Pages

Jump to bottom

22 comments

1 Bob Dillon  Sat, Oct 13, 2012 6:25:12pm

[Link: oversight.house.gov...]

Read page 5. State knew what was happening in "almost real time". As well as the Diplomatic Security Command Center in D.C.

If they knew, then everybody knew from the top down. And they sat on their hands like voyeurs for 6 hours.

This is not a failure of intelligence.

2 Gus  Sat, Oct 13, 2012 6:25:59pm

Fuck Michael Chertoff.

3 Bob Dillon  Sat, Oct 13, 2012 6:37:23pm

Here is the piece from page 5. Transcript*: Testimony of Charlene Lamb, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, before the House Oversight Committee on the “Security Failures in Benghazi” on Oct. 10, 2012:
.
At approximately 9:40 pm local time, dozens of attackers launched a full-scale assault. They forced their way through the pedestrian gate, used diesel fuel to set fire to the Libyan 17th February Brigade members’ barracks, and then proceeded towards the main building.
A Diplomatic Security agent working in the Tactical Operations Center immediately activated the Imminent Danger Notification System. He also alerted the quick reaction security team stationed nearby, the Libyan 17th February Brigade, the Embassy in Tripoli, and the Diplomatic Security Command Center in Washington.

4 Joanne  Sat, Oct 13, 2012 10:01:58pm

Chertoff is a fucking idiot. When he said, "That 'perfect storm' of a combination of catastrophes exceeded the foresight of the planners, and maybe anybody's foresight" he moved from unqualified to fucking idiot status. Is it not the purview of DHS to calculate worst case scenario?

Fuck you, Chertoff. You have no business saying shit about anyone else.

5 Bob Dillon  Sat, Oct 13, 2012 10:14:10pm

The point is: State knew what was happening in "almost real time". As well as the Diplomatic Security Command Center in D.C.

If they knew, then everybody knew from the top down. And they sat on their hands like voyeurs for 6 hours.

This is not a failure of intelligence.

6 majii  Sat, Oct 13, 2012 10:21:45pm

I should have known they'd be two former RW has beens who would do/say anything to boost Romney's foreign policy creds. I was expecting to hear from someone currently AT the State Department--not these extreme RW neo-cons and liars. The NYT and Foreign Policy Mag stated that the requests for funds for extra security were for Tripoli, not Benghazi, and that neither the president nor VP were aware of the requests.

[Link: thecable.foreignpolicy.com...]

7 Bob Dillon  Sat, Oct 13, 2012 10:41:15pm

re: #6 majii

The request issue is smoke that can be argued over and over to cover the real issue that State knew "almost in real time" what was happening as well as the Diplomatic Security Command Center in D.C.

I think Ms. Lamb qualifies as "AT the State Department".

Testimony of Charlene Lamb, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, before the House Oversight Committee on the “Security Failures in Benghazi” on Oct. 10, 2012:
.
[Link: oversight.house.gov...]

If Ms. Lamb and the DSCC were monitoring this then protocol requires that she and the DSCC notify the WH, Pentagon, Joint Chiefs and others immediately. To think that this was not done and everyone was confused about what was happening is beyond belief and the law.

8 Bob Dillon  Sat, Oct 13, 2012 11:37:36pm

The Diplomatic Security Command Center operates 24-hours daily to monitor and report information regarding threats against U.S. diplomatic missions, the Secretary of State, and American citizens abroad. The Command Center's staff coordinates information with the more than 265 U.S. diplomatic facilities Diplomatic Security protects worldwide.
.
[Link: www.state.gov...]

Now, Ms. Lamb wrote in her testimony, but did not state in her verbal presentation, that that she was able to monitor the attack “in almost real-time” once a Diplomatic Security agent activated the imminent danger notification system. The Diplomatic Security agent was killed during the attack but the communication links remained open.

One wonders why she chose to not state that in her verbal sworn testimony.

Granted, the specific protocol for this stuff is classified but it does not take a rocket scientist to understand that if a U.S. diplomatic facility is under attack, and you are aware of it, as part of your job description, it is not only time to pick up the red phone but you are required to pick up the red phone.

This is the heart of the matter. All else is smoke. Everyone in D.C. that had the need to know - knew "in almost real-time" for 6 hours.

