Both in the way the White House tries to lie its way out of admitting it had been warned about the attacks, and in the way the media distorts and covers up these massive White House failings, it is as obvious as it possible to be that this was an enormous blunder by Obama and the Clinton State Department and they all know it.
It is, I suppose, natural for a government to deny responsibility for the things they get wrong. Not their fault and who could see this coming? But now with so much evidence that there had been warnings about attacks on the US embassies given to the American government by both Egypy and Libya – even having been mentioned in the Jerusalem Post on 11 September – it it bizarre bordering on the criminally negligent that not only does the Obama White House insist that it was all due to an obscure Youtube presentation, but there is also no media pressure on Obama to accept a major error had been made.
But ever so slowly the facts are coming out. Here are a few examples, the first from no less a person than the new head of government in Libya itself! He must think the American government is filled with idiots the way he speaks:
In two interviews over the weekend, Libyan President Mohammed el-Megarif joined other members of his government in declaring the attack a planned assault, possibly by an Al Qaeda-tied group.
‘The idea that this criminal and cowardly act was a spontaneous protest that just spun out of control is completely unfounded and preposterous,’ Megarif told NPR.
Then there is this from The Daily Mail in the UK. These are the headlines from the online story:
War of words over deadly raid: Libya claims U.S. was warned THREE DAYS in advance of consulate attacks but America says assault was NOT planned
Libyan military official claims he met with U.S. diplomats to tell them about the deteriorating security situation
President Mohamed el-Megarif says the attacks were NOT sparked by anti-Islamic video, but by Al Qaeda-connected foreigners
But UN ambassador Susan Rice insists assault was ‘spontaneous’
Diplomat Chris Stevens died alongside three others on Tuesday night
This is from a blog posting. There is a video with it which you should only watch at your own discretion, but the text makes the point that needs to be made:
For days now the Obama administration and supporters in the mainstream media have claimed the attacks on American embassies in the Middle East were not attacks on America – or the policies of the Obama government. These reports have also attempted to suggest Libyans, once they found Ambassador Christopher Stevens, attempted to save him by transporting the ambassador to a nearby hospital. Video evidence now paints a very different and far more disturbing picture. The body of a man who appears to be the ambassador is shown being dragged upon the ground as those gathered around cheer. If Barack Obama so willingly lies about details of a U.S. ambassador’s death, what else is he lying about? How deeply into the administration does this now growing scandal go? And will the American people allow the president to get away with this deception? A final note – readers should be reminded that after being made aware of the death of Ambassador Stevens, Barack Obama flew off to Las Vegas for yet another political fundraiser. Remind yourself of that fact – a fact even more disturbing than the footage in this video.
The Wall Street Journal notes the video evidence, points out that the President is lying, but then makes the even more important point that by choosing to lie the President is creating an even larger problem for the future:
It’s one thing for the U.S. government to say it isn’t responsible for and disapproves of an anti-Islamic video. But it’s another to say the video is the reason for anti-American violence. Eleven years after 9/11 and 33 years after the Iranian revolution, it should be obvious that there is no end to the insults that Islamic radicals can imagine or cite as an excuse to foment anti-American, anti-Western protests and violence.
The far greater provocation to violence is the appearance of U.S. weakness. What should really concern the White House is how slow and parsimonious were the denunciations of anti-American violence in Egypt, Tunisia, Sudan, Yemen and most of the rest of the Middle East. The Administration’s feeble response in the last week only invites radicals to use more such excuses to kill more Americans.
The Obama administration is filled with shameless liars. The question really is whether they are about to be called to account for what they have done.
Whether there had been warnings or not, the US should have known that Libya is security nightmare, especially outside of Tripoli. There has been major security failure. It is plausible that the Ambassador and his staff were brave men who took greater risks than would be reaosnable. They should have not been permitted to do so.
OTOH, had the ambassador survived, he would have been condemned along with the rest of the administration.
Boris
18 Sep 12 at 1:38 am
If Obama can spike the ball on the Osama assassination, he MUST carry the can on the Libyan incident,
Fair is fair.
Abu Chowdah
18 Sep 12 at 1:47 am
It’s still got the better part of two months to keep on coming unglued. This is the gigantic fuckup that was waiting to happen on his watch, and not only is he not handling it very well but quite a lot of people elsewhere, that he can’t shut up and his supporters can’t dismiss as Fox News/Bushitler stooges, have a different narrative.
perturbed
18 Sep 12 at 4:28 am
The American Thinker says Rarely Has an International Crisis Been More Predictable
GeorgeL
18 Sep 12 at 6:05 am
I posted this on the OT last night, but as this is the appropriate place I’ll do it again here.
If you want an amazing run down of what happened in Libya and how the Obama Admin’s story about the death of Ambassador Stevens is just plain b**lshit, listen to this recording from John Hinderaker of Powerlineblog with Brian Ward of Fraters Libertas.
By 8min the run down is complete.
* The US embassy is attacked (how did the attackers know the amb will be in Benghazi?)
* The staff evacuate to a safehouse, it comes under attack (though it was supposed to be secret)
* Somehow the amb gets in & the others do not & get killed
* The ambassador dies from smoke inhalation in the safehouse, yet everyone else is ok
* The attackers “disappear” & the good people of Benghazi take the dead ambassador to the hospital (while hundreds take photos of him) – Do muzzies do that with every person that dies?
