Well this doesn’t sound good: “The State Department recommended Tuesday that Americans leave Libya immediately and warned U.S. citizens against any travel to the North African country. The department also said that due to security concerns and limited staffing it was only able to offer limited emergency services to U.S. citizens there.” Also, because I know people are wondering:
For the benefit of Democratic Rep. Ann McLane Kuster, (NH-02)…
- Benghazi is the second largest city in Libya.
- Libya is that somewhat large country in North Africa between Algeria and Egypt.
- That particular country, desperate apologists to the contrary*, is part of what most people call ‘the Middle East,’ – including, apparently, Ann McLane Kuster. From March of 2011:
Kuster said she supports Obama’s recent action in response to unrest in the Middle East. She said she felt the military intervention in Libya is appropriate because it’s “primarily a humanitarian mission and the international community is leading, not just the U.S.”
“I think that’s the right approach,” she said. “I think we’ve got to be very careful about not ending up in our third full-scale military operation putting American lives at stake.”
We all got that, right? Benghazi, Libya, Middle East? (more…)
Can’t say that I blame him: the executive branch has thoroughly fornicated the canine on this one.
Darrell Issa is scheduled to travel to Libya next week as part of his investigation into the attack last year on the Benghazi consulate, according to documents obtained by POLITICO.
The California Republican, who chairs the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, did not invite Democratic counterparts on the trip, which has been in the works for over a week and begins on Sunday with stops in Italy and Egypt.
Having seen the Democrats that got assigned Oversight… can’t say that I blame Issa for that, either. The only way any of them would discover a clue to what happened in Benghazi would be if one of the Democrats tried to obscure an incriminating footprint, over-balanced, and fell through a false wall and right into al-Qaeda’s hidden lair. That’s not quite likely enough to be a reliable strategy, though.
Details are still sketchy:
Security officials say a powerful explosion has caused serious damage to Libya’s Foreign Ministry building in the heart of the coastal city of Benghazi.
The early Wednesday morning blast also damaged the building next door housing the Benghazi branch of the Libyan Central Bank.
…and there’s no word yet whether this bombing was specifically done in commemoration of last year’s 9/11 al-Qaeda attack on our consulate (and murder of four Americans, including our Ambassador) in Benghazi, or whether it was done in commemoration of 2001’s 9/11 al-Qaeda attack on the WTC and the Pentagon. Although it’s certainly reasonable for us to embrace the power of ‘and,’ here.
…and that is a legitimate ‘if:’ anyway, if it turns out that Broadwell’s revelation last month is correct and that Benghazi was hosting a secret jail* for the purpose of extraordinary rendition then I hope that people will find the following posts to be useful.
- 01/21/2009. There’s a phrase missing from this Washington Times report on detainee policy.
- 01/28/2009. Obama’s Rendition Exception.
- 02/01/2009. Obama embraces torture.
- 02/02/2009. The nuance of the pro-torture Left (HRW edition).
- 02/08/2009. Greenwald, Sullivan’s faux-outrage over rendition.
Having a good morning? This will fix it.
Via Hot Air. Summary: the consulate warned their higher ups of the imminent attack, noted that their own Libyan security detachment was acting questionably, and reported that militia forces would likely be involved. And, relatedly, military intelligence was reporting that this was an organized terrorist attack within hours of the attack. So why the delay in the government admitting it? Fox News didn’t say why here, but I will: it’s because if the government admitted that it was Islamist terrorism, it would have stepped on their narrative that Islamist terrorism was in full retreat ever since Osama bin Laden was killed. So the government did nothing.
And good men died.
Don’t watch this if you have high blood pressure.
I’ll save you time: when directly and explicitly asked Were [our targeted personnel in Benghazi] denied requests for help during the attack? the President refused to answer no. The CIA’s already said no, in that special way that Beltway types have to tacitly point to who might have said ‘yes': “No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.” Which is why The Weekly Standard titled their post “Petraeus Throws Obama Under the Bus.” Because Petraeus did.
There are no words. Just get out there and vote.
(Via email) You know what the most damning thing is about this NYT tacit admission that the Obama administration is now seen as a weak horse in the Middle East?
Witnesses and the authorities have called Ahmed Abu Khattala one of the ringleaders of the Sept. 11 attack on the American diplomatic mission here. But just days after President Obama reasserted his vow to bring those responsible to justice, Mr. Abu Khattala spent two leisurely hours on Thursday evening at a crowded luxury hotel, sipping a strawberry frappe on a patio and scoffing at the threats coming from the American and Libyan governments.
It’s the correction:
An earlier version of this article described incorrectly a beverage that Ahmed Abu Khattala was drinking at a hotel in Benghazi, Libya. It was a strawberry frappe, not mango juice, which is what he had ordered.
What am I saying? Of course you do.
Kinda-sorta via AoSHQ. Ingraham is not particularly on my radar – honestly, I don’t really watch or listen to many television/radio pundits, except as necessary to do the blogs – but she was kind of ruthless, here. For those without video, she pointed out to the NYT guy’s face that his paper was a hypocrite for not covering the Benghazi lying/incompetence/whatever with nearly the same recklessly fevered enthusiasm that the Media did over, say, Plamegate. Good stuff, and nicely concentrated down into a reasonably pure form.
She also happens to be right.
You know, you read this Washington Post article on the assassination of Ambassador Stevens, and you keep telling yourself This movie is completely unbelievable.
On the eve of his death, U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens was ebullient as he returned for the first time in his new role to Benghazi, the eastern Libyan city that embraced him as a savior during last year’s civil war. He moved around the coastal town in an armored vehicle and held a marathon of meetings, his handful of bodyguards trailing discreetly behind.
Sure, that’s a great image for the cameras – some good distance and local shots for the film; quick shorthand for ‘this guy is important and influential’ for folks in the streets – but there’s no way that a real-life administration would just let one of its Ambassadors surrender so much control over his security. It’s just easier to defend a static area, and bring people to the meetings whenever possible. They’ll understand: real life ain’t Hollywood. (more…)
Let me start this by saying the obvious: I am not on Senator McCain’s Christmas card list; he is not on mine; and we’re both no doubt very happy about that. But as the above quote in the title shows, he is sound on the self-evident absurdity of believing that the assassination of our Ambassador to Libya (and his staffers) was anything except a pre-planned assassination by terrorist groups:
Honestly, the outside world is not your Xbox. People do not wander around with heavy weapons, waiting for the right moment of social disorder to set them off. Doing so causes talk.
PS: Every Republican politician and pundit knows this instinctively. Even those of us who never served in the military. That it took the Obama administration so long to work this out for themselves is profoundly… diagnostic.
Within 24 hours of the 9-11 anniversary attack on the United States consulate in Benghazi, U.S. intelligence agencies had strong indications al Qaeda–affiliated operatives were behind the attack, and had even pinpointed the location of one of those attackers. Three separate U.S. intelligence officials who spoke to The Daily Beast said the early information was enough to show that the attack was planned and the work of al Qaeda affiliates operating in Eastern Libya.
If this is true, then one of two things happened: either UN Ambassador Susan Rice lied to the American people the Sunday after the attack… (more…)