9 researchok  Sun, Oct 14, 2012 1:20:12am

If they knew there is a problem- a huge problem.

Biden's remarks are beside the point- politicians have playing fast and loose with the facts didn't start last week.

10 Joanne  Sun, Oct 14, 2012 7:58:19am

After additional consideration, how much of what's not known is classified? Question: if information is classified, what information is the government required to, or should be, provided to the public?

Chertoff, who was a colossal fuck up, still has no "right" to condemn anyone else.

11 Curt  Sun, Oct 14, 2012 8:10:55am

re: #10 Joanne (JustJay)

After additional consideration, how much of what's not known is classified? Question: if information is classified, what information is the government required to, or should be, provided to the public?

Chertoff, who was a colossal fuck up, still has no "right" to condemn anyone else.

Your personal dislike of any individual does not in any way mitigate the deaths of 4 US citizens, let alone the Ambassador, when it could have been prevented, and there is solid evidence coming out it likely could have not had to happen. OTOH, we have a wide range of celebrities who regularly decide they can condemn, even with no personal experience on the topic, other than it happened and they heard about it.

Either you'd like to get to the bottom of this and ensure resources and procedures are put in place to prevent this again (regardless of who is in the White House), or you can just sit and call people names, and not want to hear someone made an error, one that cost lives. If GWB was in office and a Clinton official who was a high ranking official in the subject matter, would you take the same opposing stance, or would you want to fix it?

As far as classified information or not, how do you feel about the last about 6-8 years of the NYT getting their hands on classified intelligence regarding monitoring cell phones and money transfers of the terrorists being splashed across the front pages of their paper (just to name two actual cases), much to the detriment of National Security?

And: Do you think Nixon should have resigned (or stayed to have been impeached) over Watergate (where no one died, but laws were broken)?

12 Obdicut  Sun, Oct 14, 2012 8:22:57am

re: #11 Curt

Your personal dislike of any individual does not in any way mitigate the deaths of 4 US citizens, let alone the Ambassador, when it could have been prevented,

How do you know it could have been prevented?

13 Curt  Sun, Oct 14, 2012 8:45:56am

re: #12 Obdicut

How do you know it could have been prevented?

1) Getting a flash precedence message out - at the least.
2) Providing security for the Ambassador a) particularly that day and b) particularly in that area.
3) Ensuring the Consulate was adequately hardened.

I recall, some time back, the "What did they know and when did the know it" mantra being all the rage and demands for Administration officials to be paraded before many committees and be grilled along these lines....and dissent being the highest form of patriotism.

What has changed?

14 Obdicut  Sun, Oct 14, 2012 8:53:14am

re: #13 Curt

How would those things have definitely prevented what happened, please? There could be another attack tomorrow on another target, and someone else might die. You can't provide perfect security; it's a fantasy.

The question is whether the amount of security was irresponsibly low given the resources they had to work with, and whether there was real, actionable intelligence that an attack was imminent. I have seen absolutely nothing to convince me either of those things is true.

I recall, some time back, the "What did they know and when did the know it" mantra being all the rage and demands for Administration officials to be paraded before many committees and be grilled along these lines

When was this, please?

15 Curt  Sun, Oct 14, 2012 9:13:56am

re: #14 Obdicut

How would those things have definitely prevented what happened, please? There could be another attack tomorrow on another target, and someone else might die. You can't provide perfect security; it's a fantasy.

The question is whether the amount of security was irresponsibly low given the resources they had to work with, and whether there was real, actionable intelligence that an attack was imminent. I have seen absolutely nothing to convince me either of those things is true.

When was this, please?

How about we quit calling names and listen to the circumstances evolving in the hearings, designed to fond out, as we already have push back from DoS regarding it wasn't a YouTube trailer and they know it was an organized attack.

It's been a good check point to discuss such matters with people who have filled such positions, in other administrations, and their voices lend credence to the discovery process. This set of comments, despite Bobibutu's specific reference of things on the public record were greeted by "F...him."

Yep, that will solve it...oh, and the Ambassador himself had asked for help and himself indicated there was imminent danger. I guess his call isn't good enough for me to listen and suspect there's plenty to the story being the story of his horrible death.

