Email Shows State Department Rejecting Request of Security Team at US Embassy in Libya

ABC NEWS BLOGS
>
POLITICS
>
POLITICAL PUNCH
Political Punch Headlines Politics Entertainment Health Lifestyle Business Technology

PREVIOUS HOW PRESIDENT OBAMAS DEBATE STRATEGY HELPED MITT ROMNEY NEXT OBAMA TOUTS GOOD JOB NEWS: WEVE COME TOO FAR TO TURN BACK NOW
About Political Punch

Political coverage and musings on pop culture from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper and the ABC News White House team.
Oct 5, 2012 7:00am
By Jake
Tapper
@jaketapper
Email Shows State Department Rejecting Request of Security Team at US Embassy in Libya
153
Text
ABC News Broadcasts

|
20/20 GOOD MORNING AMERICA NIGHTLINE THIS WEEK WHAT WOULD YOU DO WORLD NEWS WORLD NEWS NOW WORLD NEWS WITH DIANE SAWYER
(ImageCredit:IbrahimAlaguri/APPhoto)
ABC News has obtained an internal State Department email from May 3, 2012, indicating that the State Department denied a request from the security team at the Embassy of Libya to retain a DC-3 airplane in the country to better conduct their duties. Copied on the email was U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, who was killed in a terroristattackonthediplomaticpostinBenghazi,Libya,Sept.11,2012, along with three other Americans. That attack has prompted questions about whether the diplomatic personnel in that country were provided with adequate security support. No one has yet to argue that the DC-3wouldhavedefinitivelymadea difference for the four Americans killed that night. The security team in question, after all, left Libya in August. But the question both for the State Department, which is conducting an internal investigation, and the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which is holding hearings next week is whether officials in Washington, D.C., specifically at the State Department, were as aware as they should have been about the deteriorating security situation in Libya, and whether officials were doing everything they could to protect Americans in that country. Earlier this week, the chair of the House Oversight Committee, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and another member of the committee wrote to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton listing 13 incidents leading up to the attack, ranging from IED and RPG attacks to a posting on a pro-Gaddafi Facebook page publicizing early morning runs taken by the late Ambassador Stevens and his security detail around Tripoli.
Was State Department headquarters in Washington aware of all the above incidents?they asked Secretary Clinton, requesting written responses by Oct. 8. If not, why not? If so, what measures did the State Department take to match the level of security provided to the U.S. Mission in Libya to the level of threat? The subject line of the email, from Miki Rankin, the post management officer for Libya and Saudi Arabia, reads Termination of Tripoli DC-3 Support. Rankin informs Stevens and the others on the email, whose names have been redacted, that Undersecretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy has determined that support for Embassy Tripoli using the DC-3 will be terminated immediately. Posts request to continue use of the plane in support of the SST was considered. However, it was decided that, if needed, NEA will charter a special flight for their departure. You can read the email HERE. An SSTis a Security Support Team, about 16 Special Forces troops assigned to protect officials from the U.S. State Department. This particular SST was assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli. Shown the email uncovered by ABC News, a spokesman for the committee said the document is consistent with what the Oversight Committee has been told by individuals who worked in Libya. Ambassador Stevens and the diplomatic mission in Libya made multiple security related requests that were turned down by Washington based officials. Security related transportation has been identified as one of the particular items where embassy personnel did not receive the support they sought. Provided with a copy of the e-mail, a senior State Department official downplayed the importance of the denied request. The official told ABC News that the DC-3 was pulled from Iraq and moved to support Libya early on when there was no commercial airline service into Libya. When commercial service was re-established in Libya, the aircraft was reassigned to other State Department business. We use our aircraft when no commercial flights exist. The U.S. government official who provided the email to ABC News and wantedtoremainanonymousbecauseofthesensitivityofthematter described the small DC-3 plane as an asset for a security team to more freely and safely move throughout the country, and to more easily transport arms and other security equipment. In short, having the plane allowed the security team to better perform its duties, the official said. The State Department official acknowledged that the plane was used to get around Libya, not just to get in and out of the country. But once commercial air service was re-established, the State Department decided that the SST didnt need the plane anymore. The security team, it would seem, disagreed. Told of the State Departments explanation, the House Oversight Committee spokesman said the State Departments naive determination to follow rigid bureaucratic policies, instead of making common sense decisions that took the serious threat of terrorism conveyed by those on the ground into account, appears to have been a significant factor in the Benghazi Consulates lack of preparedness. On Wednesday, Oct. 10, the committee will hold a hearing featuring the testimony of Regional Security Officer Eric Nordstrom, who was stationed in Libya from September 2011 through June 2012; and Deputy Assistant Secretary of International Programs Charlene Lamb.
SHOWS:
Good Morning America
153
Text
RELATED VIDEOS
Venezuela: Is Chavez forcing people to go to his rallies?
Taking Aim: Animal Tales From the Campaign Trail
PREVIOUS HOW PRESIDENT OBAMAS DEBATE STRATEGY HELPED MITT ROMNEY
NEXT OBAMA TOUTS GOOD JOB NEWS: WEVE COME TOO FAR TO TURN BACK NOW
USER COMMENTS
Obama and his lackeys flat out lied about the attack in Libya for a full WEEK. Why? Because they basically got an ambassador and several others killed through narcissistic negligence and incompetent indifference.
POSTED BY: RIDLEY KNOWS | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:14 AM 7:14 AM
The DC-3 request is just a tiny piece of the evidence that will show the total disregard for American lives by the DOS and WH. Willful or due to absolute stupidity or incompetence, the person in charge needs to be fired. Clinton or Obama. I dont care which one, but one of the two needs to be held responsible for the blood they have on their hands.
POSTED BY: SAD TIMES | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:20 AM 7:20 AM
How inconvenient. This story sounds NOTHING like what the President and his administration assured the people. Never ends with this administration. They spin so much you cant believe anything they say.
POSTED BY: KAL ALBI | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:25 AM 7:25 AM
Why is this a surprise? The current administration does not care about Americans plus they are liers.
POSTED BY: KUTYADOG | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:27 AM 7:27 AM
At the bottom of the email in question, it says: Save trees please do not print this email unless necesary. Im glad they were concentrating on important details to keep people safe. Save the trees, forget the embassy staff.
POSTED BY: LARRY | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:28 AM 7:28 AM
What do we expect from Hildabeast, who hates the military and law enforcement, and Obama, who bows to the Muslims. Hildabeast will be gone by Jan.Obama, God help us!
POSTED BY: OLDFUZZ695 | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:29 AM 7:29 AM
Fire Obama and you get two birds with one stone Just sayin
POSTED BY: CB | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:34 AM 7:34 AM
So.. Let me see. The journalist headlines, then tweets this story out in a misleading way. Obviously that journalist is trying to link this to the murder of our Ambassador and his colleagues. When any thoughtful person who actually reads the article will ask what on earth does one have to do with another. Once again this shows more of a hostility to this administration by the journalist rather than an honest skepticism. These kinds of loaded stories makes one wonder about the meme of a liberalpress. Yeah right.
POSTED BY: STEVE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:35 AM 7:35 AM
Dont we already know this Obama administration is a lying piece-o-crap? Good Lord wake up people!
POSTED BY: NEWCOUNTRYMAN | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:42 AM 7:42 AM
Posted by: Steve | October 5, 2012, 7:35 am The DC-3 was requested by the Security Support Team (SST) at the embassy in Tripoli. Denying the request meant that any spur-of-the-moment deployment of the team to Benghazi would require chartering a flight from Tripoli to Behghazi, which would slow the response time of the SST. Im not saying it wouldve made any difference -and neither did Jake Tapper, but its an indication that the State Department didnt accurately assess the danger to U.S. personnell in Libya.
Its Jim Lehers fault! No wait, its Bushs fault. No wait, its Christopher Stevens fault for going there in the first place. No wait, its Romneys fault. No wait, its Sarah Palins fault. No wait, its Bushs fault.
Its Jake Tappers fault. Thats the ticket.
B-K KnightRider; Are you out there robot?
This administration was in too much of a hurry to establish relations with the new Muslim Brotherhood government of Libya. We should never put an ambassador in a make-shift unhardened embassy anywhere, especially in an unstable middle east country like Libya. This amounts to no less then criminal indifference,in my opinion the administration is solely to blame for the death of Ambassador Steven and his co-workers.
POSTED BY: HKDAKOTA | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:04 AM 8:04 AM
Larry, You make my point. An objective person would ask how you can make the huge leap from this email to this is an INDICATION that the State Department didnt accurately assess the danger. (my emphasis). I see it all as a bit deceptive, especially given that the subject of the email DC3 plane requestis left out of the headline and tweet. And of course the State Department appears to have a legitimate explanation of the matter.
POSTED BY: STEVE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:04 AM 8:04 AM
