclown said ‘It’s a bump in the road’, ‘not optimal’. And what’s the murder of a few Americans in comparison to the reelection of the scfoamf?

  34. An Interested Party says:

    And what’s the murder of a few Americans in comparison to the reelection of the scfoamf?

    Well, if this is the standard that we are using, there was a SCoaMF who was reelected even after thousands of Americans died on his watch…but, of course, he supposedly kept the country safe, if you happen to forget about a certain day in September…

  35. Tillman says:

    @JEBurke:

    This notion that high government officials are such geniuses that they could not be party to a messy, failed coverup is just silly.

    I always presume stupidity over malice, and this doesn’t really fit the profile of a badly-done coverup. For instance, in coverups you don’t usually say this:

    Fourteen hours after the attack, President Obama sat down with Steve Kroft of “60 Minutes” for a previously scheduled interview and said he did not believe it was simply due to mob violence.

    “You’re right that this is not a situation that was — exactly the same as what happened in Egypt and my suspicion is that there are folks involved in this who were looking to target Americans from the start,” Mr. Obama said.

    I mean, I get it, there’s a slice of the right that’s convinced themselves that Obama is an idiot. But you’d have to be a monumental idiot to attempt a coverup after saying that. My observation thus far has been that Obama isn’t a monumental idiot.

  36. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    Yeah, let’s trust the New York Times.

    The Times, which still holds Walter Duranty’s Pulitzer for covering up Stalin’s genocide?

    The Times, which endorse John McCain and then ran a BS story accusing him of having an affair with a lobbyist?

    The Times, which allowed Jayson Blair to plagiarize and fabricate for years?

    The Times, which has been incredibly quiet about Fast & Furious and the whole Libya fiasco so far?

    The Times, owned by a Mexican billionaire?

    That New York Times? Or is there another one?

  37. Septimius says:

    @Jenos Idanian #13:

    I think it’s the other New York Times.

    The New York Times that hasn’t endorsed a Republican for President in 56 years.

    The New York Times that ran front page stories on Abu Ghraib for 32 straight days.

    The New York Times that was called out for liberal bias by two different public editors.

  38. G.A. says:

    Obama needs to be impeached….arrests need to be made….The biggest most idiotic cover up in American history,well for most of you. Many of us have known it for weeks…But damn!!!…None of us, I think, knew it was this blatant or ridiculous.

    Yet the usual suspects and accomplices are still denying reality.

    Obama gives himself, like the biggest October surprise ever…to bad this **** ain’t Funny… or I would laugh about this clown for the millionth time.

  39. Herb says:

    No, it was the other New York Times, the one who published Judith Miller’s Iraq WMD stories.

    Or maybe it was the one that was blocked in China.

  40. Just 'nutha ig'rant cracker says:

    @Gromitt Gunn: Probably not if the source is thinkprogress.org. They are even worse than “Al Gore’s silly little network.”

  41. Andy says:

    To me this is all very reminiscent of the “failure” to get UBL in Tora Bora. Why, people wondered, didn’t the Marines down south hop into their helicopters, fly several hundred miles and drop troops into a bunch of little-known snowy, high-mountain passes in the middle of the Afghan winter? There was, after all, many requests made which were denied. What did the President know and when did he know it?

    The politics of Benghazi are as predictable as aftermath of Tora Bora was, but in the real world the reasons for the “failure” at Tora Bora were essentially the same as the recent “failure” to provide timely support to Embassy and CIA facilities in Benghazi. The simple reality is that bureaucracy at senior levels is, by nature, slow to react and risk averse unless forces are already on alert and standing-by to react to a contingency. Although there were forces in Sigonella, it doesn’t appear that they were on alert, and why would they be? The State Department obviously didn’t view the threat as serious enough to warrant a very high security posture, why should anyone expect that the DoD would have forces on alert for a contingency the CIA and State Department didn’t plan for?

    And really, to me the problem was with the State Department which

  42. Just 'nutha ig'rant cracker says:

    @Todd: I don’t read Breitbart, so I can’t say, but what I have read in The Blaze is more on the order of Weekly World News-level information.

  43. Travail says:

    Wow – all the progs are jumping on Mataconis with their usual fall-back technique when the facts look bad for them… gross insults and name calling.

    Stay classy mantis, anjin-san, reynolds, and Co. Your President is a coward and a political hack who has no problem with “sacrifices’ by others – up to and including their lives. As long the notion of “sacrifice” doesn’t involve him sacrificing a little booty from a fund-raiser in Vegas. No matter whether you believe Obama lied has been lying about what he knew and when (and there is a GROWING awareness that he did in fact lie), the whole flying to Vegas while Bengazi burned thing does NOT speak well of his priorities.