* Then the safe house goes back under attack and the rescue force from Tripoli has to get them free after a fierce fire fight.
Listen to lawyer John Hinderaker tell the story and if you have the time, listen for the whole hour and hear the analysis of one of the persecutors from the World Trade Centre bombing.
PS: That is the blind Sheik that the Islamists who invaded the US embassy want released.
Token
18 Sep 12 at 8:21 am
No doubt Obumma, Clinton and company are shameless liars but that video proves nothing Steve.
If the are going to say Obumma’s a liar and provide this crap as proof they’ll be hammered by the MSM.
And for once quite rightly.
JamesK
18 Sep 12 at 8:23 am
How can the Obama administration not be getting itself into an impeachment situation.
Here is the official line (video included) continuing to state the Libyan raid was due to the movie.
Interesting facts are emerging to counter the Obama admin line:
Libya’s volatility keeping FBI agents from probing attack
Yet testimony of guards to the embassy contradict the Obama admin:
FFS.
Token
18 Sep 12 at 8:28 am
Further details on how the US was warned:
The story provides a neat summary.
How long will the cover up last? Will it make it through to November?
Token
18 Sep 12 at 8:31 am
Token, I think we’ve just seen the framework for the elections.
The bumbling, stumbling, unmitigated clusterfuck of a President is being shown as unable to deal with the crisis that his VP predicted would come.
Bob Sewell
18 Sep 12 at 8:48 am
Translation of the audio in the comments on the Youtube clip (& also provided at the New York Times & other outlets):
I guess this is one of those facts that are slow in coming out.
badm0f0
18 Sep 12 at 10:15 am
Is this “I don’t care enough to change my schedule” Mr Obama’s “I am not a crook” moment?
JohnA
18 Sep 12 at 10:54 am
Thanks M0f0, I’ll look into the story with interest. It doesn’t explain all the gaps and contradictions in the story as presented, I hope the links you provide do cover them.
______________________________
As Andy McCarthy noted, the Muslim Brotherhood government of Egypt is keen to negotiate for the mastermind of the World Trade Centre bombing & the US state department has confirmed it is in discussions…
Token
18 Sep 12 at 11:42 am
Watched Glenn Beck this morning and he seemed to suggest this was a CIA fuck up. On the “known” evidence the security detail and perhaps even the Ambassador himself were involved in (sanctioned) arms dealing to the Libyan rebels. Remember the WH said they would not put boots on the ground. Something went horribly wrong, obviously.
Probably when they worked out they were dealing with Al Qaeda.
The MSM isn’t asking the right questions, that’s why we’re not getting any answers. And not likely to either.
Oblique
18 Sep 12 at 3:57 pm
Oblique
I read the ambassador was a first order idiot. He went around with low security because he thought the Libyans loved him and he wouldn’t get into much trouble.
Don’t look for cloak and dagger theories when plane old stupidity and numbnuttary serve the argument better.
JC
18 Sep 12 at 4:03 pm
Look I’m sorry he’s dead and all and I’m not mocking someone who dies in such a bad way as I really don’t want to sound callous. But FFS you really are a first order moron to be going about in that rat hole of a country without a legion sized security detail.
If that was me instead of him, I wouldn’t go anywhere without a regiment…. no strike that that… I wouldn’t be there at all.
JC
18 Sep 12 at 4:07 pm
JC, the first story said he went in to help the staff, so maybe he had little choice. It’s obviously a terrible fuck up and its worse that the warnings are being covered up.
Pedro
18 Sep 12 at 4:21 pm
Yeah, that was mentioned too (on Beck). About his p/poor security detail, unarmoured vehicle, uncontrolled war zone etc, as you say. Perhaps the Amb. thought he was invincible because of whom he was dealing with? Isn’t the security detail of all staff at US Embassies handled by the State Department, not individuals.
I just can’t believe he could be that stupid, and besides, someone on the ground was peddling arms to the Libyan rebels. So who knows but the WH? One thing’s for certain, its a terrible affair all round.
Oblique
18 Sep 12 at 4:28 pm
Interesting, the US posts a homo ambassador to an unstable Moslem country with virtually no protection and shrugs off prior warnings of trouble brewing.
It’s almost like a…. set up. Like the Clinton era again. Who stands to gain here I’m not sure.
Chris M
18 Sep 12 at 9:11 pm
I posted this on another comment thread. Canadian broadcaster Brian Lilley calls out the media on their lies about the embassy attacks. Frankly you didn’t need intelligence reports to see the embassy attacks coming. It was all there on TV.
I also used to think US Senator Michelle Bachman was a bit flaky. I may have been wrong.
CC
19 Sep 12 at 1:35 am
A comment about poor security, unarmoured vehicle etc.: I don’t know if that was true or not or whether it is of import. In some high risk areas armoured vehicles packed with heavily armed musclies simply says, shoot me now. You may be safer getting around in a beat up car, at most with a mate (preferably local), concealed weapons, windows down and radio blaring.
CC
19 Sep 12 at 1:48 am