And still, ABC refuses to quote wired.coms e-mail exchange between one of the embassy staff and a fellow gamer. The TXT from one day before clearly shows that the embassy staff knew something was up and feared for their lives. It seems odd that a staffer and a gamer would exchange messages regarding the threat yet the state department didnt know? And by the way, it was not an airplane that the staff requested. It was the security team contained in a specific aircraft.
POSTED BY: WANTINGBALANCE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:04 AM 8:04 AM
WOW can you spell cover-up?
POSTED BY: JAMESCBUILDER | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:13 AM 8:13 AM
We have so many amateurs in this administration. The players cant even get on the same page to lie about this DEADLY inept terrorism, right down to using that word: terrorism. What qualifications did Hillary have to be Secretary of State or Panetta for the military job? Obama showed his amateur persona when he debated without his teleprompter, group of yes men/women, MSM and their softball cheerleading, etc. The next day he is all bravado. The REALObama was on that stage like the emperor without his clothes.
POSTED BY: JONNIE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:18 AM 8:18 AM
Another article by Jake Tapper. Just ignore it.
POSTED BY: OBAMA2012 | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:21 AM 8:21 AM
I see it all as a bit deceptive, especially given that the subject of the email DC3 plane requestis left out of the headline and tweet. Posted by: Steve | October 5, 2012, 8:04 am I didnt see the tweet, but the article aboves headline is pretty straight forward. Im not sure why you think not including DC3 plane requestin the headline makes it misleading. The security team made a request, and it was denied. And of course the State Department appears to have a legitimate explanation of the matter. Posted by: Steve | October 5, 2012, 8:04 am Are you referring to the State Dept response IN the email or their response TO the email?
Obama said yesterday: If someone wants to be president, then they owe the American people the truth.Well then, Obama just disqualified himself for president about a thousand times over, obviously. One recent exampleObama and his lackeys flat out lied about the attack in Libya for a full WEEK. Why? Because they basically got an ambassador and several others killed through narcissistic negligence and incompetent indifference.
POSTED BY: RIDLEY KNOWS | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:30 AM 8:30 AM
Obama2012among the 47%.
Yeah, back to the teleprompter and scrolling canned bs in front of crowds of moronically gullible people for Obama. Good luck with that. The new party line talking point is that Romney is a liar. LOL! Obama calling Romney a liar is
like a serial killer calling a speeder on the highway a criminal. Its that absurd.
POSTED BY: BEABEA | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:32 AM 8:32 AM
Nothing but a cover-up worse than Watergate. Obama hates America. Both he and his wife have confirmed that statement.
POSTED BY: WEB63GP | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:33 AM 8:33 AM
This is disgustingthe Obama administration was responsible for protecting those Americans and they rejected numerous claims for help!! So you send fellow Americans into these dangerous countries and dont give them enough protection!! I mean seriously they ASKED FOR HELP REPEATEDLYand what was the answer NO!!! What kind of country does that to their own people?? TIME FOR A CHANGERomney/Ryan 2012
POSTED BY: WHATHAPPENED016 | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:45 AM 8:45 AM
Beabea, this quote: Obama calling Romney a liar is like a serial killer calling a speeder on the highway a criminal. Is perfect!
POSTED BY: ANGIE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:46 AM 8:46 AM
I wonder when Susan Rice will just get fed up?
When r the other networks going to cover this failure to protect Ambassador Stevens?????? Answer: After the election.
POSTED BY: RICKY | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 9:07 AM 9:07 AM
Dont we already know this Obama administration is a lying piece-o-crap? Good Lord wake up people! POSTED BY: NEWCOUNTRYMAN | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:42 AM You can lead a progressive to the truth, but you cant MAKE them believe it.
POSTED BY: DEANBOB | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 9:25 AM 9:25 AM
Even now, our President tries to downplay the significance of what took place, saying merely that our foreign policy has suffered some bumps in the road.The foreign media have not been nearly as kind to the Administration as our own press has been. A headline in the German newspaper Der Spiegel put it bluntly: Obamas Middle East Policy Is In Ruins. That may be the view from Germany. But its certainly not how the press sees things or explains things here in the United States. Can you imagine how the mainstream media in this country would have reacted if something like this had occurred while George Bush was in office? And if word had gotten out that the President was skipping most of his daily intelligence briefings so he could campaign for reelection in Las Vegas and Hollywood?
Why dont we hear anything about all of the weapons used to kill the ambassador and Navy Seals? Is this the Libyan version of Fast and Furious?
Totally misleading headline and story unless you can show that having a shuttle plane available would have affected the security in Benghazi. Since they werent attacked in transit and there was not an attempt to get security support to Benghazi that would have gotten there in time to rescue the Americans, this is irrelevant to the attack. This is like saying that a denied request to have more copiers by the consulate shows lack of support from the State Dept. There is no therethere and to imply it shows ABC/Disneys Pro-Republican bias attempt to manipulate the news.
POSTED BY: ED, WATERTOWN MA | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 9:29 AM 9:29 AM
Obama, Clinton, and Susan Rice all lied. The Obama administration lied about this and Fast & Furious and people die. Obama lies about everything that might hurt his reelection, ignores it or just out and out lies. The word truth should not be allowed in his vocabulary. This new rues of 7.8 unemployment doesn match the number of new jobs reported. More lies before the election.
POSTED BY: FREEDOM | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 9:32 AM 9:32 AM
I can just imagine after 9/11 if Democrats had pounced on Bush and blamed him and exploited the situation for political gain like Republicans are doing now even though Republicans then used 9/11 for years afterwards. Wasnt that an epic fail the largest in our history? And we still dont have all the answers but suddenly the Republicans who did mention terrorism, Al Quaeda, Afghanistan at their convention are suddenly worried about the Middle East? Democrats arent the only ones who sit on security and defense Committees. I
POSTED BY: AUNTIECAIRO | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 9:34 AM 9:34 AM
DeanBob this didnt happen when Bush was in office it was called 9/11. It came out recently that the Bush administration had warning even further than in advance than previously though memo after memo went unnoticed Bush was on vacation 5 weeks the summer before 9/11 and Cheney didnt call any meetings on the anti-terror Committee of which he was allegedly in charge. Bushs mistakes have cost our country trillions of dollars and thousands of lives what happened in Libya is tragic but 4 lives vs. tens of thousands in two questionable wars does give some perspective. And why werent the Republicans concerned about this a month ago at their convention? They didnt mention anything about terrorism, Al Quaeda the wars yet talked up trying to start more heck Romney talks about China and Russia like its 1980. Im sure we will get answers to what happened in Libya but perhaps its time to get real answers about 9/11 unredact those reports as to Saudi Arabia and its ties to Bush investigate profits and money made by Halliburton from the wars by its investors and D&O like Cheney
POSTED BY: AUNTIECAIRO | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 9:38 AM 9:38 AM
AUNTIECAIRO | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 9:34 AM What about the Obama administrations lies, long after it has been proven they had the intelligence that said the attacks were pre-meditated?
AUNTIECAIRO | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 9:34 AM..I believe you are compare apples to oranges. Obama ignored the Congress and went into Libya (you do remember that the Congress is supposed to approve this action?), while the majority of Americans were against it. Then Obama gave the Libyans weapons; and, these weapons were subsequently used to kill the Ambassador.
Ambassador Stevens and his people knew better than anyone how safe and secure thtey were, or werent. The fact they requested specific resources from their HOME BASE (State Dept) to ensure relative safety should have been a GIANT clue to our officials to GET THEM HELP. Obama and his crew aided in the murder of five SUPERB, HEROIC Americans. Fire Hillary and let the dominoes fall from there.
POSTED BY: WILDANDBLUE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 10:01 AM 10:01 AM
Posted by: AuntieCairo | October 5, 2012, 9:38 am 9:38 am Nice try but you cant try to deflect this MAJOR LIE and COVERUP by channeling Bush! Team Oblammer dropped the ball on this because he didnt want his foreign policy to appear to be the joke that it is right before the election and is DIRECTLY responsible for the deaths of these brave Americans! Oblammer Lied and Americans died PERIOD! I would respect him if he admitted it his team made a mistake but instead what do we get lies and cover-ups! I guess this is FORWARDin the Oblammer zombie army!
POSTED BY: MEDIASTINKS_ABC | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 10:16 AM 10:16 AM
Why isnt this story the main Headline Story of the day instead of the phony jobs report. Why does ABC hide any negative reports on Obama administration and give negative comments on the opposition the most attention????????Now we know who is running the Whitehouse and it isnt Obama, he is just their puppet.
POSTED BY: FUDGENUT | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 10:22 AM 10:22 AM
The primary purpose of this coverup is directed at hillarys 2016 candidacy. She knows that this may probably bury her and expose her incompetency and lack of foreign policy experience. I doubt if all of the truth will ever surface because it is just too damaging for obama and hillary. It certainly will be delayed until after the election. The FBI investigation is a sham and for cosmetic purposes only.
