State Department made "grievous mistake" over Benghazi: Senate report

Comments (36)
usa.wi.vet.4q wrote:

No security in an Islamic country in a civil war?? Noone at the top is responsible? Washington let the little people take the blame. No wonder nothing is getting done! Nobody is in charge or responsible for anything. Too bad people had to die as a result of your incompetence!! Oh well you are still getting rich in Washington!!

Dec 31, 2012 11:31am EST  --  Report as abuse
Vuenbelvue wrote:

When did Marines give up Embassy guarding. I would never question the strength and bravery of the 2 independent contractors who died but they should never have had that employment opportunity in the first place. The Ambassador was a career man and should have, of all people, known the dangerous and never had been unescorted like he was. Some personal responsibility lies with the dead. I’m not going to take a trip to Syria to buy olive oil for resale here, or to Egypt, Afghanistan or Yemen. There is a good chance I will be shot or kidnapped or both.

Dec 31, 2012 11:40am EST  --  Report as abuse
PenRumi wrote:

There was no intelligence failure.

In early September 2012, there was a preponderance of warnings and threats (including a video by al-Qaeda chief al-Zawahiri) that a major attack on US interest was imminent.

Historically, terrorists always act up on the anniversary of September 11 – that itself should have raised a red flag.

The truth is that the Obama Administration failed to beef up security at all US consulates and embassies over the world.

After the Benghazi assault occurred, the Chicago Machine, aware of the negative fallout on the upcoming presidential elections, used the demonstrations against the anti-Islamic video to distract the American people. Susan Rice, a supreme political hack, went on news shows after news shows to explain that the Benghazi assault was the result of spontaneous demonstrations, not the work of terrorists. It worked beautifully!

Dec 31, 2012 11:56am EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

Given that the state department was 400 miles from its embassy, to help a CIA field office in Benghazi gather intelligence…. The CIA should have offered some firepower. It is against international law for diplomatic missions to even be involved with spying, but they were going out on a limb to help the CIA. Sometimes, that is necessary, especially in a failed state like Libya. Then the CIA was sleeping when the RPG’s came. CIA has lost its touch. They couldn’t even manage to assassinate Hussein and save us all a trillion dollars and 4,000 U.S. service lives. Time to dissolve the CIA and start over.

Dec 31, 2012 11:57am EST  --  Report as abuse
Gen wrote:

Not surprising this report was released today on the eve of the Fiscal cliff and the eve of a holiday. The big story of the news cycle will be the ‘Fiscal Cliff’ and with the eve of a holiday everyone will paint over this story. Well done Democrats…you did your best to bury this one.

Dec 31, 2012 12:10pm EST  --  Report as abuse
amos033 wrote:

Apparently neither Obama nor Hillary were available to answer the “Red Phone” at 3am.

Dec 31, 2012 12:45pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Rollo2 wrote:

Yeah, but Hillary has an ouchie and we are supposed to be in morning for her. Remember this report was generated by the Democratic Senate. When will we get the whole truth. Remember we have seen 4 people in the State Dept lose their jobs already! What is that you say, they only switched desks? Oh well, how could anyone predict the reaction to that mean spirited Utube? You know the one that Hillary and Obama spent 70K running ads apologizing for on mid east media. Oh
BTW, that “independent scathing report” wasn’t scathing, held no one to account and did not even interview Hillary.

Dec 31, 2012 12:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
brd893 wrote:

Now that Senators John McCain (who has suddenly goe mute)and Lindsey Graham have made asses of themselves and know the truth, are they going to apologize to ambassador Rice? They malainged her and bimirched her reputation before gathering the facts.
One wonders if John McCain would like to see his daughtered treated in such a manner.

This was really a way to get back at the President.Small minded and really disgusting behavior.

Dec 31, 2012 12:56pm EST  --  Report as abuse
DeannaTx wrote:

This article, as does the Senate, fails to mention that a plea for additional funds specifically for the use of additional security at the smaller embassies was made to the Congressional House not 90 days before this tragedy. And denied.

Dec 31, 2012 12:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
brotherkenny4 wrote:

If every event in the world requires us to change what we do and increase effort and thus spending, it becomes apparent how the US will eventually fail. We will become total control freaks intent on not having anything bad ever happen, and thus put so much effort into preventing relatively few events from happening that we will bury ourselves in cost. It’s funny, the GOPers claim to be fiscally responsible, but they fail to see that the potential outcome of their rants on this topic will only lead to more spending. But then again, we know they are not fiscally responsible, they just would rather spend money on killing other people than on helping our old people.