    This almost incomprehensible incompetence by Obama ( I give him the benefit of the doubt here by labeling it as simple incompetence) would blow up like a Hydrogen bomb if we actually had journalists who would be more interested in actually “speaking truth to power” than providing a smoke screen for Obama. This is going to get ugly anyway – guaranteed. The new media will do what NBC, CBS, ABC, etc should have already done and ferret out the truth amongst all the contradictions presented by Obama (actually, lies, but again I’m being generous).

    The MSM will simply try to delay any in-depth investigation until after the election in order to prevent the fall-out for Obama. But it won’t work. The just out-right BAD of how it went down is coming out in bits and pieces – and Hillary won’t accept the stain and stink when it belongs on Obama.

  44. Herb says:

    @Travail: Sorry….can’t take anyone seriously who complains about “gross insults and name calling,” then two sentences later is calling the president a coward and a political hack.

    And then later,

    “The MSM will simply try to delay any in-depth investigation until after the election in order to prevent the fall-out for Obama.”

    Uh huh…..such brilliant commentary.

  45. Dazedandconfused says:

    The Tapper article has been updated with the CIA’s replies and comments. It seems they weren’t there when Doug made his comments.

    It also seems Mr. Woods believes there was a live video stream to the White House through the whole event.. We must guess who told him that. I find the inclusion of Glenn Beck most disconcerting. If they really had something good, I think they would have used someone else.

    Sounds like FOX and the Republicans are taking advantage of the mans state of mind. An utterly disgusting thing to do, if they have.

    Speaking of creepy things, I just watched Mitt’s press conference the day after the event. At about 4:20, he starts smiling. I guess he could only “keep it together” for just so long. He slides into making it a foreign policy campaign opportunity of sorts. By the time he walks off, he has a great big grin on his face.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoAL4c7uneE

  46. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    I’ll say this for Obama… the man swings big. His scandals have serious body counts.

    Fast and Furious? A couple hundred.

    Benghazi? Four, including an Ambassador and two former Navy SEALs working for the CIA.

    And absolutely, let’s postpone any serious investigations until after the election. Most people don’t care if he’s malicious, or just as grossly incompetent as a lot of us predicted way back in 2008.

  47. Tony W says:

    @Jenos Idanian #13:

    Drudge broke the Lewinsky story, and was right.

    The National Enquirer was the only media following the John Edwards story — and were right

    I am pleased that you are finally comparing Fox News to its peers.

  48. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @Tony W: I am pleased that you are finally comparing Fox News to its peers.

    Oh, I’m just getting warmed up.

    MSNBC talks about “violent racists” while showing a guy with a gun at an anti-ObamaCare rally, cropping the video to hide that the guy with the gun is actually black — Weekly World News.

    CNN agreeing to cover up Saddam Hussein’s atrocities in the 1990’s in exchange for “access” — Soviet-era Pravda and Izvestia.

    Ezra Klein setting up JournoList so “professional” journalists could secretly collaborate with leftist pols, operatives, and commentators on pushing the leftist agenda — Völkischer Beobachter.

  49. Just Me says:
  50. JKB says:

    @Dazedandconfused:

    There is no believe the White House had a live feed. I haven’t heard about video but the DS agent went up on the radio and had cameras immediately. He stayed at his post and up till he was killed. It’s old technology and old SOP, once the agent reported the attack, everyone would have come up on the feed. The WH situation room, the Pentagon National Command Center, the CIA, State and a dozen or so military area command centers.

    There is now an assertion that there were gunships overhead. The defenders of the annex were painting targets, begging for gunship engagement. There would be no use in painting the target until the laser was linked to the gunship weapon system.

    Win or lose the election, Obama has no moral authority for command. He can never be Commander in Chief in more than name only again. Panetta as well. Petraeus may be trying to salvage his with the CIA statement. You don’t deny assistance, you don’t leave men to die without explaining yourself. From this point forward, every order will be greeted with skepticism

  51. Just Me says:

    The more I read, the more I think this administration was willing to lose some Americans in order to avoid dropping bombs on Libyan fighters.

    I also believe this administration was far more concerned with raising money than protecting Americans.

    I also am pissed that this administration scapegoated an individual in order to hide their ineptitude in this matter.

    This administration has been obfuscating the truth since the speech in the rose garden.

  52. Franklin says:

    @Jenos Idanian #13:

    I’ll say this for Obama… the man swings big. His scandals have serious body counts.

    The body count in Iraq (which is a scandal become of the WMD lies) exceeds these by several orders of magnitude, even if one granted you the Fast & Furious issue which actually had nothing to do with the Obama administration.