POSTED BY: PERPLEXED | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 10:24 AM 10:24 AM
I can just imagine after 9/11 if Democrats had pounced on Bush and blamed him and exploited the situation for political gain like Republicans are doing now Posted by: AuntieCairo | October 5, 2012, 9:34 am 9:34 am HUGE difference. Bush didnt send out his lackeys to lie and say, It was a movie! It was a movie!
POSTED BY: WHERESMYMONEY | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 10:49 AM 10:49 AM
The media, like abc, have been covering for Obama on this one from day one. Have you heard any of our esteemed journalists ask an, even one, tough question about Libya? Mainstream media is destroying our country with their perverted progressive agenda.
POSTED BY: DOUG | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 10:58 AM 10:58 AM
abcs covering for obama and hillary has contributed to this murder of an Ambassador and three Americans. hillarys incompetency and inexperience were known by the MSM from the beginning but they looked the other way. It is inexcuseable.
POSTED BY: PERPLEXED | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 11:04 AM 11:04 AM
The death of four Americans in Libya could have been prevented but for the abject and total incompetence of Obama and Hillary Clinton. This is reason alone to throw this bunch out.
POSTED BY: CONSTANTINEXI | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 11:04 AM 11:04 AM
Maybe Univision will pick unp this story and someone will finally ask the tough questions.
POSTED BY: GOING GOING GONE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 11:06 AM 11:06 AM
Why is this story not front and center on every news website? Just shows that the lamestream media is the tank for obama.
POSTED BY: MIKE FROM TEXAS | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 11:33 AM 11:33 AM
This looks like Hillary is on hook here, but she is a protected political asset of Barack together with the staunch loyalist Susan Rice, so that makes Gen. Mike Clapper will be the scapegoat for political incompetence in the highest order ! Barack should be ready with facts on next debate as he will surely be ask about this. However, with medias protective cover, Barack may just continue to have soft ball questions then too !
POSTED BY: WYL5326 | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 11:36 AM 11:36 AM
Im not ready to call Hillary incompetent yet, but she could only be following Baracks instruction to maintain light footprint in Libya as he tries not to attract the ire of Terrorists there ! Unfortunately, Barack couldnt understand how serious are the treat of Terrorist. Remember how Barack even tried to banish the phrase War on Terror from the WH lexicon ? Thats how Baracks stupidity and naiveness is dictating on his actions ! VOTE out Barack next month !
POSTED BY: WYL5326 | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 11:42 AM 11:42 AM
Hesitent about labeling hillary an incompetent and inexperienced? Please itemize the foreign policy experience she had before her appointment in 2009? Do you know of a valid reason for her appointment to Sec. of State other than her husband?
POSTED BY: PERPLEXED | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 12:09 PM 12:09 PM
This should not be complicated. Americans in Libya need security protection, especially on 9/11. Does anybody really believe that somebody didnt drop the ball here? Only partisans
POSTED BY: PHIL HORTON | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 12:14 PM 12:14 PM
Can you say coverup, with even the media in on it! Im surprized to even see this story on ABC. It wont be here long becuase Im sure Axlrod is reaming the ABC news director right now for going off script! The media needs to pay some sort of price for the biased reporting this election cycle. If Oblammer does in fact blow this election the left will be mad because they were mislead and either way the right is going to be mad because of the biased reporting! Can you say ratings Nightmare, like it could get much worse for them but it will!
POSTED BY: MEDIASTINKS_ABC | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 12:34 PM 12:34 PM
The administration knew the Ambassador had serious security issues. The embassy was attacked twice before the night the Ambassador and Seals were killed. The administration knew this. They either let the Ambassador be killed or helped set it up. Why was the MusBros put in charge of security? How come the Marines werent properly staffed and armed? Why was the movement of the Ambassador leaked to the terrorists? Why is it just now that the FBI shows up after the scene has had plenty of time to be completely trampled and meddled? Why did the administration lie about what happened and offer up mixed messages on purpose?
POSTED BY: TEXBORK_2012 | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 12:39 PM 12:39 PM
This sounds suspiciously similar to when Brownieof the FEMA dropped the ball after Hurricane Katrina! Who will lose their job?
POSTED BY: OBAMA ZOMBIE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 12:45 PM 12:45 PM
Even more shocking, on Obamas watch, U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens was the first ambassador to be sodomized and murdered in U.S. history. On the anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. In Libya, where Obama waged an illegal war and killed scores of innocent civilians with drones.
POSTED BY: REALITY CHECK | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 12:55 PM 12:55 PM
OBAMA ZOMBIE: This sounds suspiciously similar to when Brownieof the FEMA dropped the ball after Hurricane Katrina! Who will lose their job? - Get fired for what? Not providing a DC3? That is crazy! How would having a DC3 have made one iota of a difference to what happened? TEXBORK_2012: The administration knew the Ambassador had serious security issues. - What makes the lack of a DC3 a serioussecurity issue? Other than the DC3 what other SPECIFIC issues were seriousand what is your EVIDENCE to support that contention?
POSTED BY: B-K KNIGHTRIDER | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 12:56 PM 12:56 PM
REALITY CHECK: Even more shocking, on Obamas watch, U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens was the first ambassador to be sodomized and murdered in U.S. history. - Oh please, stop regurgitating that LIE from rabidly partisan conservative propaganda sites. Also, maybe if you lay off of the partisan koolaide bong maybe the delusions will subside enough for you to be able to observe something even remotely similar to objective reality.
Naively following procedure? Sounds like a defense or damage control more than anything. Why is the spokesmanfrom the House Oversight Committee unnamed? Is this ongoing security issue going to impact the elections? I guess that depends on how protectionist the media is towards the current administration. It seems like Big Bird and the 47% have got the attention instead, along with the latest season of Dancing with the Stars.
POSTED BY: JANE R. | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 12:59 PM 12:59 PM
uh if you really read the above clip the DC3 airplane even if it had been provided back in may would have left when the security team left in AUG . so really this is a mute point. but I understand you think it furthers your agenda LOL again this SST team was withdrawn in AUG. got it? As to Mr Stevens the question that needs to be answered is why did Mr Stevens go to the less-secure post site in benghazi on Sep 11 instead of staying at the vastly more secure embassie in Tripoli? if after all there where ALL of these security concerns around Sept 11 and threats to Mr Stevens why did he make the decision to travel on that day with only 2 security personal??? That was his decision folks.
POSTED BY: LVAS | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 1:02 PM 1:02 PM
Posted by: B-K KnightRider | October 5, 2012, 12:58 pm 12:58 pm Truth hurts.
POSTED BY: SALLY | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 1:02 PM 1:02 PM
Posted by: B-K KnightRider | October 5, 2012, 12:58 pm 12:58 pm Regardless, a US ambassador is dead and the Obama administration denied him security he requested multiple times. Those are the facts.
POSTED BY: TED | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 1:04 PM 1:04 PM
SALLY: Truth hurts. - WHAT truth? I all I see are empty, petty, rabidly partisan opinions. Opinions are worthless as any idiot can have an empty opinion that lacks any support from rational reasons or reliable evidence. The ONLY thing commentors here know with any certainty is that the security detail was denied further us of a DC3. In case anyone was to lazy to bother to actually read the article, or is to stupid or ignorant to not understand what a DC3 is, a DC3 is a cargo aircraft that can also support personnel transport. Not one single person has offered a RATIONAL explanation for what difference having that plane would have made regarding the attack on the consulate. They are simply being petty, whining, rabidly partisan hacks and acting like the security detail was denied comm gear, weapons, ammo, and/or body armor you know, things that might have made a difference if they did not have them.
TED: Regardless, a US ambassador is dead and the Obama administration denied him security he requested multiple times. Those are the facts. - The ONLY known fact is totally IRRELEVANT. Again, HOW would what we KNOW was denied i.e. a DC3 made ANY DIFFERENCE WHAT SO EVER to preventing the Ambassadors death? The fact that the security detail was denied further use of a DC3 is TOTALLY irrelevant to the attack on the consulate. There is ZERO cause and effect relationship between the two issues. And anyone who claims or implies otherwise is an irrational rabidly partisan idiot.
SALLY: Posted by: B-K KnightRider | October 5, 2012, 12:58 pm 12:58 pm Truth hurts - Just to be perfectly clear about SALLYs claim regarding my post specifically at 12:58. I researched that claim within the last few weeks when some other partisan idiot made it. There is not one shred of truth to the specific claim I was responding to in my 12:58 post. The ONLY sources for that LIE and I repeat LIE, as in a bold faced LIE are conservative propaganda sites on the Internet that made it up and others that have been regurgitating it. Not one single reputable news source in the entire world has repeated that lie made up by rabidly partisan delusional liars. Not even Feaux News dared to repeat that lie.
The ONLY fact that one need be concerned about is that we have a DEAD Ambassador and three Americans. Why are they dead?
