+- Twitist Forums (http://twitist.com)
+-- Forum: Twitter forums (/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Twitter abbreviations (/forum-4.html)
+--- Thread: RE: The Ambassador in Libya? (/thread-45244.html)
Pages: 1 2
- Crazyhall769 - 11-27-2012 06:35 AM
you already know the answer: Obams is the antichrist and his mission is to destroy Western civilization
beeenvoenovevnp
- Kiran C - 11-27-2012 06:35 AM
There was a request for increased security in Tripoli and it was denied. However, the ambassador was in Benaghzi so that would have no effect. What really happened was the embassy was attacked but the fog around the events made it hard to figure out what happened and why.
- John J. S - 11-27-2012 06:35 AM
1) The republicans decided to balance the budget. They cut the State Department budget because they HATE hillary Clinton.
2) The EMBASSY is in Tripoli. The Building that got burned was in Benghazi- hundreds of miles from Tripoli, so it was a consulate, which doesn't rate the full defense the embassy does.
3) When the extra protection in the face of budget cutbacks for a consulate, not an EMBASSY, in the part of Libya most strongly friendly to the US, with no apparrent increase in threat level, it probably seemed prudent at the time. Of course, in hindsight all decisions look different.
- gatita - 11-27-2012 06:35 AM
I love it when people blame the Republicans for the failure of this administration's failure to provide adequate security. I believe this scripture is applicable in reference to Obama and his followers, Romans 1:25 - Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
One of the men who was in charge of security for U.S. diplomats in Libya says he feared for their safety long before the attack last month on the consulate in Benghazi. Four Americans were killed in the attacks on the Libyan consulate, including Ambassador Chris Stevens. security team leader in Libya: "We needed more, not less" security staff. Wood first set foot in Libya last February to lead an elite, 16-man counterterrorism team. From the moment he arrived, he says he saw chaos. "Shooting instances occurred, many instances involved the local security guard force that we were training," he told CBS News. "Constantly, there were battles going on between militias, criminal activity and that became increasing danger as time went on as well."
A top State Department security official in Libya told a congressional investigator that he had argued unsuccessfully for more security in the weeks before Ambassador Chris Stevens was killed. Department officials instead wanted to “normalize operations and reduce security resources,†Senior State Department officials acknowledged to Congress on Wednesday that they had turned down requests to send more U.S. military personnel to guard diplomatic facilities in Libya shortly before the Sept. 11 attack that killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans. But Charlene Lamb, deputy assistant secretary in charge of diplomatic security, argued that security at the U.S. mission in Benghazi was appropriate for known threats related to the 11th anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States.
The first email, timed at 4:05 p.m. Washington time - or 10:05 p.m. Benghazi time, 20-30 minutes after the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission allegedly began - carried the subject line "U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack" and the notation "SBU", meaning "Sensitive But Unclassified."The records obtained by Reuters consist of three emails dispatched by the State Department's The text said the State Department's regional security office had reported that the diplomatic mission in Benghazi was "under attack. Embassy in Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well." The message continued: "Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four ... personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support."
A third email, also marked SBU and sent at 6:07 p.m. Washington time, carried the subject line: "Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack." The message reported: "Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli." While some information identifying recipients of this message was redacted from copies of the messages obtained by Reuters.
How can Obama and his minions claim ignorance of the situation is beyond imagination. Isn't it obvious the denials were to deflect criticism in order to be reelected.
gatita
Degree in History (focus Jewish studies) and Spanish, New Mexico State U. 1990