  53. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @Franklin: Oh, look, the Iraq card. That’s as maxed out as the race card. Try again.

    And Fast & Furious had “nothing to do with the Obama administration?” Then why is Obama using “Executive Privilege” to cover it up?

    Oh, I know — he’s covering up for Bush. He doesn’t want Bush to be blamed for even more bad things. Ain’t he a nice guy?

  54. michael reynolds says:

    @Travail:

    Please show me where I engaged in “gross insults and name calling”directed against Doug.

    When you fail, please apologize.

  55. wr says:

    @michael reynolds: If these righties apologized every time they failed in a post, there would never be room for any other messages here. Hell, Jenos/Jay’s apologies alone would crash the server…

  56. Just Me says:

    And Fast & Furious had “nothing to do with the Obama administration?” Then why is Obama using “Executive Privilege” to cover it up?

    And don’t forget they did find a head to lop off and a body to throw under the bus.

    Some of the best reporting on Fast and Furious didn’t come from a US news outlet but Univision. Shoot univision has done a better job of questioning our president than our own media has.

  57. Modulo Myself says:

    Here’s a gross insult that happens to be very true.

    This isn’t about our Libya policy. This is about a bunch of Americans unable to fixate on anything but the fantasy of a black President watching and enjoying the deaths of four Americans. That’s it. It’s wired into Doug’s head so he keeps on reverting back to the question of what really happened. And it’s wired into those dumber than Doug with their fantasies of circling helicopters called off by the black man (watching this snuff film on his personal live feed) with a single No.

  58. al-Ameda says:

    @Jenos Idanian #13:

    So, until Rachel Maddow gives it her imprimatur, it’s meaningless?

    Who cares about Rachel Maddow? This is all about the right wing media creating a story that Obama failed to take action and that resulted in the killing of the ambassador. There is no credible source for that talking point.

  59. G.A. says:

    Some of the best reporting on Fast and Furious didn’t come from a US news outlet but Univision. Shoot univision has done a better job of questioning our president than our own media has.

    Because the Coward Obama won’t get in front of a real reporter…

  60. G.A. says:

    .This is about a bunch of Americans unable to fixate on anything but the fantasy of a black President watching and enjoying the deaths of four Americans.

    are you truly this mental?

  61. G.A. says:

    Who cares about Rachel Maddow?

    lol most of you are half*** clones of Rachel Maddow that say and think the same crap.

  62. al-Ameda says:

    @G.A.:

    lol most of you are half*** clones of Rachel Maddow that say and think the same crap.

    Sure thing, Sparky

  63. G.A. says:

    Sure thing, Sparky

    lol, I watch her and read you guys… show me where I am wrong?

    You think the same or MUST get your news and talking points from her and her crap Obama propaganda channel.

  64. Davebo says:

    Good Ole Dougie doing his part to bring out the tea posters.

    Some might wonder why Doug never tires of being made a fool of after linking, yet again, to Faux News.

    (Remember, he’s not a Republican and will vote for Big Bird for president.)

    The simple truth is that this site operates, like all other sites, off page views. I’m reminded of my time in the military. The CO (James) is almost always the good guy so he needs the XO (Doug) to be the prick and hopefully draw said page views.

    You must admit it works. And they both have to appear, at least, to be even handed but Doug long since gave up that ship and classic passive aggressive James is really just riding along now.

  65. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @al-Ameda: This is all about the right wing media creating uncovering a story that Obama failed to take action and that resulted in the killing of the ambassador.

    FTFY.

    And what’s the current status of the “mob incited by a YouTube video” cover story, chump? Are we due for another round of apologies for having freedom of speech?

  66. wr says:

    @Just Me: ” Shoot univision has done a better job of questioning our president than our own media has. ”

    “Our own media”? You mean, media for white people? Why isn’t Univision, an American television network owned by Haim Saban (and various private equity funds) part of “our own” media?

    Is BET also not part of “our own media”?

    Are whites now so endangered we need special “no dark people allowed” networks?

    “Our own media.” Lovely.

  67. al-Ameda says:

    @G.A.:

    lol, I watch her and read you guys… show me where I am wrong?
    You think the same or MUST get your news and talking points from her and her crap Obama propaganda channel.

    Sorry G.A., I’ve been disappointing conservatives for a long time. I don’t watch Rachel Maddow, not part of my viewing rotation. I will admit to watching Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, and FoxSoccer channel, and to reading the NYT, WSJ, and my local papers, as well as listening to local sports talk, NPR and Armstrong & Getty on my drive time radio.

  68. anjin-san says:

    @ Jenos Idanian

    Body counts? Are you ready to put 3000 dead in New York City on Bush? I doubt it.

    Failing that, you are just a prick trying to pimp 4 dead Americans who willingly went into a dangerous place to serve their country for political gain,

  69. G.A. says:

    Good Ole Dougie doing his part to bring out the tea posters.

    Obama being a lying coward and getting caught in the biggest cover up in American History by his doing brought me out…

    Not to mention the epic October surprise karma:)

  70. mannning says:

    One small report element stated that there was a Spectre aircraft overhead, and that it was given a no-fire order as well. There was laser painting of the mortar positions by the team on the ground, which would have given the gunship excellent targets to obliterate in a matter of seconds. I cannot find conformation of this, but if so, it is devastating to the command chain.

    There was near perfect identification of the type and positions of weapons firing at our people. What more is needed to give an open fire order on those mortars or any other identified target at that time? Our men were already firing at the hostiles, so it isn’t a case of withholding all firing.

    If the report of a gunship overhead, or within near enough range to get overhead, is correct that was ordered not to fire, it is a real failure to support our people in an immediate firefight when the targets are clearly identified, available and laser designated! I find this utterly reprehensible if so. The capabilities of the Spectre gunship are well known, and with the targets designated by ground-based lasers, extremely accurate fires can be laid down. That gunship would have been worth several platoons of marines in the battle.

  71. anjin-san says:

    Oh, look, the Iraq card. That’s as maxed out

    Yea, the etch-a-sketch has been shaken. Bush never happend. That became pretty clear when the last sitting Republican President was told he was not welcome at the GOP convention.

  72. al-Ameda says:

    @G.A.:

    Obama being a lying coward and getting caught in the biggest cover up in American History by his doing brought me out…

    There is no credible news source whatsoever to back up that Talking Point assertion.

  73. Just Me says:

    Failing that, you are just a prick trying to pimp 4 dead Americans who willingly went into a dangerous place to serve their country for political gain,

    If even part of the Fox News story is true, this isn’t comparable to how Bush handled 9-11 on the day it happened.

    It is one thing to have something bad happen, but not having the balls to take some risks to save some Americans is beyond inept and indifferent.

    Obama scapegoated a guy who made a movie-by lying through his teeth to do it-and decided to fund raise in Nevada rather than take questions from the media or to have extensive meetings with his NSC. Fundraising and reelection has been more important to Obama than doing the job of being president.

    His story has stunk from day one. Four Americans are dead and he won’t even be honest about what happened.

  74. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @al-Ameda: There is no credible news source whatsoever to back up that Talking Point assertion.

    There was no “credible news source” to verify that President Clinton had an extramarital affair with an intern young enough to be his daughter.

    There was no “credible news source” to verify that John Edwards had an illegitimate child with his mistress, conceived while his wife was dying of cancer.

    There was no “credible news source” to verify that agents of the US government were supplying weapons to Mexican drug cartels.

    There was no “credible news source” to verify that Congressman Anthony Weiner was sending out very lewd Tweets to teenaged girls.

    Why don’t you just admit that “credible news source” means, to you, “liberal news sources that I can trust to cover up for my side?” Or should I go on?

  75. al-Ameda says:

    @Jenos Idanian #13:

    Why don’t you just admit that “credible news source” means, to you, “liberal news sources that I can trust to cover up for my side?” Or should I go on?

    You should go on and provide a credible news source to back up your Talking Point assertion that Obama is covering up the story on Benghazi. So far you have not.

  76. G.A. says:

    There is no credible news source whatsoever to back up that Talking Point assertion.

    Dude, like I have been on this story for weeks. That is my opinion from watching him lie and knowing the story, It keeps getting worse and he is doing it to himself.

    You know the time form when it happened and you guys believed his propaganda apparatus and I didn’t.

    Dudes in big trouble and I am not talking about his losing the election.

    Well I would love to stay and chat but I have a TEA party to attend.

  77. mannning says:

    @JKB:

    The Spectre gunship does not have to “link” with ground laser designators. The optical sight channels in the gunship would pick up the laser splash on the targets very readily, and then the torrent of shells would devastate the target.

  78. anjin-san says:

    this isn’t comparable to how Bush handled 9-11 on the day it happened.

    Really? Sitting in a classroom full of little kids for about 15 minutes after he was told about the first plane hitting the WTC? What was the story afterwards – he stayed there because it the President could not afford to look panicked?

    In front of a bunch of little kids.

    I mean, he could not say “Kids, the President has to go back to work – study hard and make me proud” and then go try and find out what the hell was going on in NYC.

  79. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @al-Ameda: You should go on and provide a credible news source to back up your Talking Point assertion that Obama is covering up the story on Benghazi. So far you have not.

    They spent two weeks pushing the lie that a stupid YouTube video was the motivating factor. They’ve already been busted as liars. Busted worse than the race-baiting idiots who talked about Zimmerman ruthlessly stalking and gunning down the totally-innocent Martin in cold blood.

    The story here is extremely plausible. It deserves further investigation. Preferably before the election.

    But you sure as hell don’t want that, do you?

  80. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @anjin-san: Congrats, you win today’s “SQUIRREL!” award. It comes with a case of Turtle Wax and a year’s supply of Rice-A-Roni, the San Francisco Treat.

  81. Davebo says:

    Obama being a lying coward and getting caught in the biggest cover up in American History by his doing brought me out…

    You obviously are more self aware than I gave you credit for. But then that’s a pretty low bar even for you.

  82. anjin-san says:

    @ Jenos Idanian #13

    So – babbling incoherently is your comeback?

    Hey, maybe you could tell us again how a “highway” in 1555 England was the most advance roadway in the world. You can shake the etch-a-sketch and all those pesky Roman roads will vanish.

    You keep the Rice a Roni. I am going to head over to SF, have lunch at Chaya, then watch the World Series. 70 degrees in SF today. It’s rough living in the socialist hell hole that is the bay area…

  83. mannning says:

    The particular laser designator being used was indeed synched with the weapons system, which make it far more probable that a Spectre was overhead.

    BlackFive confirmed with a retired Delta operator: The fact that ground personnel were painting the target says there was a Spectre on station.

    Having spent a good bit of time nursing a GLD (ground Laser Designator) in several garden spots around the world, something from the report jumped out at me.
    One of the former SEALs was actively painting the target. That means that Specter WAS ON STATION! Probably an AC130U. A ground laser designator is not a briefing pointer laser. You do not “paint” a target until the weapons system/designator is synched; which means that the AC130 was on station.
    Only two places could have called off the attack at that point; the WH situation command (based on POTUS direction) or AFRICOM commander based on information directly from the target area.
    If the AC130 never left Sigonella (as Penetta [sic] says) that means that the Predator that was filming the whole thing was armed.
    If that SEAL was actively “painting” a target; something was on station to engage! And the decision to stand down goes directly to POTUS!

  84. anjin-san says:

    Sure thing Manning. And Snoop Dog & the Black Panthers were with Obama in the situation room with him, shucking and jiving the whole time.

  85. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @anjin-san: I understand your need to project your own racial issues on others — it’s so you don’t have to feel quite so bad about your own unresolved feelings of guilt and self-hatred — but there’s absolutely no reason why anyone else should cater to your delusions and play along.

  86. anjin-san says:

    @ Jenos

    project your own racial issues on others

    Hate to burst your bubble skippy, but by the time I was 10 I had enjoyed more soul food than most white folks see in a lifetime, & spent a lot of hours cutting up to Moms Mabley records and listening to Jerry Butler, Louis Armstrong and so many other great artist that white kids in the suburbs are not generally exposed to. I spent quite a bit of time with black folks in their homes, something that sadly, not too many white Americans do in their lives.

    This was back in the days when a white boy had to be ready to drop down if he had black friends. Nearly 50 years later, I’m still tight with some of those guys, actually just got of the phone with one of them a few minutes ago. Growing up in an integrated neighborhood was a great experience, and it never would have happend if Democrats had not shoved desegregation down the throats of cracker-ass Republicans.

    It must be difficult for you – going through life when you are so spectacularly wrong, so often.

  87. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @anjin-san: Methinks the honkey doth protest too much…

    Why so defensive? You’re the first to bring up race, and now you feel some need to stress just how non-racist you are.

    Yeah, you lost the hell out of this argument. But to try to regain some shred of dignity by making this about race? Show the slightest shred of dignity here.

  88. anjin-san says:

    @ Jenos

    Seriously dude, you should not bring up dignity up around here – you lost any you had the first day you showed up.

    If you ever want to tell me I am a racist to my face, we can make that happen.

  89. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @anjin-san: Ooh, Internet Tough Guy calls me out. I’m totally cowed.

    I didn’t call you a racist. I’m not calling anyone racist. You’re the race-obsessed goober here. Race had nothing to do with this until you got tired of getting your cracker ass kicked and tried to salvage some shred of victory by calling racism.

    Back to the topic at hand… which obviously terrifies you… there’s a hell of a lot of smoke here about how the Obama administration left those Americans out to die. Let’s get the truth.

    Even if it makes you squirm and get all desperate.

    Actually, especially if it makes you squirm and get all desperate. That makes me hot.

  90. anjin-san says:

    Dude, are you really under the illusion that you have every won an argument in here? Good lord.

    Anyway, the game is on soon, the sun is shining, a lot of boats are out on the bay, and life is good. I think I will leave you to your Rice a Roni and your hot flashes.

    BTW, people who actually win arguments? They don’t steal lines from the people they are arguing with.

  91. G.A. says:

    You obviously are more self aware than I gave you credit for. But then that’s a pretty low bar even for you

    Dude, that you don’t know what is going on or what has been going on for weeks is nothing new, your a liberal. It’s a good excuse but a sad one.

  92. G.A. says:

    Dude, are you really under the illusion that you have every won an argument in here? Good lord.

    Dude stealing my line is is very liberal of you, but misspelling a word while doing it made me look over my shoulder….

  93. mannning says:

    @anjin-san:

    People that don’t know sh*t about this engagement but what they read in the news or hear on Biasd TV should keep their stupid and irrelevant opinions to themselves, until the real story is published. It is coming out bit by bit, and it is making the POTUS stink to high heaven. Thank God there is an election coming up so we can shed ourselves from this LYING, dissembling, preening, narcissistic ogre.

  94. anjin-san says:

    Yea Manning, we are all really impressed by your insider knowledge and unsourced cut ‘n pastes. Remember to put your tinfoil hat on before going online!

  95. mannning says:

    @anjin-san:

    The source, A-hole, was Blackfive, but I realize that was too much of a strain on your little intellect to read it in my post. Of course, you probably don’t know what Blackfive is, so I will let you stew. I do believe you are the most obnoxious and biased person I have ever encountered on line, which is something to be proud of, for you. Nitwit.

  96. anjin-san says:

    Yes Manning, I took a look – an unnamed source is implying something. Wow. Oh, and they are citing Fox. And they have video of Rush. And I am “biased”

    You might want to be careful throwing “nitwit” around…

  97. anjin-san says:

    Manning did you read carefully at your link?

    Update 3: Jeff Emanuel thinks that we might be jumping to conclusions and that Jennifer Griffin at FoxNews might have misreported a statement about active laser on a target.

    Another (very very trusted) source is saying that the AC130 Marine resources were in the middle of a rotation and that the new Marine resources weren’t ready yet so no help would come from Sigonella. So that confirms Panetta’s statement.

    It’s sad to see Americans who so desperately want to see the Commander-in-Chief hurt simply to further their partisan political agenda. Yes Manning, I am talking about you.

  98. mannning says:

    @anjin-san:

    Why, I just saw the updates, which may put doubt into the connection between the lasing and a Spectre overhead. but did you listen to the Special Forces Lt. Col interview with Rush, that states the protocol for emergency actions and informing the President of an Ambassador being in jeopardy? There had been a decision by Obama not to support at the 5 pm meeting, which is a total failure of command, with no excuses. Our people were left to die by the President when all manner of support was able to reach the area in time.
    This is chickenshit cowardice by an incompetent CIC, and he should be impeached for it.

    You bet I want Obama the hell out of office; it would save American lives, for one thing.

  99. mannning says:

    Nitwit is probably inaccurate for you; maybe idiot savant would do. Your kind of mentality mounts a total defense of Obama asa reflex action, when the facts are lining up as a full condemnation of his decisions or lack of same that lost an Ambassador and three operatives. I look forward to further exposes of this failure and even an impeachment if the facts warrant it. The public should be fully informed of this catastrophe and the blame properly placed on Obama for it.

  100. anjin-san says:

    That’s great Manning, have fun with your rant sites – I see the guy who runs Blackfive appears on the Glenn Beck Show – nutjob central.

  101. anjin-san says:

    catastrophe

    9.11 was a catastrope. Iraq was a catastrophe.

    This is a tragedy. Sad that blind hatred of Obama makes you want to make this into something it is not. You might want to take your cues from Condi Rice instead of Fox & Rush.

  102. mannning says:

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/ten-questions-white-house_657977.html

    Let us see what happens here. the President needs to answer these questions pronto.

    From the far left perspective, any one to their right is automatically a nutjob, and after accounting for the source of these smears, it is rather easy to ignore them. With any luck at all, a ton of leftiesin government will be looking for jobs come January, much to my personal satisfaction. They should never be allowed near the reins of power, and the very best illustration of this is the Obama record of failures and distortions of the nation.

  103. anjin-san says:

    From the far left perspective, any one to their right is automatically a nutjob

    I guess you missed the fact that the guy who runs this blog enjoys a lot of respect from the left. I checked out a blog called “The American Conservative” today that looks like it contains a lot of insightful analysis and quality writing. Daniel Drezner is very good. The Volokh Conspiracy is good.