16 Obdicut  Sun, Oct 14, 2012 9:21:43am

re: #15 Curt

How about we quit calling names and listen to the circumstances evolving in the hearings, designed to fond out, as we already have push back from DoS regarding it wasn't a YouTube trailer and they know it was an organized attack.

Who is calling names?

It's been a good check point to discuss such matters with people who have filled such positions, in other administrations, and their voices lend credence to the discovery process. This set of comments, despite Bobibutu's specific reference of things on the public record were greeted by "F...him."

Chertoff is an asshole. If there's legitimate criticisms to be made, sourcing them elsewhere is wise.

Yep, that will solve it...oh, and the Ambassador himself had asked for help and himself indicated there was imminent danger.

Please support this point.

17 Bob Dillon  Sun, Oct 14, 2012 10:47:41am

re: #9 researchok

re: #14 Obdicut

re: #15 Curt

re: #6 majii

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

Thread about the specific issue.

18 Obdicut  Sun, Oct 14, 2012 11:14:21am

re: #17 Bob Dillon

Doesn't do anything to address what I asked.

19 Joanne  Sun, Oct 14, 2012 11:16:31am

re: #11 Curt

What I know is:

This base has been identified as "OGA." As such, playing political games with what is and isn't known isn't just stupid, it's potentially damaging to national security. And make no mistakes, this is nothing but political theater.

Yes, we need to know what happened if it's an intelligence failure. but seriously, does the NTSA make snap decisions about air disasters? No. They study evidence. And playing politics, especially from that asshole Chertoff, is both stupid and dangerous.

20 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Oct 14, 2012 3:56:37pm

re: #19 Joanne (JustJay)

What I know is:

This base has been identified as "OGA." As such, playing political games with what is and isn't known isn't just stupid, it's potentially damaging to national security. And make no mistakes, this is nothing but political theater.

Yes, we need to know what happened if it's an intelligence failure. but seriously, does the NTSA make snap decisions about air disasters? No. They study evidence. And playing politics, especially from that asshole Chertoff, is both stupid and dangerous.

I'd argue it has to be done. Obama's failings need to be spotlit so that he can be defeated at the polls and replaced. Moreover, its irrational to expect this not to be partisan and political; It's took close to a presidential election for it to be anything else. This close in Democrats protect their candidate and attack the Republican, and Republicans protect their candidate and attack the Democrat. It's not about facts, its about creating the visuals that will win the election. Facts only matter to the winner after winning, the loser will spin them into a dishonest narrative to explain the loss at the polls to their base without having to admit any more error than needed.

21 Curt  Mon, Oct 15, 2012 9:24:44am

re: #19 Joanne (JustJay)

What I know is:

[...]

Yes, we need to know what happened if it's an intelligence failure. but seriously, does the NTSA make snap decisions about air disasters? No. They study evidence. And playing politics, especially from that asshole Chertoff, is both stupid and dangerous.

For the record, the NTSB does make rapid decisions that have quickly grounded entire types of aircraft, if an accident, at first look, showed attributes that may be the cause, like wing cracks, or other indications of structural fatigue in the wreckage. Why? Because if an aged fleet is developing a fleet wide deficiency, that appears to be the case, they act, so as to prevent deaths. The more detailed investigation looks deeper, but they do act quickly, as do other agencies, when a reasonably obvious problem exists, they first go to "plug the hole" and prevent more loss/death/etc.

The judgement of experts in the fields have powerful voices, when they see evidence that has a logically cause before them, and they do what they can to minimize the risk right away, as well as providing changes in materials, processes, procedures as they learn more about how it did actually happen.

22 philosophus invidius  Tue, Oct 16, 2012 4:30:52pm
blasted Vice President Joe Biden for making the U.S. intelligence community a scapegoat for ‘the inconsistent and shifting response of the Obama Administration’.

Did you notice that when Biden was asked whether it was a "massive intelligence failure" he refused to say "yes"?


This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Once Praised, the Settlement to Help Sickened BP Oil Spill Workers Leaves Most With Nearly Nothing When a deadly explosion destroyed BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, 134 million gallons of crude erupted into the sea over the next three months — and tens of thousands of ordinary people were hired ...
Cheechako
Yesterday
Views: 73 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
4 days ago
Views: 169 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1