Dec 31, 2012 1:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse
DeanMJackson wrote:

All these reports are DIVERSIONS! We want to know why there was a stand down order not to provide support to the Benghazi mission during the fighting, and why the sociopath Secretary of Stand Down, “Leon” Panetta, fired General Carter F. Ham as he was about to order back-up forces to proceed to Benghazi.

Where’s the investigation of the military no-show during the hours the battles raged? Why doesn’t the media do its job and ask these questions?

Dec 31, 2012 2:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

To DeannaTx’s point, how many other embassies around the world were asking for additional funding for security? And was denied by Congress. What most of you fail to accept is that CONGRESS holds all the purse strings our country. Every department has a budget that has been approved by Congress. I still go back to the actions of Chris Stevens on that fateful day. He may very well have asked for additional funding for security. Chris left the safety of the Embassy in Tripoli and traveled to Benghazi (with the security team that he had) on relatively mundane business. Chris was our man on the ground. He understood the region better than anyone. So why did he make the trip if Benghazi was so dangerous? The simple answer is that he didn’t see Benghazi as any special threat on that day.

Dec 31, 2012 2:17pm EST  --  Report as abuse
usa.wi.vet.4q wrote:

Not accepting another excuse. If you can’t guard the Ambassador you get them out of the country. In other words you make a mature decision and get out of harms way. This administration killed these people by being completely ignorant and unprofessional. Then they all run when accountability comes to call. Good Americans died due to the iidiots in charge. Real leaders?? NOT!!!!

Dec 31, 2012 2:43pm EST  --  Report as abuse
DannyBoys wrote:

“With Osama bin Laden dead and core al Qaeda weakened, a new collection of violent Islamist extremist organizations and cells have emerged in the last two to three years,” the report said. That trend has been seen in the “Arab Spring” countries undergoing political transition or military conflict, it said.

1. Some of the grievances of the Umma are valid. Many are not. The challenge, here, is to rightly divide the wheat of grievance from the chaff of political instigation.

2. The State Department acted professionally, showing remarkable restraint and maturity in the aftermath of the tragedy.

3. Condi’s approach was clearly outmoded and frankly, dangerous. Notwithstanding the terrible price paid by Amb. Stevens and his staff, it was (and remains) incumbent on the Libyan government to prevent further escalation.

4. The region is a tinderbox, and economic and political reform is still the only way out for about 90% of Libyans.

Dec 31, 2012 2:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ConradU812 wrote:

@Alkaline State,
” It is against international law for diplomatic missions to even be involved with spying, but they were going out on a limb to help the CIA.”

But not against common practice.

Dec 31, 2012 2:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ConradU812 wrote:

Let’s see, the President isn’t responsible for the economy, the Attorney General isn’t responsible for Fast and Furious, and the Secretary of State isn’t responsible for poorly managed embassies. Is there ANY reason for these guys to be in office?

Dec 31, 2012 2:57pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Gypsy_413 wrote:

brd893 you are an idot! Stop drinking Obama’s cool aid…it is poisoning your mind!

Dec 31, 2012 3:23pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jaham wrote:

Whatever is being covered-up, it’s apparently sinister enough to make one fall over and nearly blow an aneurism….the truth, we may never know.

Dec 31, 2012 4:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

DeanMJackson writes: “We want to know why there was a stand down order not to provide support to the Benghazi mission during the fighting…”

There wasn’t. Any other questions you heard on AM radio that we can answer for you?

Dec 31, 2012 4:28pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Tiu wrote:

In this attempt to ruin Britain, even the court of France was obliged to preach the doctrines of Liberty, and to take its chance that Frenchmen would consent to be the only slaves. But their officers and soldiers who returned from America, imported the American principles, and in every company found hearers who listened with delight and regret to their fascinating tale of American independence. During the war, the Minister, who had too confidently pledged himself for the destruction of Britain, was obliged to allow the Parisians to amuse themselves with theatrical entertainments, where English law was represented as oppression, and every fretful extravagance of the Americans was applauded as a noble struggle for native freedom. – All wished for a taste of that liberty and equality which they were allowed to applaud on the stage; but as soon as they came from the theatre into the street, they found themselves under all their former restraints. The sweet charm had found its way into their hearts, and all the luxuries of France became as dull as common life does to a fond girl when she lays down her novel.
In this irritable state of mind a spark was sufficient for kindling a flame. To import this dangerous delicacy of American growth, France had expended many millions, and was drowned in debts. The mad prodigality of the Royal Family and the Court had drained the treasury, and forestalled every livre of the revenue. The edicts for new taxes and forced loans were most unwelcome and oppressive.

