USS Obama going down, Libya emails to Obama's administration.

[ROYC75]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...roup-on-radar/

State Department emails from day of Libya attack show Al Qaeda-tied group on radar

By Chad Pergram

Published October 23, 2012

FoxNews.com

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...#ixzz2ABA6n3a7


A series of internal State Department emails obtained by Fox News shows some some of the initial assessments of last month's deadly consulate attack in Libya, including one email within hours of the attack that noted that the group Ansar al Sharia had claimed responsibility.

Ansar al Sharia has been declared by the State Department to be a an Al Qaeda-affiliated group. A member of the group suspected of participating in the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi has been arrested and is being held in Tunisia.

The emails obtained by Fox News were sent by the State Department to a variety of national security platforms, whose addresses have been redacted, including the White House Situation Room, the Pentagon, the FBI and the Director of National Intelligence.

Fox News was told that an estimated 300 to 400 national security figures received these emails in real time almost as the raid was playing out and concluding. People who received these emails work directly under the nation’s top national security, military and diplomatic officials, Fox News was told.

The timestamps on the emails are all Eastern Time and often include the subheading SBU…which is shorthand for “Sensitive But Unclassified.”

The first email indicates that U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and other personnel were “in the compound safe haven.” Officials later discovered that Stevens and three other Americans had died in the attack.

The first email was sent at 4:05 p.m. ET with the subject line “U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack (SBU).”

“The Regional Security Officer reports the diplomatic mission is under attack," the email reads. "Embassy Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well. Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four COM personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support.

"The operations Center will provide updates as available.”

The second email came at 4:54 p.m. ET, with a subject line “Update 1: U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi (SBU)"

“Embassy Tripoli reports the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi has stopped and the compound has been cleared. A response team is on site attempting to locate COM personnel.”

The third email came at 6:07 p.m. ET and was sent to a different email list but still includes the White House Situation Room address and a subject line of “Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack (SBU).”

“Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli," the email reads.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...#ixzz2AB9lsYce

[The Rick]

Originally Posted by patteeu

I think your post proves the point that BEP and I made.

You and BEP agree on something?

*checking to see if hell has frozen over*

[J Diddy]

Originally Posted by patteeu

Yes, there's a difference between the topics there. The main difference is that you agree politically with one set (and therefore you seem blinded to the fact that they're political) and the other set is obvious politics to you. I'm way ahead of you on this.

Not so fast there broseph. I'm a smoker. I don't agree with the first assignment. In fact its a pain in the ass.

[The_Grand_Illusion]

Originally Posted by ROYC75

Now before you laugh, I have not been a BIG supporter of Glenn Beck. He has been way over the top many times and at times spot on.

This is one of the times where he is spot on with a seriousness that makes so much sense with the security demands, lack of it, time lines, the reason behind the lies ( cover up ), Syria, etc.

It makes way too much sense to ignore.

JUST WATCH IT BEFORE YOU JUDGE IT.


( or you can watch the bigger picture here ) http://www.video.theblaze.com/media/...ource=THEBLAZE







WHY WAS THIS GUY KILLED ?

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/10...official-says/

Thanks for posting. Beck may be a drama queen but he did bring up some very good points, including gunrunning. We've seen that scandal before in Fast & Furious so who knows at this point why the need to lie and coverup about this.

What makes me the most furious about this is the 2 former Navy Seals knew the emergency button was pushed right away and the entire chain of command was alerted to the situation. According to Col. David Hunt, the only person who can make the call to do something is the president himself. These 2 Navy Seals fought valiantly on the rooftops of the compound, understanding protocol, help was on the way holding the attackers off till they were killed.

That help never came.....


TGI

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by J Diddy

Not so fast there broseph. I'm a smoker. I don't agree with the first assignment. In fact its a pain in the ass.

You're obviously comfortable supporting a party that pushes for smoking bans, even if you disagree with them on that issue (if you do). It can't be a terribly important issue for you.

[ROYC75]

Originally Posted by Dallas Chief

GB is such a drama queen!

That is true, but it doesn't mean everything he comments on or reports is wrong. As much as MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC is a left leaning media source, doesn't mean that some stuff they report is not true.

Reason I said watch it before commenting on it. Did you watch it or just comment on it?

