| Submit your comments on this article |
| Africa North |
| U.S. denies premeditation report in Libya attack |
| 2012-09-14 |
| [Politico] The B.O. regime is flatly denying a blaring British newspaper report that the U.S. diplomats in Libya were killed as a result of a "continuing security breach," and that "credible information" about possible attacks had been ignored. A U.S. official told POLITICO: "There's no intelligence indicating that the attack in Benghazi was premeditated." The newspaper, The Independent, plastered its cover with the headline, "Revealed: inside story of US envoy's liquidation," and reported inside: "The killings of the US ambassador to Libya and three of his staff were likely to have been the result of a serious and continuing security breach ... American officials believe the attack was planned." The article continued: "According to senior diplomatic sources, the U.S. State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted, but no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and 'lockdown', under which movement is severely restricted." Shawn Turner, front man for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, emailed: "This is absolutely wrong. We are not aware of any actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent." |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #9 U.S. denies premeditation report in Libya attack They were just pining for the fjords. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2012-09-14 15:38 |
| #8 Flamethrowers don't need bullets. Just sayin'. |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2012-09-14 15:13 |
| #7 Raider, what good would weapons have done if they weren't allowed to have bullets? Actionable is, to coin a phrase, a term of art. It means that they did not have names, places and detailed plans to intercept the bad guys. It does NOT mean that they couldn't have taken actions to strengthen defenses. These are evil men and women in our gov't. though none dare call it treason. |
| Posted by: AlanC 2012-09-14 14:14 |
| #6 At a bare minimum - you would think they would have stocked up on weapons. |
| Posted by: Raider 2012-09-14 10:05 |
| #5 the "actionable" part is pure spokesholee dissembling. They had warning, knew a prime anniversary date was coming up, yet did nothing to protect our people. "Under the bus" doesn't even begin to describe what Zero and Shrillary have done and continue to do. These are Americans dead because he couldn't be bothered. "Intel briefings? Val can attend and give me a headsup if it's important, like if it affects my campaigning and fundraising" |
| Posted by: Frank G 2012-09-14 09:38 |
| #4 Just because we didn't have any intelligence on it doesn't mean it wasn't premeditated. It was obviously planned, premeditated, organized, etc. and therefore an intelligence failure. But of course O can't admit that so it never happened. Move along. |
| Posted by: Spot 2012-09-14 09:04 |
| #3 It was the anniversary of 9/11. Champ may not get that but the radical Muslims do. The intel may not have been 'actionable' but it should have raised security precautions substantially. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2012-09-14 08:47 |
| #2 I mean like duh. zawahiri only celebrated the martyrdom of al libi and asked the mooj to avenge his blood. Plus his bro offered a hudna. Doesn't anybody understand this language? Anyone? Yes. Precautions should have been taken in Libya. |
| Posted by: Hupailing Ebbuns 2012-09-14 06:20 |
| #1 Shawn Turner, front man for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, emailed: "This is absolutely wrong. We are not aware of any actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent." Intelligence reporting need not be "actionable" to be crucial. Knowing these people are, let me say.... 'anniversary prone to violence', a geographic uptick in [source unspecified] reporting during the 9/11 timeframe might be something to investigate further, keep an eye on, or mention in routine cables. Furthermore, I always get a bit uneasy when "intelligence experts" respond with the words "absolutely", always, or never, especially when it involves a potential operational cock-up involving dead people. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2012-09-14 04:21 |