Published: Saturday, Dec. 22 2012 12:00 a.m. MST
Kerry was running interference for Obama to help pave the way for his nomintaion
for Sec. of State.The administration knows exactly what happened and is
stonewalling. Clinton's head ache? Does that trump executive privledge?
Either way stonewalling. The truth is Americans were dying and Obama is still
No Deseret News, the whole problem was Susan Rice. She misinformed the American
Public on National TV. She was just "stupid". How can you blame the
State Department for bad policy and the congress for lack funding, when we all
know because McCain and Graham told us so, that the problem was Ms. Rice. How
can you be so blind DN? The real villian here is our Ambassador to the United
Nations. You know she works at thet evil international body that seeks to take
away U.S. soverignty at every turn. Don't believe me, Look at that
disability treaty they tried to foster on us. Thank God for the Utah
congressional delagation for putting those dangerous dissabled persons in their
place and thwarting the UN's attempt to control Utah Schools.
Agree. There ought to be a House cleaning, starting with the UT delegation.CNN Anchor Soledad O’Brien asks, “Is it true that you voted
to cut the funding for embassy security?”Chaffetz answers,
“Absolutely. Look we have to make priorities and choices in this country.
We have… 15,0000 contractors in Iraq. We have more than 6,000 contractors,
a private army there, for President Obama, in Baghdad. And we’re talking
about can we get two dozen or so people into Libya to help protect our forces.
When you’re in touch economic times, you have to make difficult choices.
You have to prioritize things.”
The report on Benghazi came out this week, and the State Department took it in
the shorts, causing three resignations of high level types inside a week.
"Stonewalling" should be made of sterner stuff. In fact, it WAS under
GWB, when one could never tell where the lies ended and the ignorance began.
I'm sure mo noticed, and protested at the time, given that thousands of
deaths and injuries resulted.
I think the bigger issue is that the Administration lied to the American people
repeatedly about the nature of the attack. The President lied on the David
Letterman show. Susan Rice lied on 5 Sunday talk shows. It's surprising how
many Americans are comfortable with that. What else will they lie to you about?
It's disturbing because there was no reason to lie - all Susan Rice had to
say was that we are still gathering intelligence to determine the nature of the
attack. That's all. But for some reason they chose to blame it on an
irrelevant video- possibly to make Americans more comfortable with giving up
their first amendment right to free speech. If this had been the Bush
administration it would have been non stop coverage on the alphabet channels.
But it was a Democrat administartion so of course it's " nothing to see
here folks- move along". Chilling.
Re:RedstateprideRice suggested that the protest was used as a cover
by extremists who had a plan. It turns out that she was half-wrong, and the
attackers -- who did cite the video as a justification -- acted without a
spontaneous protest covering their tracks. But the larger
"Benghazi-gate" narrative was based on a bunch of partial readings of
Obama statements and an obsession with the word "terrorism." If you actually go back and read Obama's statements he talks about Libya
and Egypt and the unrest in general terms. He even applies the phrase "act
of terror." Despite the GOP's best attempt to make this
look like a big conspiracy and cover-up there is liitle supporting evidence.
The larger issue, addressed by the investigation is the lack of security in the
first place and changes that need to be made.
@truthseeker - maybe you should ask Rudy Guiliani what Susan Rice said about the
Benghazi attack on Meet the Press because he called her out on it on the spot
using the exact expression to describe what she was saying. But OK,
we'll accept your explanation. When Ambassador Steven's dead body was
dragged through the streets of Benghazi he was actually (as Hillary said) being
taken to the hospital by concerned Libyans. We'll pretend that Obama and
Hillary didn't use the return of Ambassador Steven's casket as a photo
opportunity to perpetuate the "offensive video" propaganda. Let's
pretend Libyan officials didn't tell American officials within hours that
the Benghazi attack was carried out by an Al Quaeda affiliated group. We'll
forget all that. There still is a question of why 7 hours after being
advised of the attack on American soil the administration still had not
rendered any assistance. I'm sure you can spin that also.
"What the nation needs now is assurance that what should never have happened
in the first place will never happen again". Why are they saying this now.
Attacks have occurred on our consulates in the recent and close to a hundred
people have died. No doubt mistakes were made but to suggest the State
Department needs to overhaul its procedures to assess risks when they have been
doing this for over a century is a bit brazen and blatantly political. Where is
the Editorial Boards demand that assurances be made that innocent school
children "never again" die.
You know, it is instances like this that shows how rapidly people will decline
and defer to their most base instincts. The idea that this was an issues
specific to a particular administration only highlights how little people
understand how our government functions. The vast majority of these
personalities directly involved span multiple administrations working in the
state department. If there was gross incompetence, there has been so for many
administrations.Case and point. Some 10 years ago we have a
catastrophic bridge collapse on a national highway span in Milwaukee. The
problem with this bridge, and many others, had been present for a long time.
But budgets and priorities had been other places. Likewise with the recent
series of gun violence that has captured the nations attention... just because
there had not been an incident for a long time did not mean there danger of
events like these were not present.Policy is often a reaction to the
issue de jour. Embassy security has been under funded for decades, because we
have been lucky. It's like driving drunk... you get away with it until
something very bad happens. Something very bad happened... and only now will it
Re:RedStatePrideRather than relying on blatantly false sources, perhaps
you should spend a few mins and actually read the Benghazi report yourself.From Adm Mike Mullen and Thomas Pickering's report:"With the clearing of smoke, Ambassador Stevens’ rescuers found him
within a room in the safe area of Villa C, did not know his identity, pulled him
out through an egress window, and sought medical attention for him. Although the
Ambassador did not show signs of life upon arrival at the BMC, doctors attempted
to resuscitate him for some 45 minutes before declaring him deceased, by
apparent smoke inhalation.""The Board determined there were
no warnings from Libyan interlocutors.""The Board found no
evidence of any undue delays in decision making or denial of support from
Washington or from the military combatant commanders. Quite the contrary: the
safe evacuation of all U.S. government personnel from Benghazi twelve hours
after the initial attack and subsequently to Ramstein Air Force Base was the
result of exceptional U.S. government coordination and military response and
helped save the lives of two severely wounded Americans."