    If Chuck Heagle was the Republican nominee, I would have a difficult choice to make come election day. It’s noteworthy that this highly decorated combat vet, who is both a natural leader and a hard working guy who understands how to make government work well was run out of town on a rail by today’s conservatives.

    Do you really have nothing beyond a victim complex, fringe websites, and the delusion that only people who share your views are patriots?

  104. anjin-san says:

    And now you trot out William Kristol? I have to hand it to you – you leave no partisan right wing hack behind…

  105. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @anjin-san: Hey, you came back! Missed you, Ofay!

    Anyway, the Christian Science Monitor thinks that Fox’s reporting is solid enough to repeat, so there’s a crack or two appearing in the Wall of Silence.

    It’s sad to see Americans who so desperately want to see the Commander-in-Chief hurt simply to further their partisan political agenda. Yes Manning, I am talking about you.

    Maybe if the Commander-in-Chief in question and his proxies hadn’t spent two weeks lying about how this was all the result of a mob incensed over a stupid YouTube video, people would have given him a little more respect. Not all of us enjoy the taste of the Kool-Aid as much as you do.

  106. G.A. says:

    Not all of us enjoy the taste of the Kool-Aid as much as you do.

    lol, I bet anjin has lot of big holes in his walls from his delivery man:)

  107. Just Me says:

    Maybe if the Commander-in-Chief in question and his proxies hadn’t spent two weeks lying about how this was all the result of a mob incensed over a stupid YouTube video, people would have given him a little more respect. Not all of us enjoy the taste of the Kool-Aid as much as you do.

    Exaxtly.

    There is something in this incident that smells and the administration lied to either cover up something awful or was hoping the American electorate would think it was simply a tragedy.

    Anjin-look at the time line. That attack started just about 9:30 and first reports went up the chain of command. This would be during afternoon hours in the US.

    The people in the consulate were moved to the annex about midnight.

    Woods and Doherty died about 4am.

    I have a hard time believing that our government left all those people for 7 hours without doing much a tall.

    Obama may have been optimistic that the attack would lose steam or that local Libyan forces would do something whatever, I don’t think the mistakes made here were malicious but it was 7 hours-two of those Americans who died may have survived had our administration done something other than sit with their thumbs up their behinds.

    And instead of coming out and saying he messed up-he decided to lie for over two weeks and scapegoat a film maker.

    Anjin you might like this kind of obfuscation in your CiC but it turns my stomach. I can also tell you that I would be worried if I were stationed at an embassy or consulate in a predominately muslim country-wondering if my president might leave me to die for 7 hours without any support.

  108. mannning says:

    Irrespective of the source of those questions, the questions themselves need answering real soon now. To have a President that refuses to lay out these considerations in the first place smacks of hiding guilt, incompetence, and political protection of himself. Instead we get obfuscation, distortion, and lies, which is the hallmark of the Obama administration. I cannot imagine that sane people would vote this incompetent back in office, while the national debt passes $16 trillion, the debit stands relatively constant at $1.2 Trillion, and the real unemployment stands at 16%, including those who have given up looking. and we are faced with a fiscal cliff that will materially harm the middle class, our defense posture, and even entitlements. This superpartisan and closed shop guy is a walking, talking catastrophe for the nation.

  109. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @mannning: anjin seems to have fled this field of battle, so let me say what I suspect he’d say if he had stuck around:

    Shut up, racist! Oh, and Bush! And Iraq! Karl Rove! Southern Strategy!

    SCARY MORMONS!!!!!

    And one last “RACIST!” just in case you missed the first one.

    There, I think I covered all the bases…

  110. mannning says:

    @Jenos Idanian #13:

    Yes, I am sure the racist card would have been played, but one might note that none of my criticisms have racial overtones; rather they are based on lack of effective performance. It is so easy to throw the label racist around, but it will not deter me from voicing my opinions on the performance of the Obama adminnistration, I think the main reason to throw it around is to silence objectors, and that will not happen in my case. In fact, if the term racist becomes defined as objectors to the leftwing progression, I would wear it as a symbol of rationality.

  111. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @mannning: In fact, if the term racist becomes defined as objectors to the leftwing progression, I would wear it as a symbol of rationality.

    Um… did you miss the memo? That happened, like, four years ago. And a lot of people ARE wearing it proudly — Michelle Malkin, Stacy McCain, and a host of others.

    Malkin’s a particularly fun example. She’s a “twofer” — female and Asian — but she still gets called a racist on a regular basis. Along with getting really, really vile racist insults.

