Benghazi Attack

[dsummoner]

Dsummoner, even the terrorists themselves admit the video inspired the attack:

This should be the end of the 'protest' argument (first paragraph from your citation):

without any warning or protest

Since protest (as a whole) is rejected than so would be any adjectival modification of the same (e.g. spontaneous protest).

As far as the video goes... you are getting a little bit warmer with discussing Ansar al Shari'a, the Cairo Protest and, "Those leaders, including Ahmed Abu Khattala and Mohammed Ali Zahawi..." Couple this with the previous hint and give it some thought.

BTW, have an excellent Thanksgiving.

[soulflower]

This should be the end of the 'protest' argument (first paragraph from your citation):

I think it's clear by now based on the witness accounts and video evidence that there was no protest. However, that doesn't mean the first attack wasn't spontaneous or launched with very little planning.

As far as the video goes... you are getting a little bit warmer with discussing Ansar al Shari'a, the Cairo Protest and, "Those leaders, including Ahmed Abu Khattala and Mohammed Ali Zahawi..." Couple this with the previous hint and give it some thought.

It's no mystery what happened. And the fact that the attacks were executed with very little advanced warning or planning doesn't downplay the fact that these were acts of terror.

BTW, have an excellent Thanksgiving.

You too my friend.

[SoSad]

You serve at the pleasure of the president. It is true that she did not have to go onto TV but she was instructed to do this as it is part of her job, or an senior administration member's job, and she followed instructions. True, she could have refused and handed in her resignation but why should she do that when all she is doing is reading off of prepared talking points submitted by the intelligence community?

You are one of my favorite opponents. I truly appreciate your posts.

The President serves the people. The U.N. Ambassador of the United States, by extension also serves the people, or at the very least, reports back to the people. The President has spoken about the necessity of transparency at the U.N. for all people.

I just want to give you an idea of where I'm coming from. I understand that if your boss gives you an order, you do your job, but unlike a business model, the government includes the boss and the people.

The U.N. Ambassador has a more indirect relationship with the people, as in this position you can report to the people through the State Department.

[dsummoner]

I think it's clear by now based on the witness accounts and video evidence that there was no protest. However, that doesn't mean the first attack wasn't spontaneous or launched with very little planning.

With no protest (spontaneous or otherwise) there then was no protest (by definition since we have already excluded the set of 'protest' and correspondingly all subordinate subsets) over the video (in regards to Benghazi). When you follow the trail of those involved, you will see that it was not spontaneous. The amount of planning did not appear to be substantial but given the targets, it did not need to be. There is a role for the video to play in all of this but it is not in line with the statements of government.

It's no mystery what happened. And the fact that the attacks were executed with very little advanced warning or planning doesn't downplay the fact that these were acts of terror.

There are certain aspect that are still shrouded (such as the exact and specific details of Stevens' role in Benghazi, the exact and specific details of the CIA operation, the full organizational and geospatial details of the groups and individuals involved, etc.). Advanced warning is bipartite: indicators given by the adversaries and the corresponding elucidation of these indicators. Planning (the determination thereof) is multifactorial, especially when viewed through the lens of a posteriori appearance and furthermore through the lens of what government is deciding to keep secret. Premeditated, politically motivated violence, conducted by non-state actors, directed at non-combatants with the intention of influencing others (aka the US government's definition by which it tracks incidents of international terrorism)... it was.

You too my friend.

Thank you. I have much to be thankful for this year.

[Grindelwald]

You are one of my favorite opponents.

But according to you, he shouldn't be an opponent of yours, because both of you (according to you) are both Democrats.

[SoSad]

But according to you, he shouldn't be an opponent of yours, because both of you (according to you) are both Democrats.

That's correct as far as political affiliation, but on this topic, we appear to share different views.

I happen to like Joy In Mudville's posts. No harm in that I should think.

You aren't really in any position to question my party affiliation. Only I know how I registered, right? I've admitted to being a moderate, but a registered Democrat. Depending on the topic, my views may fall in line with one party or the other. Sometimes I disagree with both sides and I'm often undecided.

[Joy in Mudville]

That's correct as far as political affiliation, but on this topic, we appear to share different views.

I happen to like Joy In Mudville's posts. No harm in that I should think.

One of the things that I find frustrating about comes from the time I spent working in DC.

The reality is that a UN ambassador is, by definition, a mouthpiece. They are far removed from the development of policy and, quite frankly, nothing of any consequence almost ever happens at the UN. Just about everything involving Benghazi is far far above Rice's pay grade. They should leave her alone and focus their witch hunt and any legitimate questions they may have on the CIA, State, and Defense.

[SoSad]

One of the things that I find frustrating about comes from the time I spent working in DC.

The reality is that a UN ambassador is, by definition, a mouthpiece. They are far removed from the development of policy and, quite frankly, nothing of any consequence almost ever happens at the UN. Just about everything involving Benghazi is far far above Rice's pay grade. They should leave her alone and focus their witch hunt and any legitimate questions they may have on the CIA, State, and Defense.

I don't have a problem with that. We may disagree on what happened in the past, but I do agree with the way you suggest we move forward.

[flyboy56]

An ambassador has to win the trust of other nations. And they have to be more than a mouth piece. If an ambassador is going to put themselves into the public light and make critical statements then they should also make damn sure that what they are saying is the truth. It is their reputations that are on the line as Rice is finding out. No employee should ever just be a "yes" person and should be willing to risk their careers by doing a bit of research themselves and then discussing their concerns, if any were determined, with their boss. "Yes" people who are just mouthpieces never attain credibility with anyone. Just ask yourself if this kind of person in your own workplace has credibility.