PERPLEXED: The ONLY fact that one need be concerned about is that we have a DEAD Ambassador and three Americans. Why are they dead? - On the basis of what I have learned so far they are dead mostly because well trained and well armed radical malitia members planned, coordinated, and launched a tactical assault on a fixed position using small arms, heavy machine guns, PRGs, and indirect fire. Another contributing factor was the Amassadors well known habit of moving about the country with minimal security. It would not have made a difference if the Ambassador had had a whole Marine Division at his disposal if he was always choosing to have only minimal protection with him whenever he left the protection of the Embassy.
Yes we have 1 ambassador and 3 security folks dead and the right ringers are screaming why why? well its because being ambassador in war torn countries is a dangers job folks and yes your trying to use this US ambassador death for some kind of political advantage how un-American and how said is that?. Im still waiting to hear the answer as to WHY we have 4,477 dead and 31,961 wounded Americana in the Iraq war. Do you right wingers have that answer yet? I mean after all its only been like 12 years since Bush started that war.
Can you please tell me what was the reason for that war again? and can you answer was it worth the cost in American lifes? The Iraq war was a war of choice which the right wing extremeist in this county chose to make.
Posted by: B-K KnightRider | October 5, 2012, 1:37 pm 1:37 pm Its well established that the U.S. Consulate in Libya had no security on 9/11. Are you dense?
It would not have made a difference if the Ambassador had had a whole Marine Division at his disposal if he was always choosing to have only minimal protection with him whenever he left the protection of the Embassy. Thats NOT THE POINT, idiots!!
Posted by: lvas | October 5, 2012, 1:39 pm 1:39 pm Obamas responsible for 70% of all U.S. casualties in Afghanistan, not to mention hundreds of civilian deaths.
The only positive aspect of the knee jerkreactions to this storyis that it confirms that the individuals supporting our current candidates have little capacity to think for themselves. Read beyond the headliness that rarely are a true indicator of the items news value. Consider the source always. That applies to both sides of this currently divisive election. A generation of TV-sized citizens satisfied with miniscule sound bites flavored with corn syrup and ill will are being led down a path with a very clear destination. It is a place where truth is bought, packaged and served up in very little pieces that do not reflect its original form at all. Stop, take a breath and consider what is happening. Do good things.
POSTED BY: EUGENEJOHN | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 1:52 PM 1:52 PM
B-K KnightRider, With respect to you, aside from the D3, in five months leading up to the 9/11 terrorist attack there were two bombings on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi and increasing threats to and attacks on the Libyan nationals hired to provide security at the U.S. missions in Tripoli and Benghazi. I think that alone would indicate theres a threat. Honestly, to me a couple of bombings actually sends a stronger message than an email regarding what the security situation was. This is concerning to me because, why would the administration send Stevens to an embassy building thats already been attacked and there were more threats to it on Facebook? So, 1. we know that there were attacks in this area. 2. We know that there were threats leading up to this. 3. We know Libya itself requested extra protection. Not only that, I just downloaded the email from Miki Rankin regarding the DC-3 Support. The email states that the Undersecretary for Management has determined support for Embassy Tripoli using the DC-3 will be terminated immediately. So, the DC-3 was already there and supported, but that even with the threats and bombings, that support was terminated. Still, take the DC-3 out and we have the threats and bombings before the 9/11 attack. Thats the evidence I have. The June bomb blast in Benghazi that blew a hole in a perimeter wall surrounding the consulate is evidence to me that there was a security issue that needed attention.
On the basis of what I have learned so far they are dead mostly because well trained and well armed radical malitia members planned, coordinated, and launched a tactical assault on a fixed position using small arms, heavy machine guns, PRGs, and indirect fire. Posted by: B-K KnightRider | October 5, 2012, 1:37 pm 1:37 pm What??? Are you saying it wasnt a spontaneous reaction to a movie??? NYTIMES: Based on information provided to the committee by individuals with direct knowledge of events in Libya, the attack that claimed the ambassadors life was the latest in a long line of attacks on Western diplomats and officials in Libya in the months leading up to Sept. 11, 2012,the letter said. Multiple U.S. federal government officials have confirmed to the committee that, prior to the Sept. 11 attack, the U.S. mission in Libya made repeated requests for increased security in Benghazi,it said. The mission in Libya, however, was denied these resources by officials in Washington. In June, the letter asserted, Mr. Stevens was threatened in a posting on a Facebook page supporting the old government in Libya. Other episodes it cited included harassment, beatings, unsuccessful bombing attempts, gunfights and attacks with rocket-propelled grenades, directed not only at Americans but also at other international representatives and the new Libyan authorities. Put together, these events indicated a clear pattern of security threats that could only be reasonably interpreted to justify increased security for U.S. personnel and facilities in Benghazi,the letter said. ABC News only got their hands on ONE e-mail that was about the plane. The House Oversight Committee has more.
POSTED BY: WHERESMYMONEY | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 1:57 PM 1:57 PM
Sally you can lie to your self all you want but all americans know who started the Iraq and Afgan wars and it was the repbulican party and Bush. period LOL
Yes we have 1 ambassador and 3 security folks dead and the right ringers are screaming why why? well its because being ambassador in war torn countries is a dangers job folks and yes your trying to use this US ambassador death for some kind of political advantage how un-American and how said is that?. Posted by: lvas | October 5, 2012, 1:39 pm 1:39 pm The real question is WHY did the President and company LIE about why the Embassy was attacked?
TED: Its well established that the U.S. Consulate in Libya had no security on 9/11. Are you dense? - ROFLMAO That is patently FALSE! ! ! Are you grossly ignorant of the actual facts, so rabidly partisan to engage in self-delusion to make up your own facts, not smart enough to understand the facts, or just plain dishonest? It is a FACT that the Consulate had security. The security in place was not sufficient to deal with the kind of military assault launched on the facility, but it did in fact have security.
Sally you can lie to your self all you want but all americans know who started the Iraq and Afgan wars and it was the repbulican party and Bush. period LOL Posted by: lvas | October 5, 2012, 1:59 pm 1:59 pm Sally stated FACTS. You ARE aware that Hillary Clinton voted to go to war in Iraq, right?
The security in place was not sufficient to deal with the kind of military assault launched on the facility, but it did in fact have security. Posted by: B-K KnightRider | October 5, 2012, 2:03 pm 2:03 pm Yep, it sure did. Rent a cops without bullets.
Posted by: lvas | October 5, 2012, 1:59 pm 1:59 pm Republicans and Democrats in Congress approved both wars. Some of the most passionate calls for going to war with Iraq came from DEMOCRATS as far back as the Clinton era. The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow. Bill Clinton in 1998 There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction. John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002 Saddams existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraqs enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East. John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002 Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administrations policy towards Iraq, I dont think there can be any question about Saddams conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts. Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002 (W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he is miscalculating Americas response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War. John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003 Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administrations policy towards Iraq, I dont think there can be any question about Saddams conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts. Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002
POSTED BY: DEMS ARE WARMONGERS | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 2:11 PM 2:11 PM
BK It would not have made a difference if the Ambassador had had a whole Marine Division at his disposal if he was always choosing to have only minimal protection with him whenever he left the protection of the Embassy. SALLY: Thats NOT THE POINT, idiots!! - Why not? Of course it is the point. It is a well known fact that the Ambassador CHOSE to travel around the country with minimal security because he did not want a large security detail to get between him and the Libyan people. Therefore, the Ambassador was partly responbible for what happened to him. It is IMPOSSIBLE to totally protect someone who CHOOSES to routinely use minimal security instead of more security whenever leaving the protection of the Embassy. Where is that vaunted conservative value of personal responsability for personal choices? To use the Navy as a metaphor, the Ambassador was the skipper of his ship and so the Ambassador was ultimately responsible for what happened under his command and supervision. Anyone expecting ANY President or Secretary of State to personally tour every American Embassy and Consulate in the world to micromanage their security is a foolish idiot. IF there was any evidence that the Embassay security chief had requested ADDITIONAL security personnel and equipment that could have made a difference in defending against the attack on the Consulate and then the State Department denied those kinds of request THEN we would have a rational and legitimate issue for severe criticism. So far we DO NOT know any such thing.
The security in place was not sufficient to deal with the kind of military assault launched on the facility, but it did in fact