  112. An Interested Party says:

    She’s a “twofer” — female and Asian — but she still gets called a racist on a regular basis.

    Oh the poor dear..she is treated so unfairly

  113. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @An Interested Party: Sorry, under the Obama Principle, attacks on her can be summarily dismissed as racism. And sexism. Besides, she’s defending a policy put forth by FDR and approved of by the Supreme Court — how can you question their liberal credentials? And all six of the Justices who voted in favor of internment were appointed by FDR. (OK, so were two of the dissenters, but the only Republican nominee also dissented.)

    On the serious side… yeah, there can be non-racist, non-sexist criticisms of Malkin. But for some reason, “me love you long time” and ping-pong balls always seem to be the most prominent themes.

  114. mannning says:

    @Jenos Idanian #13:

    No, I didn’t get the memo, but the conclusion to wear the badge as one of courage and rationality is rather obvious. It is likewise obvious that Michelle would be hounded for her positions. She can be harsh and tart in her expositions, but clear in her intentions.
    Somewhere, way above this entry, there was an important subject being tossed around. We have strayed too far from it:)

  115. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @mannning: And there’s another memo you missed: the topics here are only good for a dozen or so comments. After that, it’s a general free-for-all with old grudges and grievances are hashed out again and again, with nothing new ever added.

    Dude, you really gotta check your e-mail more often. You’re woefully behind the times…

  116. mannning says:

    @Jenos Idanian #13:

    Actually, no. Most of the partisan drivel posted here I can skip with no loss in real content.
    Getting caught up in the squabbles is pointless and a waste of time. So I post what I want to react to on my terms, not necessarily in time with the ongoing flow of tripe. It is hard not to respond to insults, and I do give in to the temptation on occasion, but it is usually because I happen to be at my PC anyway, so I might as well toss a few words back. Even so, I recognize that it is a useless task posting here against the ongoing defense of Obama and the crazed, leftist agenda.

    I have the distinct notion that I am often responding to many clones of Alan Colmes or Bill Mahr or the like that are: 1) totally convinced of their rightiousness; 2) believe their positions are absolutely correct; 3) can whistle up a relatively plausable story to cover just about any situation; 4) are adept at obfuscation, ad hominem attacks, dissembling, and usually try to lebel anyone disagreeing with their stands as kjpaqjj!!. or worse (you fill in the term!) and 5) use sneering and condescending remarks as a weapon. I sometimes wonder how seemingly bright people can become Colmes or Mahr clones dedicated to some etherial leftwing political philosophy that is so impractical in the real world, and that has been proven over and over to fail miserably for the nations and the peoples involved. It may be in their genes, merely their way to make money, or the result of their acquired atheism, and the loosening of their moors of decency.

  117. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @mannning: Oh, man, you went and got serious and totally harshed my riffing.

    But yeah, I think you’re right. wr is a cauldron of stupid, michael reynolds is a professional hate-monger, and the other day mantis called Doug an “asshole” — yet they routinely get up-voted. I’ll admit I’m not always the best of guests here, but I really do try to show at least a modicum of respect to our hosts.

    Back on topic… the coverup is crumbling, and crumbling hard. I fear that Obama’s going to learn the hard way that the President can’t simply throw everyone under the bus — that gets people killed. And loyalty has to be a two-way street — once those on the front lines stop believing that their higher-ups don’t feel any obligation to them, their own sense of obligation will start to erode. And that will be a VERY, VERY bad thing.

  118. Andy says:

    This source seems to corroborate significant portions of the fox news version of events for the doubters:

    http://world.time.com/2012/10/21/the-other-911-libyan-guards-recount-what-happened-in-benghazi/

    Also assuming this Libyan guard isn’t lying in this story where he was a coward and miserably failed at his duty (which is a pretty odd lie). If his version of events is true, then I have no doubt that the President himself suppressed this story, becuase only an executive order could keep the USMC from tooting its own horn.

  119. Dazedandconfused says:

    @Andy:

    What FOX story are you referring to? I’m not seeing anything about what was asked for and what was denied in US communications

  120. Andy says:

    @Dazedandconfused: why should the source (some libyan named wasim) know anything about communications between the annex and the white house? It’s the overall sequence of events that is corroborated not the damning detail, but that sequence of events makes the detail of the other story more plausible.

  121. Dazedandconfused says:

    @Andy:

    He wouldn’t, but this is the most detailed timeline of events in Benghazi that I have seen yet. The Annex not coming under attack until 3:00AM strikes me as important information.

    Executive orders to keep the USMC from tooting their own horn? I’d call that quite a leap. According to this account they only transported them out.