[flyboy56]

At my workplace, "yes" people are referred to as "tools."

[soulflower]

An ambassador has to win the trust of other nations. And they have to be more than a mouth piece. If an ambassador is going to put themselves into the public light and make critical statements then they should also make damn sure that what they are saying is the truth. It is their reputations that are on the line as Rice is finding out. No employee should ever just be a "yes" person and should be willing to risk their careers by doing a bit of research themselves and then discussing their concerns, if any were determined, with their boss. "Yes" people who are just mouthpieces never attain credibility with anyone. Just ask yourself if this kind of person in your own workplace has credibility.

99% of people who work for any organization or corporation are "yes people". Policies are driven from the top down.

As for Mrs. Rice, even John McCain has walked back the criticisms he made of her. If you read the transcripts of what she said, Rice didn't use absolute terms for anything she said and left open the possibility that Al Qaeda may have been involved.

"Based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is in fact what began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy--sparked by this hateful video. But soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi, we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals, joined in that-- in that effort with heavy weapons of the sort that are, unfortunately, readily now available in Libya post-revolution. And that it spun from there into something much, much more violent." "We do not-- we do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned.""I think it's clear that there were extremist elements that joined in and escalated the violence. Whether they were al Qaeda affiliates, whether they were Libyan-based extremists or al Qaeda itself I think is one of the things we'll have to determine."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benghazi_attack

[flyboy56]

"99% of people who work for any organization or corporation are "yes people". Policies are driven from the top down." soulflower

That's like saying two wrongs make a right. Maybe it is for this very reason America has become a weaker nation. We are not mentoring our workforce to become great leaders. And includes our government as well.

You failed to mention the video that was viewed in real time that clearly showed the group that showed up at both the Embassy and the CIA annex came armed for a serious fight. Unfortunately for Obama's campaign talking points having this information get out to the public would have made them look pretty silly. This President is constantly surrounded by one eye brow raising coincidence after another. At what point do we start saying "fool me once, shame on you Mr. President. Fool me twice, shame on US."

[flyboy56]

"Dsummoner, even the terrorists themselves admit the video inspired the attack:" soulflower

Yes, and so did our support for the over throw of Gaddafi, our M.E. policy and on and on. The point is they were not protesters but a well armed and disciplined force with Al Qaeda ties which Obama was claiming had been weakened.

[SoSad]

99% of people who work for any organization or corporation are "yes people". Policies are driven from the top down.

As for Mrs. Rice, even John McCain has walked back the criticisms he made of her. If you read the transcripts of what she said, Rice didn't use absolute terms for anything she said and left open the possibility that Al Qaeda may have been involved.

Unlike a corporation, there is reporting to the president, but you ultimately serve the people when you work for one of our 3 branches of government. Policies should be driven by what is in the best interest of the people.

Leaving Rice out of this, Obama in the end said he is responsible. That's all fine and well, but did he avoid this until after the election? If he truly served the people, shouldn't they be his priority over campaigning?

I agree with Joy in Mudville in that I believe that Rice served as a mouthpiece, but that was at the direction of the Obama administration.

[soulflower]

You failed to mention the video that was viewed in real time that clearly showed the group that showed up at both the Embassy and the CIA annex came armed for a serious fight.

Two of the four people killed worked for the CIA

We have no idea what exactly the CIA was doing in Benghazi. Some speculate that they may have been doing things that violated international law. So the full, unfiltered truth about what happened could take a while to be revealed.

Whatever the case, I think some people forget that it was the terrorists, not the administration who killed those people...

[flyboy56]

Kind of sounds like the movie "Clear and Present Danger" when a squad of special forces were cutoff from all communications and allowed to be killed to keep from exposing the government's involvement in an illegal intrusion into another country. The whole Benghazi thing stinks to the high heaven. Even Petraeus's untimely down fall is intriguing as he is a key witness in the investigation.

[flyboy56]

"Whatever the case, I think some people forget that it was the terrorists, not the administration who killed those people..." soulflower

A question that still is yet to be answered is who was it that denied the extension of the US security force in Benghazi, not once, but twice. And this request came from two security supervisors and the Ambassador himself who were at Benghazi. And the two bureaucrats who were involved in this decision both claimed they had never been to Benghazi. You can watch this congressional investigation on C-SPAN.

[songfourone]

Two of the four people killed worked for the CIA

We have no idea what exactly the CIA was doing in Benghazi. Some speculate that they may have been doing things that violated international law. So the full, unfiltered truth about what happened could take a while to be revealed.

Whatever the case, I think some people forget that it was the terrorists, not the administration who killed those people...

That is exactly my thoughts from the very beginning, and haven't changed through all this clouding of the issues.

[flyboy56]

And then of course you hear the argument that added security would not have matter considering the overwhelming ferocity of the attack. And I say if the State Separtment bureaucrats in the states had listened to their own security supervisor's concerns months before the attack, and heeded the British Embassy's close-sure prior to the attack we would not be discussing this event. Even the Libyan government issued the warning that they would not be able to protect US personnel in the area. What really was the "risk versus gain" the State Department believed keeping Stevens their outweighed the risk?

[flyboy56]

Yes, it's easy to blame this on our enemies. But let us also not forget it is the President's number one priority to keep all Americans safe. What exactly did Obama do to ensure the safety of these 4, now deceased, American patriots? That is the question the President needs to address.