have security. Posted by: B-K KnightRider | October 5, 2012, 2:03 pm 2:03 pm Yep, it sure did. Rent a cops without bullets. Posted by: wheresmymoney | October 5, 2012, 2:08 pm 2:08 pm Exactly. Hillary Clinton signed off on the no bulletsrules on engagement. Complete madness.
The U.S. Consulate is still not secured weeks after the attack. Shortly after the attack, CNN walked around and perused Top Secret documents. How is this possible?
IF there was any evidence that the Embassay security chief had requested ADDITIONAL security personnel and equipment that could have made a difference in defending against the attack on the Consulate and then the State Department denied those kinds of request THEN we would have a rational and legitimate issue for severe criticism. So far we DO NOT know any such thing. Posted by: B-K KnightRider | October 5, 2012, 2:16 pm 2:16 pm Political Punch October 2nd: Earlier today, chairman of the committee Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, the chair of the subcommittee on national security, homeland defense, and foreign operations, wrote to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, asserting that multiple U.S. federal government officials have confirmed to the Committee that, prior to the September 11 (2012) attack, the U.S. mission in Libya made repeated requests for increased security in Benghazi. The mission in Libya, however, was denied these requests by officials in Washington. The two congressmen also listed thirteen incidents leading up to the attack ranging from I.E.D. and RPG attacks to a posting on a pro-Gaddafi Facebook pagepublicizing early morning runs taken by the late Ambassador Chris Stevens and his security detail around Tripoli. MULTIPLE U.S. GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS HAVE CONFIRMED REPEATED REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL SECURITY. Obama and company LIED about the reason the embassy was attacked. AND are covering up their refusal to protect it.
TEXTBORK_2012: B-K KnightRider, With respect to you, aside from the D3, in five months leading up to the 9/11 terrorist attack there were two bombings on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi and increasing threats to and attacks on the Libyan nationals hired to provide security at the U.S. missions in Tripoli and Benghazi. I think that alone would indicate theres a threat. - True, very true. I completely agree. And so either the Ambassador and his security advisors i.e. the people on the ground at the scene and closest to the situation and threats underestimated the threat and therefore did not adequately prepare to defend against the threat, OR the Ambassador chose to ignore the level of the threat and continue his habit of moving around the country with minimal security. I dont have a clue whether or not analysts further away in the State Department were necessarily in a position to provide a better assessment and then overrule the Ambassador and his people by microcmanaging from a distance to impose upon them more security resources or take different security measures than what they were already doing. I dont know enough reliable information upon which to base a rational condemnation of the Adminstration as a whole above the level of the Ambassador and his people. Is it possible people higher in the chain of command failed on some level? Sure it is. And when I know enough information and have enough evidence to warrant it I will criticize them appropriately. But since I despise micromanagement just on principle I NEVER condemn anyone for failing to micromanage and instead hold chains of command responsible at the most appropriate level. Well, the cat is visiting and might be making it impossible to type shortly by laying down on my arm.
Obama GUILTY 4 murderednightly news team told not to air this or intentionaly covering up for Obama??? Resign ClintonResign Susan RiceIMPEACH OBAMA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OBAMA_______________VS________________AMERICA
POSTED BY: YEP I SAID THAT | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 2:35 PM 2:35 PM
Ted, Theres more on the security assigned to the consulate in Benghazi. US security officers and the Libyan authorities did not call for help from any formal military or police force, but turned to the leader of another autonomous militia with its own radical Islamist ties, the February 17 Brigadeis controlled by Fawzi Bukatef and it had been charged with local security to the consulatein Benghazi. Thats the same February 17 Brigadethat is tied to the Muslim Brotherhood. Two U.S. intelligence officials are currently analyzing an intercept between Bukatef to an officer in the brigade to have his men stand down for a pending attackanother piece of evidence implying the violence was planned in advance. There are even reports that part of the February 17 Brigadestood down as the Islamist attackers stormed the U.S. consulate. Which makes perfect sense when you consider Libyan Interior Minister Wanis al-Sharifs early claims that Libyan security forces essentially handed the US consulate personnel over to the attackers. The information is all out there if only the media were still governmental watchdogs instead of a party-line propagandist machine more people would know this, but they are covering it up instead of covering it.
WHERESMYMONEY @ 2:31 So what? I heard Issa say exactly the same thing. That is all worthless ambiguous garbage. How convenient that Issa did not mention one single specific detail of ANY requests for ANYTHING that would have actually made a difference. Basically, Issa is engaging in a lie of ommission and lie of implication. For all we know requests for more battary chargers and batteries for the security details radios were turned down. How convenient for Issa to NOT present one shred of evidence to rationally support what he is trying to imply.
B-K KnightRider, Chief, no problem. The email itself doesnt contain any detail from DC on the reason for the decision to pull the DC-3. To be honest, I dont think that particular part of the situation was going to make the difference. For me is not the issue of the aircraft. If the State Dept wanted to get the Ambassador out, they would have chartered a plane or made other arrangements. Thats why I really think this whole thing stinks. I mean, the FBI shows up on the scene 3 weeks after CNN got there? That doesnt seem right either.
WHERESMYMONEY: Obama and company LIED about the reason the embassy was attacked. AND are covering up their refusal to protect it. - How long have you had those magical powers of telepathy that allow you to KNOW when they are lying (i.e. intending to decieve) instead of just mistaken/wrong? I always find it amazing how conservatives switch between the government being totally competent at conspiracies, or a bunch of liars, or incompetent at everything they do depending upon which characterization is the most politically expeditious.
TEXTBORK_2012: I mean, the FBI shows up on the scene 3 weeks after CNN got there? That doesnt seem right either. - CNN does not have to deal with the political fallout of rabidly partisan hacks distorting and perverting and exaggerating anything and everything possible in the hope of gaining the political advantage one single extra vote.
TEXTBORK_2012: The June bomb blast in Benghazi that blew a hole in a perimeter wall surrounding the consulate is evidence to me that there was a security issue that needed attention. - I totally agree with you again. You present a very valid rational concern and thus raise legitimate questions. Aye, there is the rug. We do not KNOW that the security issues were not getting attention, nor how much attentiion, nor sufficient attention. Sadly, some people choose to act as if they know for a fact beyond any shadow of a doubt that relevant security conerns were getting ZERO attention by everyone.
BK: You are full of bull if you dont think it matters whether he had adequate security. That is just a cop-out for hillary and obama. If it doesnt matter what kind of security then why have any at all? No, security is changed depending on the situation and the intelligence. One size does not fit all. If your butt were on the line you wouldnt be taking such a flippant view. If hillarys butt was on the line I guarantee you that she would care about what security was provided. You are excusing people who were incompetent and it doesnt matter to you who has to die because of that incompetency. These people had families. These people were your fellow countrymen.
Scandalous! They should all be fired, especially Obama!
POSTED BY: FREEDOM | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 2:59 PM 2:59 PM
WHERESMYMONEY: Obama and company LIED about the reason the embassy was attacked. AND are covering up their refusal to protect it. How long have you had those magical powers of telepathy that allow you to KNOW when they are lying (i.e. intending to decieve) instead of just mistaken/wrong? Posted by: B-K KnightRider | October 5, 2012, 2:47 pm 2:47 pm Because they kept up the LIE for over a week, even though intelligence called it terrorism. Obama stated it again in his UN speech which was AFTER Carney told the press it was a terror attack.
Perplexed, I dont think that BK said that security didnt matter. I think what he was saying is that the Ambassador is like an Executive Officer. A Base Commander, Skipper He calls most of the shots. Not all of them, but he has a certain level of executive powers at his level. DC can give order and authorize or deauthorize expenditures and assets. While I dont always agree with him on many things, I understand where hes coming from on this. To the degree of the freedom of Command and Movement the Ambassador had, I do not know. There were extremely bad decisions made over this and it could be by the Ambassador, but then again, it could be from DC as well. Either way, someone let the radicals end up controlling the security and movement and that was a stupid fing idea regardless. I still seriously maintain the claim stops somewhere back in DC, but the spin and lies keep the truth from being known and the evidence that is out there does suggest more that the administration was involved and tried to cover it up, but has failed badly at that as well. They have successfully kept the public from knowing the real truth or even if we do, we will question even that. Yeah, I dont think BK is full of BS. We agree on some things and not on others, but not because of BS.
ABC Take down this worthless piece of crap. It is a bogus claim. The DC3 would have had no impact on this situation. This is shameless pandering to right wing tin foil morons.
POSTED BY: BILL | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 4:29 PM 4:29 PM
