U.S. officials in Washington denied repeated requests from Americans in Libya for more security

Could Ambassador Stevens and 3 other deaths have been prevented? I am quite sure the Obama administration will figure out a way to wriggle away from this one. After all, they “thought” it was a spontaneous act.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/02/us-usa-libya-security-idUSBRE88J18R20121002

If this is true, then Hillary Clinton should resign. I would think that an Ambassador would get help if he asked for it. But if that Ambassador asked for more security but he was refused, this is bad, bad news about our State Department.

nochain wrote:Could Ambassador Stevens and 3 other deaths have been prevented? I am quite sure the Obama administration will figure out a way to wriggle away from this one. After all, they “thought” it was a spontaneous act.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/02/us-usa-libya-security-idUSBRE88J18R20121002

"...two Republican lawmakers said on Tuesday.

U.S. Representatives Darrell Issa and Jason Chaffetz wrote a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton demanding details of the requests for more security - which they said were made amid numerous attacks on Westerners in Libya in recent months..."

In other words, two Republican reps have accused the State Dept. of withholding funds for better security in Libya without providing a shred of evidence that their claims are justified. Surprise? Nah.

nochain wrote:Could Ambassador Stevens and 3 other deaths have been prevented? I am quite sure the Obama administration will figure out a way to wriggle away from this one. After all, they “thought” it was a spontaneous act.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/02/us-usa-libya-security-idUSBRE88J18R20121002

" I am quite sure the Obama administration will figure out a way to wriggle away from this one."

They said the House of Representatives Oversight and Government Reform Committee would hold an October 10 hearing on the security situation leading up to the Benghazi attack on September 11.

As I recall, the House of Representatives is a Republican lead body.

Slicef18 wrote:They said the House of Representatives Oversight and Government Reform Committee would hold an October 10 hearing on the security situation leading up to the Benghazi attack on September 11.

As I recall, the House of Representatives is a Republican lead body.

Partisanship is alive and well in Washington. The Obama (Democrat) State Department will be found guilty by a Republican House of Representatives even if no proof of a lapse of diligence is found. Democrats will be accused of stonewalling if no evidence is forthcoming.

It's the same ol', same ol'. Welcome to politics at it's finest.

If eric holder heads the investigatiom, the obama administration will be as free as the black panthers and mexican gun/drug running cartels.

Floridatexan wrote:

nochain wrote:Could Ambassador Stevens and 3 other deaths have been prevented? I am quite sure the Obama administration will figure out a way to wriggle away from this one. After all, they “thought” it was a spontaneous act.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/02/us-usa-libya-security-idUSBRE88J18R20121002

"...two Republican lawmakers said on Tuesday.

U.S. Representatives Darrell Issa and Jason Chaffetz wrote a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton demanding details of the requests for more security - which they said were made amid numerous attacks on Westerners in Libya in recent months..."

In other words, two Republican reps have accused the State Dept. of withholding funds for better security in Libya without providing a shred of evidence that their claims are justified. Surprise? Nah.

Did you bother to read your own link???? There are State Dept. employees coming forward. Even Jay Carney dumped the whole problem on Hillary. Bill Clinton was used and screwed, Hillary has been hung out to dry........

NaNook wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

nochain wrote:Could Ambassador Stevens and 3 other deaths have been prevented? I am quite sure the Obama administration will figure out a way to wriggle away from this one. After all, they “thought” it was a spontaneous act.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/02/us-usa-libya-security-idUSBRE88J18R20121002

"...two Republican lawmakers said on Tuesday.

U.S. Representatives Darrell Issa and Jason Chaffetz wrote a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton demanding details of the requests for more security - which they said were made amid numerous attacks on Westerners in Libya in recent months..."

In other words, two Republican reps have accused the State Dept. of withholding funds for better security in Libya without providing a shred of evidence that their claims are justified. Surprise? Nah.

Did you bother to read your own link???? There are State Dept. employees coming forward. Even Jay Carney dumped the whole problem on Hillary. Bill Clinton was used and screwed, Hillary has been hung out to dry........

FT sees an "R" and runs without even bothering to understand an issue. Talk about a partisan hypocrite.

Now we are going to have the house determine what a captain on a battlefield is going to use for tactics? Stupid on steroids......pure political hyperbole......and using a death of a patriot for political gain.....when the man himself set his security criteria.....traitors.