[ChiefsandO'sfan]

Speaking to the "Lars Larson Show," father of Seal Tyrone Woods -- who died defending the consulate and Benghazi -- told about his experience of meeting the President and Secretary Clinton at the memorial service for the fallen a few days after the attack. Charles Woods said that the President "couldn't look me in the eye" and "mumbled" an "I'm sorry" but that it didn't seem "genuine". He said the same of Secretary Clinton and that Clinton assured him that they were going to "arrest and prosecute" the man that made the scapegoated youtube video critical of Islam.


http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-T...itbart+Feed%29

[J Diddy]

Originally Posted by patteeu

You're obviously comfortable supporting a party that pushes for smoking bans, even if you disagree with them on that issue (if you do). It can't be a terribly important issue for you.

It's not one of my top priorities, no. That being said I don't follow the democratic agenda to a T. Do you follow the right wing agenda to a T?

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by J Diddy

It's not one of my top priorities, no. That being said I don't follow the democratic agenda to a T. Do you follow the right wing agenda to a T?

Nope. Nor would I expect you or anyone else in this forum to be in perfect sync with their party.

[BWillie]

Originally Posted by ROYC75

Why Team Obama used 'blame- the-video' tactic after Libya attack

By Bill Siegel

Published October 21, 2012

FoxNews.com

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/...#ixzz2ADwgBdfW




Perhaps the most under-examined aspect of the blame-the-video story spun by President Obama’s administration following the Benghazi terror attacks is how easy the White House presumed it would be to sell.

An acquiescent mainstream media has for years encouraged an arrogant administration to expect its full support, even it has been forced to acknowledge that the administration has erred, if not lied when it comes to the deadly attack in Libya.

It is equally critical, however, that we the people begin to understand our contribution to this tragedy and how suggestible and easily exploitable we are.

It is clear that the White House did not want to tell us the truth about the Benghazi assassinations -- that Al Qaeda is far from dead or “mission accomplished,” that there were no protests before the attack, and that the State Department and intelligence agencies had quickly concluded it was a highly coordinated terrorist attack.

Is the administration so incompetent that any peek inside would spell immediate disaster for Obama’s reelection campaign? Could some analysts’ suspicions that Ambassador Christopher Stevens had been assigned with originally arming the Libyan rebels and was on a doomed mission to retrieve such weapons be the underlying revelation that must be covered up at all costs -- "Fast and Furious" Libyan Style? These issues will hopefully soon be investigated. But of all the substitute explanations available, why the one which cites a barely viewed video?

The overwhelming tendency for the American mind to accept itself as cause for Islamic rage and violence is easily exploited. When the White House needed a true channel changer, it went right to what it knew best.

-

Certainly there are political objectives underlying the choice. The Muslim Brotherhood has allies situated into virtually all US government functions that involve Islam and the Islamic world, from Muslim “outreach” to law enforcement to policy development. I believe that much of Obama’s domestic and Middle East policy can be characterized as aligned with the Brotherhood and its now institutionalized objectives.

It should come as no surprise, then, that the Blame-the-Video tactic would be fully Brotherhood compliant. The Brotherhood, along with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (the largest Islamic body in the world), has for years sought to bring about a change in US free speech laws so as to criminalize speech that is blasphemous or otherwise critical of Islam or the Prophet Muhammad. Part of the strategy involves demonstrating that such speech is uniquely inciting to Muslims and certain to result in violence: the narrative of the “Fragile Muslim” requiring special treatment for Muslims and Islam. Incremental acceptance of the notion that insults to Islam “cause” violence will “evolve” into banning such speech on the theory that violence becomes, a priori, “imminent.”

Furthermore, UN Human Rights Council Resolution 16/18 sets out to enforce a ban on such speech by treaty rather than through our traditional domestic legislative process. That Hillary Clinton co-sponsored this resolution speaks volumes as to where the Obama administration sits.

Nonetheless, the blame-the-video tactic would not exist without our willing collusion. It is natural, of course, for us to try to minimize escalation following an unprovoked violent attack. Yet more insidious, there is the tendency of much of the modern Western mindset to accept responsibility for the hatred and anger practiced throughout much of the Islamic world. Whether illegally occupying Muslim lands, supporting un-Islamic leaders in Muslim territories, violating Shariah laws in our own land, or insulting the Prophet in cartoons, films, and novels, the critical maneuver is to place the West as the “cause” of Muslim behavior.