PERPLEXED: BK: You are full of bull if you dont think it matters whether he had adequate security. - Where and how did I say or imply anything even remotely like that? Beyond that I cannot possibly respond better than how TEXTBORK_2012 replied to you with his excellent and spot on analysis. As far as the overall issue goes, while TEXTBORK is a little more critical than I am willing to be at this time on the basis of the information we have, every issue and question he raises is fair and valid to bring up as possibilities to consider at least.
What this email shows is that there was communication about the security situation I expect more will follow. Also there are news reports, which I am sure they (in DC) were aware of, of various terrorist attacks on Westerners in Benghazi with the latest being a bomb attack on the British ambassador in his car (pics and video on the web)- Brits closed up shop and left. One current HUGE proof of incompetence or dereliction is the lack of structural security in place for this to even be considered a consulatein order to protect not only those humans there but also the very classified info (regarding humans around there). THOSE CALLS ARE TYPICALLY WELL ABOVE THE PAY GRADE OF THE IN-COUNTRY AMBASSADOR. THERES A PROTOCOL THAT WOULD HAVE HAD TO BE WAIVED- WHO WAIVED IT?
POSTED BY: ABC | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 4:31 PM 4:31 PM
Joke Tappy: Yes sir Chairman Issa, please, anything you want leaked into the media, no matter how ridiculous your spin, Im your man! Executive Producer: Way to go Joke Tappy! Drudge Report link traffic, here we come!
POSTED BY: JESSUP | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 4:36 PM 4:36 PM
This is shameless pandering to right wing tin foil morons. Posted by: Bill | October 5, 2012, 4:29 pm 4:29 pm Tapper is a Democrat and a fine journalist.
POSTED BY: DON | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 4:39 PM 4:39 PM
WHERESMYMONEY: Because they kept up the LIE for over a week, even though intelligence called it terrorism. Obama stated it again in his UN speech which was AFTER Carney told the press it was a terror attack. - And you KNOW they intended to decieve how exactly? You KNOW they intended to decieve instead of just getting it wrong how exactly? Just being wrong is NOT sufficient to create a lie. Lying requires an intent to deceive. For example, your claim that intelligence called it terrorismis very misleading. So, I will give you the benefit of the doubt an assume you are simply ignorant of the certain facts. On the basis of everything I have read and heard, intelligence INITIALLY used the label of terrorism ONLY to release certain resources in the fastest way possible. The mere possibility that the attack was a terrorist attack was sufficient for them to use the terrorism lable strictly to release certain resources. Initially they were NOT making a determination of fact or presenting a conclusion from their analysis or assessment of the information and situation.
Poor Jake Tapper. The one reporter in the MSM that doesnt cover up for the Obama Administration. It is the job of the 4th estate to keep the government honest. Every suspicious angle should be investigated. If there is nothing found, as long as the reporter and his editors dont libel anyone, than it is just the gathering of news. Instead of seeing Jake as the adverserial press, keeping government honest, the tolerant liberals see him as another person to smear and jeer.
POSTED BY: IONAGOAL | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 5:00 PM 5:00 PM
COVER UP BIG TIME by Obama Admin since they will DO ANYTHING to NOT AFFACT HIS RE-ELECTION Americans be damned! Please do not waste your VOTE this Nov!
POSTED BY: UMA | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 5:17 PM 5:17 PM
Sep 19, 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was a terrorist attack.Matthew Olsen, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, repeated. Was Obama not receiving intelligence? He spoke AFTER this at the UN and still repeated the movie LIE.
Repeating something said in another thread on this topic: It reminds one of ChineseGordon; How far does the parallel run ?
POSTED BY: M. REPORT | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 5:31 PM 5:31 PM
I love the tiny placement of this link should be splashed across page one, and would be if the Bush State Dept. had done this. Establishment media at its most biased.
POSTED BY: TEENBO | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 5:42 PM 5:42 PM
WHERESMYMONEY: Sep 19, 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was a terrorist attack.Matthew Olsen, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, repeated. Was Obama not receiving intelligence? He spoke AFTER this at the UN and still repeated the movie LIE.: - Nice try taking his comment out of context. He actually said the current evidence available at the time suggested it was a terrorist attack. Meaning it was possible. Meaning it was probable. But NOT meaning they were yet certain. He basically gave the Senate his professional informed opinion, but NOT an official determination made from all available evidence. Since I dont know exactly what the President said in full context at the UN I dont have a clue how accurate your opinion is on that point. Based on your track record I have ZERO reason to trust your characterization.
A DC-3? How many air miles are on that craft?
POSTED BY: JAMESR | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 5:46 PM 5:46 PM
What, exactly, would a DC-3, an antique aircraft, have accomplished against people on the ground armed with RPGs? How would it have enhanced the security of the Libyan embassy? Use your heads, folks!
POSTED BY: MARK KESSINGER | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 5:52 PM 5:52 PM
Yeah. Obama results!!! The economy has spoken. GDP downUnemployment upnational debt up manufacturing downmiddle-class income down!!!! Obamas policies have spoken.. stimulusfailed Taxes up. record debt up. spending upregulations up. inflation comingpersonal freedoms down!!!! Obamas leadership has spoken. Embassy-gateFast & Furious. Solyndra. Prostitute-gateCommie czars!!! - Obamas LiesObamacare. Guantanamo Bay. FEDs hidden $1.6 Trillion debt . taxing the middle classdeficit not reducedseas are not lowering!!!!
POSTED BY: THELOYALOPPOSITION | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 5:55 PM 5:55 PM
Another drunk Kennedy involved in other peoples deaths.
POSTED BY: MARGIELYLE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 5:59 PM 5:59 PM
When will you realize that the killed Americans where just collateral damage, just like the soldiers killed in Afganistan, and the dead civilians killed in the drone strikes.
POSTED BY: LIZZIE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:00 PM 6:00 PM
What an utter non-story. Theres no way the plane could have helped save our personnels lives, and removing the plane was entirely proper. Is ABC News now trying to outdo Fox News?
POSTED BY: BRIAN K | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:02 PM 6:02 PM
God bless Jake Tapper! The last of the living MSM journalists!
POSTED BY: BRIAN | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:04 PM 6:04 PM
The blame fall directly on Hillary Clinton. She was fully aware of the requests for additional security and did NOTHING. She has a long track record of cover ups. Add this one to the list. Shame on congress for accepting her nomination as Secretary of State.
POSTED BY: VINCE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:04 PM 6:04 PM
Uh Oh for President O.
POSTED BY: GEORGE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:04 PM 6:04 PM
We The People have all known the truth about the attack virtuallyhours after it happened. The attack was posted on FB, for Gods sake! You allocated all that money to build a facility to retrieve and analyseand you miss THIS?!?!? This e-mail provides additional fuel to the fire. And then you are so shameless as to LIE to us??? This blood is on YOUR hands! People should really consider how they feel about people that lie so easily
POSTED BY: ANN GITZINGER | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:08 PM 6:08 PM
the same people (Republicans)upset about this are the same people that deny our Vets benefits and more resources ( Veterans Bill that was rejected last week). Spare me the fake outrage. I dont see you crying or complaining over all the soldiers Bush sent to Iraq based on Lies.
POSTED BY: SEAN MARRON | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:11 PM 6:11 PM
I cannot even imagine how the family and friends of those killed in the 9-11 anniversary attack are feeling right now. I wonder if any would like to speak out but are afraid to due to possible retaliationfrom our regime. This is beyond reprehensible. If your ambassador and other embassy staff request security to continue YOUR GIVE IT TO THEM!!!! You should have saved money and cut Valerie Jarretts security detail and moved it over to Benghazi. Thank you Jake Tapper, for being one of the lone voices of truth here. Please keep this issue alive until election day. Obama & Co.have no place in the PeoplesHouse!
POSTED BY: LITTLELEERS | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:12 PM 6:12 PM
In an effort to show mad dog terrorists how much we trustthem, Obama and Hillary got our ambassador raped and murdered by said terrorists. That is the bottom line. Neither of them is competent to be a small town dog catcher, much less POTUS and SECSTATE. FIRE THEM!
POSTED BY: ERIC | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:12 PM 6:12 PM
@Sean Marron: You talk about Bush sending soldiers to die in Iraq based on lies. Nice little PROG that you are and serial liar like all Progs, you bend the truth to meet your ideology. SICK TO THE CORE. 1, Going into Iraq was voted
on by congressDemocrats AND Republicans. 2. We have more men dying in Afghanistan under Obamas watch then when GWB was in office, yet you and yours are silentcrickets4. Obama sent our military assets into Libyas civil war. Obama, unlike GWB, go to congress for advice or even a mere voteHe did it because he wanted to. Many civilians died as well and Obamas singular decision bolstered Al-Qaedas hold on Benghazi. .Every 9-11 when GWB was in office, his administration beefed up security in hot spots. Obama, Clinton, and Rice denied men security protection and delivered them a death sentence. Anyone who defends the actions of Obama, Clinton, and Rice appear willing to shed American blood when it suits their ideology. Soft tyranny that will be booted out on Nov. 6th
Thanks Jake, good reporting, keep after Republicans and Democrats keep them honest and us Educated.
POSTED BY: PHILIP | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:19 PM 6:19 PM
America knows who the real lairs are, shame on you Obama. The sad part this all started before the LAST election :(
POSTED BY: STEVEN ROBERTS | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:22 PM 6:22 PM
THIS is why that hideous Tweet came out on September 11 these guys KNEW they werent gettting any backup from this INCOMPETENT and DISGUSTING ADMINISTRATION.
POSTED BY: JOEB | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:23 PM 6:23 PM
RIP Ambassador Stevens and staff. This negligence is unforgivable. Get rid of OBAMA now!
I hope President Romney makes an offer to private citizen Obama/Davis, that he cannot refuse, of the ambassadorship to Libya.
POSTED BY: PORCOROSSO | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:24 PM 6:24 PM
["What, exactly, would a DC-3, an antique aircraft, have accomplished against people on the ground armed with RPGs? How would it have enhanced the security of the Libyan embassy? Use your heads, folks!"] ..you either did not read the entire article or your comprehension is severely impaired. The article clearly states that the aircraft comes with SST. a well equipped security detailmeaning that a detachment of special forces are part of that DC-3 package. If you know anything about special forces, they are trained to sniff out and prevent possible attacks, to keep people safe, and to know how to repel an attack. You are a great example of the dumbed down Obama voter base. God Help Us.
And so what will happen now we know just how complicit in these peoples death the admin was? Nothing.
POSTED BY: MONTFORD GREENWOOD | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:32 PM 6:32 PM
The whole Libya terrorist attack and the subsequent coverup are an embarassment to the Obama re-election campaign so Hillary has tried to stonewall until after the election. This is really similar to the Watergate break-in that ultimately resulted in Nixons resignation. The difference now is that Obama made so many promises about transparency that have shown themselves to be worthless.
POSTED BY: MISSOURIAN | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:33 PM 6:33 PM
OK, heres the question. Did the Obama administration tell the truth about anything? Apparently not. Next well find out that they have accepted donations from Hezbollah and the Muslim Brotherhood. That story will come out on Monday.
POSTED BY: DONB | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:34 PM 6:34 PM
After denying support to the Rangers in Somalia in 1993, Defense Secretary Les Aspin resigned. Hilllary should Cowboy Up and do the same.
POSTED BY: FLYOVERMAN | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:34 PM 6:34 PM
Obama and administration and government-media-complex put his election first over the responsibilities of the office. If not criminal, it certainily is *** not leadership ***. The corruption is staggering!
POSTED BY: MAX | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:34 PM 6:34 PM
Well, NumNuts, the cat is out of the bag!! You are a despicable president and your Sec State is right there with you!!
POSTED BY: AZTOM | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:36 PM 6:36 PM
Yeah, the state department wants heavily armed US special forces to travel on commercial aircraft. Makes perfect sense to me, Lets just all strap on our rocket propelled grenades and head down to the local airport and see how that works out.
POSTED BY: NICK | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:42 PM 6:42 PM
Obama has blood on his hands. Shame on the head of Obama.
Obama has blood on his hands. Shame on the head of Obama. POSTED BY: NICK So too does Holder.
POSTED BY: PATRICIA | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:49 PM 6:49 PM
You cant expect Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to doge sniper fire and protect the embassies all at the same time.
POSTED BY: BUZZ | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 6:53 PM 6:53 PM
Just sickening. And sick. This administration has got to GO.
Nice try taking his comment out of context. He actually said the current evidence available at the time suggested it was a terrorist attack. Meaning it was possible. Meaning it was probable. But NOT meaning they were yet certain. He basically gave the Senate his professional informed opinion, but NOT an official determination made from all available evidence. Since I dont know exactly what the President said in full context at the UN I dont have a clue how accurate your opinion is on that point. Based on your track record I have ZERO reason to trust your characterization. Posted by: B-K KnightRider | October 5, 2012, 5:44 pm 5:44 pm Of course you dont know what he said, and youre too lazy to look it up. That is what we saw play out the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity. It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well for as the city outside these walls makes clear, we are a country that has welcomed people of every race and religion. We are home to Muslims who worship across our country. We not only respect the freedom of religion we have laws that protect individuals from being harmed because of how they look or what they believe. We understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them. You keep talking about the official determination. Why did they blame the movie BEFORE there was an official determination? Carney also said to Jake Tapper, IT WAS BECAUSE OF THE MOVIE. Carney also said he speaks for the President. But hey, why let the FACTS get in the way of your and the Obama agenda.
Thanks for the reporting Jake, this is really sad and I hope the state department is in high gear to prevent this happening to other embassy employees.
POSTED BY: THRON | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:00 PM 7:00 PM
Great story. Finally, some real news on this. LIsten folks, this is life and death. Its not politics. Obama and the Clintons are always trying to game the system, always seeking political advantage, well now they got people killed needlessly.
["....I can just imagine after 9/11 if Democrats had pounced on Bush and blamed him and exploited the situation for political gain like Republicans are doing now even though Republicans then used 9/11 for years afterwards. Wasnt that an epic fail the largest in our history? And we still dont have all the answers but suddenly the Republicans who did mention terrorism, Al Quaeda, Afghanistan at their convention are suddenly worried about the Middle East? Democrats arent the only ones who sit on security and defense Committees. .....].GWB in office 8 months before 9-11.Clinton in office 8 yrs with the 93 Twin Towers bombing and the bombing of the USS Cole. Clinton had two opportunities to take out OBL, but declineObama in office for almost 4 yrs. State Department receives e-mails requesting continuation of SST, especially on the anniversary of 9-11 in roiling Benghazi. Request DENIED. American blood dripping from the hands of Obama (U.S.A.s CEO) and SOS Clinton. By the way.your analogy of the first 9-11 and what happened in Benghazi-Gate is like comparing Apples and Broccoli!
And Obama has the nerve to call Romney a liar? I think the first debate clearly shows who would better run this country! After seeing how amateurish the Obama Administration is, I am starting to warm up to Romney as president!
POSTED BY: DON WV | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:33 PM 7:33 PM
When Regan was in office a few of his staff got involved in guns for hosages called Iran-Contra Affair. The President claimed no knowledge but took responsibility after it was discovered and the persons responsible were removed from their positions. This is how a President should lead not hide and block investigations like Obama in the Fast
and Furious Guns sales to the Cartel which has now resulted in the deaths of two Border patrol Agents and how many other Mexican citizens that we are not told about. Another bump in the road end of statemenrt.
POSTED BY: ROBERT | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:34 PM 7:34 PM
I think the reason Obama does not do press conferences is because he is scared of Jake Tapper.
POSTED BY: BRYAN L | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:36 PM 7:36 PM
Wow this is ABC, So many anti DOS comments, dont you get that the unemployment rate had a absolutely stunning reversal to 7.8%. one month before the election :))
POSTED BY: ALOHAJONNY | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:42 PM 7:42 PM
A DC-3? A 70-year-old airplane would improve the security situation? I could understand if they were denied the use of a B-17 or some P-51 Mustangs, but a DC-3?
POSTED BY: PAT | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:50 PM 7:50 PM
How is there NOT ONE mention of the commander-in-chief, Barack Obama in this story, Tapper? Unreal.
POSTED BY: CHICO | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:54 PM 7:54 PM
Where is Ambassador Stevens family, wife? I would be screaming at the top of my lungs if this were my husband??? Me thinks, the WH and obama is keeping her quiet!
POSTED BY: KAITARA | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:09 PM 8:09 PM
The Obama regime has been proven to be incompetent and corrupt. Because of this the Ambassador, two former Navy SEALs and an Air Force veteran were needlessly murdered. The United States cannot tolerate 4 more years of failed policies. Vote Romney/Ryan 2012
POSTED BY: GUNTHER | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:31 PM 8:31 PM
Day 24, the Obama Bengazi-Gate criminal COVER UP continues. The 3AM calls came and were ignored.
POSTED BY: KELVIN | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:37 PM 8:37 PM
Jake Tapper deserves a Pulitzer for his journalistic integrity. In an industry where journo-lists collude to report the news from a distinct point of view, Tapper consistently demonstrates an appreciation for the news, a respect for the publics ability to make up their own minds, and a willingness to challenge the status quo.
POSTED BY: LARRY | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:40 PM 8:40 PM
Jake thanks. Maybe there is hope in the mainstream media that some journalistic integrity lives. God Bless America and those poor souls killed like that. You can send billions to these hell-holes but not some security. Arrest Hil/Bum NOW. Treason!!!!!!! Deriliction of duty.
POSTED BY: NOPCSPOKENHERE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:49 PM 8:49 PM
Top
Leave a Reply
Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.
Name (required)
Mail (will not be published) (required)
Website
SUBMIT COMMENT
Today in ABC News
ABC News Home