2seaoat wrote:Now we are going to have the house determine what a captain on a battlefield is going to use for tactics? Stupid on steroids......pure political hyperbole......and using a death of a patriot for political gain.....when the man himself set his security criteria.....traitors.

seems to me the left has used our soldiers dying in war against bush all these years. you never had a problem with it.

fact is, we are just pointing out the failure of this admin to protect our diplomats when it wouldnt have taken a rocket scientist to figure out they needed security in an area like that especially on 911, and after they had warning of attacks.

try again

2seaoat wrote:Now we are going to have the house determine what a captain on a battlefield is going to use for tactics? Stupid on steroids......pure political hyperbole......and using a death of a patriot for political gain.....when the man himself set his security criteria.....traitors.

The "Captain on a battlefield" apparently asked repeatedly for improved security and was denied. Why? That is a legitimate question that needs answered so more diplomats aren't left hanging out in the wind while their campaigner-in-chief tries to hang on to his job. What was the Ambassador supposed to do - hire mercenaries while his bosses struggled to make what should have been a simple decision? Ridiculous.

I am amused. Did the ambassador ask for more security when he was working with the rebels in street to street combat to overthrow Khaddafi? Did the Ambassador ask for a green zone in Libya where he could be isolated from the people and become all warm and cozy? He was courageous. He was out on the street gaining the respect of the people. The counter demonstrations and the throwing the milita out on the street tell how effective he was. The traitors to this country want war with Iran. The industrial military complex, Al Queda and who ever pulls their strings want war in Iran. Israel wants America to fight their battle in Iran......and all these folks and Fox News who beats the war drums wants to make it sound like if we only built another Fort Apache in Libya.....we would be winning.....you know the same people who got the no bid contracts and delivered bundles of money which were never accounted for in Iraq......nope the foreign policy has never been better. We dropped bombs on khaddafi and never got him out of power over 30 years as he killed our citizens in terrorist acts.....yet one brave ambassador fighting on the streets was successful, and the fear to the traitors is that what he did was successful, and that he connected, and that bombs on Iran may be counter productive.....that maybe we can win the people of Iran.....

but in the end you mentioned the requests for more security....please provide the same. I will wait......and then next week I will ask again, but all the distortions to come.....you will not provide the same today or next week, because the war machine will move on to another issue because the big lie works with fools.....but fortunately America has matured.....we have been fed this before......we will not be fooled again.

2seaoat wrote:I
but in the end you mentioned the requests for more security....please provide the same. I will wait......and then next week I will ask again, but all the distortions to come.....you will not provide the same today or next week, because the war machine will move on to another issue because the big lie works with fools.....but fortunately America has matured.....we have been fed this before......we will not be fooled again.

If you are "amused" by this issue I am astounded. From the Reuters article that you obviously neglected to read:

"Separately, four U.S. officials have told Reuters they were aware that in the months before the Benghazi attack, some U.S. personnel in Libya had sent complaints to the State Department expressing concern about security at U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, particularly the compound where Ambassador Christopher Stevens was killed. Two of those officials said their understanding was that the department did not act on the complaints before the attack in Benghazi."

I suppose if you require more clarification you can call someone who cares or even someone who doesn't care about these needless deaths, Oblamer at 202-456-1111

I read it did you.....some people.......what did the ambassador want to do.....please show me what the hero wanted to do......you know the guy who was taking the very risks that "some people" were upset.....of course those beating the war drums were upset with what he was doing.....he was a hero.....did sgt. York ask "some people" for more security, or was he fighting the battle and winning, did you think Lenny was going to wait for some people to decide on the shore to jump in and save those people in DC who were drowining in the Potomic......you know we need more people standing around watching people drown....and telling us how risky doing something is......... If you cannot see what is going on here then you are blinded for your hate of Obama. The truth is that we had to pull our ambassador out of Syria because he was taking extreme risks. At some point the most effective American in the field do take unnecessary risks, but the "some people" are the same ones who want more bombs to be dropped, and another war to start........do you understand that you have nothing.....you are saying " all in"..... a poker game with duece'/seven.....you have nothing......"some people"........REally?

2seaoat wrote:I read it did you.....some people.......what did the ambassador want to do.....please show me what the hero wanted to do......you know the guy who was taking the very risks that "some people" were upset.....of course those beating the war drums were upset with what he was doing.....he was a hero.....did sgt. York ask "some people" for more security, or was he fighting the battle and winning, did you think Lenny was going to wait for some people to decide on the shore to jump in and save those people in DC who were drowining in the Potomic......you know we need more people standing around watching people drown....and telling us how risky doing something is......... If you cannot see what is going on here then you are blinded for your hate of Obama. The truth is that we had to pull our ambassador out of Syria because he was taking extreme risks. At some point the most effective American in the field do take unnecessary risks, but the "some people" are the same ones who want more bombs to be dropped, and another war to start........do you understand that you have nothing.....you are saying " all in"..... a poker game with duece'/seven.....you have nothing......"some people"........REally?