At core, there is a profound relationship between the West and the Islamic world that, albeit oversimplified, resembles that between an addict and its enablers. For the addict, the goal is to continue unacceptable behavior without end or restriction and much of his world view is centered upon victimhood; others cause him to be outraged and consequently violent. The addict will rant and rave for so long as he is allowed to get away with it rather than take responsibility for and change his behavior.

The corollary to the addict’s anger is the enabler’s extreme fear -- fear of what the enraged addict might do if left unaddressed.

With respect to our modern Islamic enemy, the threat posed is so terrifying that the Western mind does all it can to change its perceptions so as to blind itself to the true reality it faces. The most ubiquitous enabler technique to keep stability is to accept the narrative that he is responsible for the addict’s behavior.

The dirty secret is that if one is the cause, he can find a way to change the outcome. The dirty reality, however, is that the only way to change this threat is to eliminate it in total; something that even today remains politically unacceptable to much of the West.

Obama must be fully familiar with this relationship as those he surrounds himself with are fully identified with it.

The overwhelming tendency for the American mind to accept itself as cause for Islamic rage and violence is easily exploited. When the White House needed a true channel changer, it went right to what it knew best.

Hopefully, the American mind is beginning to tire of the enabler role and is beginning to seek more accurate perceptions of what is truly going on.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/...#ixzz2ADw7dYaY

Holy shit this guy is bat shit crazy. Saying that Obama is aligned with Muslim brotherhood and that they have inserted him into the government. How do you ever get something printed again after such an article? O yeah, it's Fox news.

[The_Grand_Illusion]

Originally Posted by BWillie007

Holy shit this guy is bat shit crazy. Saying that Obama is aligned with Muslim brotherhood and that they have inserted him into the government. How do you ever get something printed again after such an article? O yeah, it's Fox news.

It seems the author is speculating. That's all we have at the moment wondering why this administration would lie and try to cover-up this debacle. Debacles happen in presidencies. Why the need to lie and cover it up? Is it because they are that incompetent? So far all we have gotten from this administration is lies about this. Speculation is all we have right now until more facts come out.

TGI

[InChiefsHell]

Originally Posted by J Diddy

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_300372.html

Couldn't find the video but here's a clip including these lyrics sang to Bush after Katrina.

Our country's stood beside us People have sent us aid. Katrina could not stop us, our hopes will never fade. Congress, Bush and FEMA People across our land Together have come to rebuild us and we join them hand-in-hand!

You honestly don't see a difference between a nod to Bush, Fema and Congress and THIS??


Mm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

He said that all must lend a hand
To make this country strong again
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

He said we must be fair today
Equal work means equal pay
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

He said that we must take a stand
To make sure everyone gets a chance
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

He said red, yellow, black or white
All are equal in his sight
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

Yes!
Mmm, mmm, mm
Barack Hussein Obama

[InChiefsHell]

Originally Posted by J Diddy

You don't think it's an important lesson for a child to know that they are capable of making a difference?

I understand your point and I don't think I'd be happy about somethings if I felt that strong about them like you do. The question is what if your child came home with an assignment of the like with something you strongly supported? Would you feel the same outrage?

Absolutely, but they need to learn those lessons from me, not some random lefty topic that a teacher imposes. If she had come home with an assignment about say gun control (and I'm a big gun guy) it would not have upset me as much, but I can honestly say I'd find it inappropriate. I like the idea of letting them come up with a topic.

[KChiefer]

I see your "Obama indoctrinated kids" video and raise you the "Kids railing against the First Ladies School Nutrition Guidlines" video that was made with the assistance of their teacher

[KChiefer]

And to get back on track, Colbert doing a parody of the FoxNews doctrine of how to report "news" in "Jeopardy form" without using facts.

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Nonstop Libya-Gate Questions
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog Video Archive

[J Diddy]

Originally Posted by InChiefsHell

Absolutely, but they need to learn those lessons from me, not some random lefty topic that a teacher imposes. If she had come home with an assignment about say gun control (and I'm a big gun guy) it would not have upset me as much, but I can honestly say I'd find it inappropriate. I like the idea of letting them come up with a topic.

I like the idea of them coming up with a topic as welland your child is lucky that you take such an active role.