Email Shows State Department Rejecting Request of Security Team at US Embassy in Libya

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Email Shows State Department Rejecting Request of Security Team at US Embassy in Libya

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ABC NEWS BLOGS

Political Punch Headlines Politics Entertainment Health Lifestyle Business Technology

About Political Punch

Oct 5, 2012 7:00am

ABC News Broadcasts

Good Morning America

Venezuela: Is Chavez forcing people to go to his rallies?

Taking Aim: Animal Tales From the Campaign Trail

PREVIOUS HOW PRESIDENT OBAMAS DEBATE STRATEGY HELPED MITT ROMNEY

POSTED BY: RIDLEY KNOWS | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:14 AM 7:14 AM

POSTED BY: SAD TIMES | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:20 AM 7:20 AM

POSTED BY: KAL ALBI | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:25 AM 7:25 AM

POSTED BY: KUTYADOG | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:27 AM 7:27 AM

POSTED BY: LARRY | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:28 AM 7:28 AM

POSTED BY: OLDFUZZ695 | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:29 AM 7:29 AM

POSTED BY: CB | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:34 AM 7:34 AM

POSTED BY: STEVE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:35 AM 7:35 AM

POSTED BY: NEWCOUNTRYMAN | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:42 AM 7:42 AM

POSTED BY: LARRY | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:46 AM 7:46 AM

POSTED BY: NEWCOUNTRYMAN | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:51 AM 7:51 AM

Its Jake Tappers fault. Thats the ticket.

POSTED BY: NEWCOUNTRYMAN | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:52 AM 7:52 AM

B-K KnightRider; Are you out there robot?

POSTED BY: NEWCOUNTRYMAN | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 7:53 AM 7:53 AM

POSTED BY: HKDAKOTA | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:04 AM 8:04 AM

POSTED BY: STEVE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:04 AM 8:04 AM

POSTED BY: WANTINGBALANCE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:04 AM 8:04 AM

WOW can you spell cover-up?

POSTED BY: JAMESCBUILDER | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:13 AM 8:13 AM

POSTED BY: JONNIE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:18 AM 8:18 AM

Another article by Jake Tapper. Just ignore it.

POSTED BY: OBAMA2012 | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:21 AM 8:21 AM

POSTED BY: LARRY | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:25 AM 8:25 AM

POSTED BY: RIDLEY KNOWS | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:30 AM 8:30 AM

Obama2012among the 47%.

POSTED BY: NEWCOUNTRYMAN | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:31 AM 8:31 AM

POSTED BY: BEABEA | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:32 AM 8:32 AM

POSTED BY: WEB63GP | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:33 AM 8:33 AM

POSTED BY: WHATHAPPENED016 | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:45 AM 8:45 AM

POSTED BY: ANGIE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:46 AM 8:46 AM

I wonder when Susan Rice will just get fed up?

POSTED BY: NEWCOUNTRYMAN | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 8:55 AM 8:55 AM

POSTED BY: RICKY | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 9:07 AM 9:07 AM

POSTED BY: DEANBOB | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 9:25 AM 9:25 AM

POSTED BY: DEANBOB | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 9:26 AM 9:26 AM

POSTED BY: DEANBOB | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 9:29 AM 9:29 AM

POSTED BY: ED, WATERTOWN MA | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 9:29 AM 9:29 AM

POSTED BY: FREEDOM | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 9:32 AM 9:32 AM

POSTED BY: AUNTIECAIRO | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 9:34 AM 9:34 AM

POSTED BY: AUNTIECAIRO | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 9:38 AM 9:38 AM

POSTED BY: DEANBOB | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 9:41 AM 9:41 AM

POSTED BY: DEANBOB | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 9:45 AM 9:45 AM

POSTED BY: WILDANDBLUE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 10:01 AM 10:01 AM

POSTED BY: MEDIASTINKS_ABC | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 10:16 AM 10:16 AM

POSTED BY: FUDGENUT | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 10:22 AM 10:22 AM

POSTED BY: PERPLEXED | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 10:24 AM 10:24 AM

POSTED BY: WHERESMYMONEY | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 10:49 AM 10:49 AM

POSTED BY: DOUG | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 10:58 AM 10:58 AM

POSTED BY: PERPLEXED | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 11:04 AM 11:04 AM

POSTED BY: CONSTANTINEXI | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 11:04 AM 11:04 AM

POSTED BY: GOING GOING GONE | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 11:06 AM 11:06 AM

POSTED BY: MIKE FROM TEXAS | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 11:33 AM 11:33 AM

POSTED BY: WYL5326 | OCTOBER 5, 2012, 11:36 AM 11:36 AM