Quote from a publication dated 1798: “Proofs of a Conspiracy Against All the Religions and Governments of Europe, Carried on in the Secret Meetings of Free Masons, Illuminati, and Reading Societies, Collected from Good Authorities, by John Robison, A. M.
Professor Of Natural Philosophy, And Secretary To The Royal Society Of Edinburgh.

History goes in circles!

Dec 31, 2012 4:31pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

Sketchy country, sketchy job, sketchy result. These things are unfortunate but they will happen from time to time. Any time you set up an office in an unstable Islamic country, there will be casualties. The more people you send, the more casualties you have. Reagan’s Beirut experience and GW’s Iraq experience proved that numbers don’t help to prevent death. They only help to increase it. 4 dead is better than 4,000.

Dec 31, 2012 4:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Rforge wrote:

I wonder how clueless the American People are about the foolishness of their administration. Ok, the same applies for us Europeans as well. Benghazi made my jaw drop. Some week later I collected the following facts from the international media – fasten seatbelts:

The CIA warned the administration that a military raid on the high profile embassy was planned.

The embassy was extra high profile because of high amounts of money and weapons. The reason for this is a scandal in itself: The US lost hundreds of most sophisticated shoulder fired anti-aircraft launchers which were supplied to the noble rebels and then disappeared.

The function of the Bengasi “Annex” was to repurchase those missiles and it was known that an attack was eminent. The CIA classified the event immediately as a sophisticated military operation.

In the mainstream press and in the announcements of the US administration the event was knowingly mislabeled as a spontaneous protest following some anti-religion-of-peace films. And exploited massively as we know as arguments to limit freedom of speech.

But that is not even it:

Not only did the ambassador request more security, which was turned down by Hussein Obama himself.

When the raid began rapid response forces where told to stain down and a general intending to ignore this stand-down-order was fired minutes after deciding so.

Also drones in the air above the embassy were not used.

The ambassador, one diplomat and to soldiers, together with unknown amounts of weapons and money were intentionally sacrificed to our enemies – for exactly what?! I don’t get it.

I am not stopping to be surprised by the foolishness, stupidity and evil of our leading oligarchs which call themselves “representatives”. Ok, this is the US, but it seams the same disease is rotting in our European “democracies”.

Dec 31, 2012 4:52pm EST  --  Report as abuse
DannyBoys wrote:

1 death is too much. Applying Soviet era doctrines & psychology to the Arab uprisings is not a good idea. The fires set off by Mohammed Bouazizi’s self-immolation in Tunisia back in December 2010 are still burning quite fiercely in Syria & Egypt. Returning mercenaries from the Libyan civil war have destabilised Mali and turned the north into an Islamic state while the entire south of Libya is a restricted military zone.

Dec 31, 2012 5:27pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Cowboy1944 wrote:

How convenient it is to simply forget who cut funding for consulate security in Benghazi. Of all of the silly, childish, STUPID comments about Susan Rice and security failures and slandering of the Whitehouse the morons on the right will not mention FUNDING request and funding cuts which they were so gung ho about until the attack and then all of a sudden amnesia.

Dec 31, 2012 5:37pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Mjolnir wrote:

The hoohah about security and intelligence is wasted hot air dancing around the real issue. Any one knows that Libya and a lot of places in the Middle East are dangerous places at the moment and that appropriate care needs to be taken or you’re going to become a casualty. That’s a fact of life and no matter what security you have short of being surrounded by a USMC division, you’re going to be at risk of dying if you’re in the wrong place at the wrong time. More importantly on a strategic level, the underlying basic problem revealed by this incident and which noone seems to want to place on the table for national discussion is that Barack Obama does not consider Islam to be a threat to Western civilization and our way of life. This is exemplified by his insistence that the events in Benghazi were an entirely justified response on the part of offended Muslims who were acting in response to a video mocking their prophet Mohammed. This characterizations of the events was known to be a ridiculous farce from the moment it started, but it’s obvious that Barack Obama and his fellow travelers in the White House are unwilling to admit that their understanding of the present state of the world is naive and absurdly flawed, and they preferred to throw Susan Rice under the bus in an attempt to see how far they could carry this canard. Unfortunately for those of us who care about this great nation, Barack Obama is the gravest threat to the security and survival of the United States that has existed in my lifetime. A clear and present danger from within that obviously 51% of the population are too ignorant or foolhardy to recognize. This guy was fathered by a Muslim father, raised by a Muslim step-father, ignored by a screwed up Caucasian mother and left to be cared for by his grandparents in an America where he was considered Black with all the prejudicial experiences that that entails over the years, and now he is determined to make America pay for its percieved sins. Reparations are going to extracted through wealth transfer at all cost and redistributed to his fellow Blacks – that is his principal mission as President and his mission in life as a community organizer. To right the perceived wrongs of the past. For him, America is evil and must be punished. If he destroys this country and its Constitutional principles in the process of achieving his mission, so be it. The unacknowledged war for Western civilization and the preservation of Christianity and Judaism is of no concern to him other than it is costing money that he would prefer to distribute through social program giveaways. Islam is not a threat in his eyes, after all he grew up with it, and it is second nature to him. Isolated incidents such as Benghazi are just background noise to his true mission.

Dec 31, 2012 5:38pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Curmudgeon43 wrote:

Those responsible held accountable?

Give me a break. They got shuffled off to other responsibilities….no loss of pay…no reprimands…no penalty.

Slaps on the wrist when criminal negligence charges are more appropriate.

Dec 31, 2012 5:40pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Jamal1 wrote:

Regardless of the lie about what caused the attacks, Americans were dying and they knew it. They could have stopped it and didn’t. News outlets were complicit in the cover-up narrative Clinton, Obama and Susan Rice concocted. Now they act as if they want to know the truth.

Dec 31, 2012 5:55pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

Curmudgeon43, when is the last time anyone in the CIA was held accountable? It is an agency that operates beyond oversight. They have gotten more innocent people killed over the last 6 decades than anyone can even count. This is an outfit that still denies involvement with Chile, Cambodia or the Bay of Pigs. These things are in textbooks now, for christ’s sake :)

Dec 31, 2012 5:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
DannyBoys wrote:

Mjolnir wrote:

More importantly on a strategic level, the underlying basic problem revealed by this incident and which noone seems to want to place on the table for national discussion is that Barack Obama does not consider Islam to be a threat to Western civilization and our way of life.

I do not think this is a realistic assessment of Barack Obama’s position on Islam and the Benghazi attacks. Moreover, what sort of response would you advocate? More to the point, what sort of response would you be willing to accept? Much better to play the long game. Nato exercises with Muslim countries make for a far better insurance policy – Operation Albanian Lion, being a good example of this.

Cowboy1944 wrote:

How convenient it is to simply forget who cut funding for consulate security in Benghazi. Of all of the silly, childish, STUPID comments about Susan Rice and security failures and slandering of the Whitehouse the morons on the right will not mention FUNDING request and funding cuts which they were so gung ho about until the attack and then all of a sudden amnesia.

. The Libyans are very sensitive about foreign troops on their soil at this time. I do not think “gung ho” funding cuts contributed materially to the tragedy.

Dec 31, 2012 6:55pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Crash866 wrote:

That is the Dempcratic controlled Senate? Huh??? Good thing this didn’t come out before Nov 6th. Good job to all those who voted who for the liar in chief…

Dec 31, 2012 7:16pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Crash866 wrote:

AlkalineState
You make me sick. Take it like a man. The Adminstration lied, knew it and continued for weeks to lie. You have proven how smart you are…now you have proven what a lemming you are… CIA nice!!

Dec 31, 2012 7:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Crash866 wrote:

AlkalineState
How about 1600 & The State depatment lying for weeks…

Dec 31, 2012 7:21pm EST  --  Report as abuse
sylvan wrote:

Sounds as if the CIA failed to detect international threats. Petraeus once again comes up short, irregardless of Paula’s expert opinion.

Dec 31, 2012 7:22pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Crash866 wrote:

Cowboy1944
That’s not the same as lying to the American public for weeks

Dec 31, 2012 7:23pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Crash866 wrote:

brotherkenny4
Stay on point. The lied…defend it…

Dec 31, 2012 7:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
GeoThermal wrote:

I still have one nagging question: What was our ambassador doing in Benghazi instead of Tripoli? Hmmm?

Jan 01, 2013 8:30am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.