Hitting the rum early today or do you really think what you just posted makes sense given the topic of the thread? The point is simple and I am disappointed that you of all posters don't seem to get it.

nochain wrote:Could Ambassador Stevens and 3 other deaths have been prevented? I am quite sure the Obama administration will figure out a way to wriggle away from this one. After all, they “thought” it was a spontaneous act.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/02/us-usa-libya-security-idUSBRE88J18R20121002

That's the problem and it was a failure of the COWH...Sec of State and other administration officials that did nothing and allowed embassy personnel and all Americans overseas to be put at risk...there is no excuse but let's see if the media will report and if the American people have the intestinal fortitude to demand answers and consequences for these security lapses...agree with 'nochain' betcha there will be PLENTY of wiggle room and blaming of others for incompetence...

Some people is your answer......and I am hitting the rum. Please show me where the Ambassador....you know the man in charge wanted more security. I will wait. Please give me the information you seem to have gleaned from "some people" that the man in charge.....the man that gave his life......felt that he needed more security........I can only think of one word. Traitors. If you cannot see who is behind the war drums.....if you cannot see how we got 16 trillion in debt........then it is useless to have intelligent conversations.........the ambassador was the solution.....and why he was killed is clear......the who will come out eventually but there are traitors among us.

The why is all that has to be answered. It is clear the why is people who have different interests than the average American.......and the big lie has always worked best with the low wattage population in any country is easily distracted.

salinsky wrote:Q: From where is this information emanating?

A: Anonymous intelligence officials leaking info to the press.

Q: Why?

The blowback from this could be enormous.

Sure, remember they work for your hero BHO? Leaks from this administration is hardly even news anymore, it's expected. Automatic free pass.

No free pass. If you show me the memos or letters where the Ambassador was asking for more security and these were denied......I am on board with you and believe somebody dropped the ball. Right is right. However, until you show me "some people" are the Ambassador who was running the show in Libya.....guess what your 2/7 is not an all in hand. However, when you produce the memo where our hero was begging for more protection....well you will have a pair of aces......but we both know we were talking about a bad asz who was winning....not some whining "some People" sitting at some third level desk in the Pentagon wanting to get promoted by being a shill for the military industrial complex.....sorry that 2/7 looks like a losing hand, but I am still waiting for your proof.....you know the basis of this thread.

2seaoat wrote:No free pass. If you show me the memos or letters where the Ambassador was asking for more security and these were denied......I am on board with you and believe somebody dropped the ball. Right is right. However, until you show me "some people" are the Ambassador who was running the show in Libya.....guess what your 2/7 is not an all in hand. However, when you produce the memo where our hero was begging for more protection....well you will have a pair of aces......but we both know we were talking about a bad asz who was winning....not some whining "some People" sitting at some third level desk in the Pentagon wanting to get promoted by being a shill for the military industrial complex.....sorry that 2/7 looks like a losing hand, but I am still waiting for your proof.....you know the basis of this thread.

Sure thing sport, I'll just ring up the state department and ask them to fax the info right on over. HILARIOUS!!!!!

That's fair....we both know it will be a a radio signal from the planet Kolob.....because it has to come from somewhere.......and you believe because otherwise why would this thread have been started.

2seaoat wrote:That's fair....we both know it will be a a radio signal from the planet Kolob.....because it has to come from somewhere.......and you believe because otherwise why would this thread have been started.

Planet Kolob huh? Is that where Barack Hussein Obama is really from? This is his deal remember?

No this is where you are wrong....this is not his deal.....this is America's deal. I watched Colin Powell in his entirety give his explanation for going into Iraq at the United Nations. We had the same kind of smoke and mirrors we are seeing now. We have lost 5 trillion in revenues, 5 trillion in wars, and now have 5 trillion more being proposed to go to the wealthy, and you think this is the President's deal. Nope, Americans are waking up. It is our deal. It is our deal that we had competent people on the ground winning in Libya. Khaddafi a thorn in America's side for 30 years who killed Americans is gone.....why because the people of Libya got rid of him without us spending 5 trillion dollars and shifting wealth over to the same folks who move their headquarters out of America after raping this country to find refuge in foreign countries.....tax free.....know we are talking about Americans....duty.....and patriotism.....you are starting a thread of more smoke and mirrors....more yellow cake from africa.....more fantasy.....again show me the memos.......and after watching Powell sell his soul, I expected him to go to the grocery store and get some Betty Crocker yellow cake mix and make a cake and cry that Ike was right......the biggest threat in America is the Industrial military complex and their allies.....who sell war as the first alternative.....no our ambassador was a hero, and the very premise that we need to hunker down with a fortress is exactly how we got in this mess.....and deep down you know I am right.