Chaffetz should get on the trail of the 26 dead Americans (children) and quit
trying to be the fox nes congress right wing extremist guy.
Are you censoring my posts again DN?Adm Mike Mullen and Ambassador
Thomas Pickering headed a panel to examine what went wrong in Benghazi. Did DN
editors read the unclasified version of the report before writing this
editorial? My guess is "no."DN, instead chose to
mischaracterize John Kerry's comments about "mistakes" ---meaning
multiple---as if the Administration is brushing Benghazi off as a
"mistake"--singular. I understand DN is trying to appeal to
a certain type of (ill-informed) reader, but i would expect higher standards.
To get "to the bottom" of this issue, you must go to the top. Anyone
with any brains at all knows Obama is responsible for this whole mess; it was
his policy that created the problem, it was his order to send out Susan Rice to
lie to everybody. Let's stop kidding ourselves, Obama is easily the most
dishonest president in history--sadly, the press lets him get away with it, even
defend his lies. This must stop.
The main reason why there was a breakdown in providing the needed security, that
Ambassador Stevens pleaded for, was because this Administration, especially the
State Department, did NOT want to paint an image that al-Qaida was still alive
and resurging. It did not fit the political campaign narrative that
"bin-Laden is dead and so is al-Qaida."
As a former State Department employee, I can tell you in a minute what the
underlying problem is: funding. The Department has been forced to conduct
worldwide diplomacy with ever decreasing funds. I visited my daughter at her
post in Asia recently and was shocked at the lack of security there. When I
asked "Where are the Marines?" I was told there was no funding for
security that high. While Diplomatic Security does bear some responsibility for
the lack of security in Benghazi, the the bulk of the blame lies squarely at the
feet of the entity that approves, authorizes, and in recent years has cut
funding. That entity is the US Congress. It is disingenuous of Congressmen
such as Chaffetz to deny adequate funding for the Department of State and then
when something happens try to pass the buck.
@Mike in Cedar City:"No Deseret News, the whole problem was Susan
Rice. She misinformed the American Public on National TV."Susan
Rice told what to say by higher authority... someone in the White House. They
didn't want the Libya fiasco to interfere in any way with the then upcoming
election. They got caught with their pants down. Now they are trying their
best to obfuscate the situation, hoping it will eventually go away. And to think... we have this guy for the next four years.
"Susan Rice told what to say by higher authority... someone in the White
House. They didn't want the Libya fiasco to interfere in any way with the
then upcoming election. They got caught with their pants down. Now they are
trying their best to obfuscate the situation, hoping it will eventually go away.
"This is the goofiest logic ever. Just like in the Susan Powell
case, or even the sad events of the last two weeks with the shootings, in the
first few days after any of these events, the facts a fuzzy, sketchy,
inaccurate, and often filled with speculation. Alfred, what, do you think the
mayor of Newtown is involved in some kind of cover up because they have been
slow to release details and motive of why the attacks happened.The
problem is we have a crowd that spends their days trying to find, wishing for
anything, hoping to uncover any detail that can make the current administration
look bad. Where this is little, drama is added to make themselves feel better.
It is silly. It is too bad that there is a whole crowd out there just wanting
bad to happen, so they can be happy..
@UtahBlueDevil:"This is the goofiest logic ever."The
goofiest logic is thinking Rice decided on her own what to say on five talk
shows. She was instructed what to say. Obama had announced Al Qaeda was on its
heels and terrorists were down and out after Osama's death. He had even
remove the word 'terrorist' from the lexicon. He couldn't afford
to have terrorism raise its ugly head near an election."Alfred,
what, do you think the mayor of Newtown is involved in some kind of cover up
because they have been slow to release details and motive of why the attacks
happened."Rice wasn't slow to release details. If the
administration didn't have the facts it shouldn't have representatives
making facts up on talk shows."The problem is we have a crowd
that spends their days trying to find, wishing for anything, hoping to uncover
any detail that can make the current administration look bad."And what did the Democrats do to Mitt to make him look bad? Accursed him of
causing the cancer death of a woman, firing people, shipping jobs over seas,
hiding his money in the Caymans, etc.
The biggest problem is and was Obama. Americans were dying and Obama is still
"And what did the Democrats do to Mitt to make him look bad? Accursed him of
causing the cancer death of a woman, firing people, shipping jobs over seas,
hiding his money in the Caymans, etc."Alfred... you are letting
the lowest of the Democratic Party set your moral tone? That is the bar you
want to use. Should the Left use all the skin heads and white supremacist as
their moral compass too. I surely hope not.And to your accusations
about RIce, she was briefed by state department people, who had it wrong. The
net loss of life caused by having the root cause of the attack wrong - O. No
one extra died. If you really want to go down the path who which
administration lied more than the other, and caused the greatest cause of
death... I think that is not a battle you want to get into.@mohakat.... ummm.. yeah. Americans are dying. Would you like to compare
the number of deaths in the first terms under Bush or Reagan... or perhaps
Nixon to Obama. I am willing to have that debate with you. I would do your
homework first though.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments