Reuters: US ambassador to Libya dead

[Razgovory]

Really, do you know who did it?

I know it wasn't spontaneous and it wasn't over the video.

You do?  How?

[derspiess]

Really, do you know who did it?

I know it wasn't spontaneous and it wasn't over the video.

You do?  How?

The same way everyone else here called it shortly after the attack (go back through this thread if you forgot).  It was pretty obvious from the details that came together a day or two later.

[Razgovory]

Really, do you know who did it?

I know it wasn't spontaneous and it wasn't over the video.

You do?  How?

The same way everyone else here called it shortly after the attack (go back through this thread if you forgot).  It was pretty obvious from the details that came together a day or two later.

No, why don't you actually tell me how you know this.  The rest of us could only speculate.  And while you are at it, why do you think Obama claimed it was the film while you became certain of the organization of this attack.

[Tamas]

Really, do you know who did it?

I know it wasn't spontaneous and it wasn't over the video.

You do?  How?

The same way everyone else here called it shortly after the attack (go back through this thread if you forgot).  It was pretty obvious from the details that came together a day or two later.

No, why don't you actually tell me how you know this.  The rest of us could only speculate.  And while you are at it, why do you think Obama claimed it was the film while you became certain of the organization of this attack.

Calm the hell down, nobody is hurting your chieftain

[Kleves]

No.  That they blamed the video for weeks after the attack when it was obvious to the rest of us it was a planned attack.

So what's the theory? Obama lied about this because a terrorist attack on his watch would make him look bad, but somehow his massive conspiracy unraveled (thank you conservative bloggers!)?

[garbon]

No.  That they blamed the video for weeks after the attack when it was obvious to the rest of us it was a planned attack.

So what's the theory? Obama lied about this because a terrorist attack on his watch would make him look bad, but somehow his massive conspiracy unraveled (thank you conservative bloggers!)?

Why does it have to be a "massive conspiracy" and not something like "Obama is inept at handling foreign affairs, here's another example"?

[The Minsky Moment]

Key takeaway: read before posting.

I did. Immediately following your quote:

However, the e-mails raise further questions about the seeming confusion on the part of the Obama administration to determine the nature of the September 11 attack that left U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans dead.

That part is not fact, it is opinion, and it isn't particularly well thought opinion either.
Whatever "seeming confusion" he is referring to, these emails don't raise "further questions" about it.  To the extent these emails demonstrate anything, they demonstrate that the stituation was objectively confusing.

Btw how does Susan Rice still have her job?

She's not resigning and the President isn't going to make her while an election is on.

[garbon]

Whatever "seeming confusion" he is referring to, these emails don't raise "further questions" about it.  To the extent these emails demonstrate anything, they demonstrate that the stituation was objectively confusing.

Which is why if there is any criticism (although largely dull to my mind) it should be on the fact that the administration had Rice making rather definitive statements (which were informed by faulty intelligence from CIA).  That's not very fun though and harder to use on Obama.

[The Minsky Moment]

It's an argument about nothing to cover up the fact that you need a high-power microscope to discover the policy differences between the candidates on foreign affairs.  Mitt made the mistake of letting Fox and Limbaugh set his rhetorical agenda but he wised up in time for Debate 3.

[dps]

What all the debate about the attack in Libya misses is that no matter who is President, there will be times that there are terrorist threats that are perceived at some level, but aren't passed on to higher-ups in the Administration, particularly not the President himself, and sometimes we're going to get bit in the ass because no one reacted to the reports--but it's simply not possible to react to every report, because there are so many of them.  Just look back at the reports we now know various agencies had about the 9/11 attackers prior to the attacks.  In hindsight, we can look at those reports and wonder, "how come something wasn't done about this threat?" but what that doesn't take into account is that for every accurate hunch about what terrorist attacks might be coming, there were dozens, or hundreds, or maybe even thousands of inaccurate hunches.  Sure, we know now that terrorists were planning on hijacking airliners and flying them into major buildings, but looking at all the assessments that were out there on 9/10/2002, it would have probably been more likely to conclude that the biggest terrorist threat was that someone was going to poison the LA water supply or something like that.

[Razgovory]

Really, do you know who did it?

I know it wasn't spontaneous and it wasn't over the video.

You do?  How?

The same way everyone else here called it shortly after the attack (go back through this thread if you forgot).  It was pretty obvious from the details that came together a day or two later.

No, why don't you actually tell me how you know this.  The rest of us could only speculate.  And while you are at it, why do you think Obama claimed it was the film while you became certain of the organization of this attack.

Calm the hell down, nobody is hurting your chieftain

Isn't it?  What I'm seeing is attacks on Obama because his administration made statements about how they thought an attack happened with the information they had at the time.  They believed this for two weeks before they changed their mind for whatever reason.  This doesn't strike me as odd.  Yet for some strange reason, this is apparently really fucking important.  I have no idea why. As of now, nobody except the people who perpetrated the crime actually know what happened.  The identity of people of involved is not known let alone how they were organized.  Yet Derspiess knows for certain.  It's obvious to him.  I'd like know how he knows this.

[derspiess]

So what's the theory? Obama lied about this because a terrorist attack on his watch would make him look bad, but somehow his massive conspiracy unraveled (thank you conservative bloggers!)?

Theory?  I don't know what Obama would have had up his sleeve.  Just seems like an inept handling of the situation.  Sorta like with Operation Fast & Furious.

[derspiess]

No, why don't you actually tell me how you know this.  The rest of us could only speculate.  And while you are at it, why do you think Obama claimed it was the film while you became certain of the organization of this attack.

Why should I oblige you if you're too lazy to go back through through this thread?

[Jacob]

So what's the theory? Obama lied about this because a terrorist attack on his watch would make him look bad, but somehow his massive conspiracy unraveled (thank you conservative bloggers!)?

Theory?  I don't know what Obama would have had up his sleeve.  Just seems like an inept handling of the situation.  Sorta like with Operation Fast & Furious.

Yeah, because Obama was obviously directly involved with that 

[Razgovory]

No, why don't you actually tell me how you know this.  The rest of us could only speculate.  And while you are at it, why do you think Obama claimed it was the film while you became certain of the organization of this attack.

Why should I oblige you if you're too lazy to go back through through this thread?

Cause I looked back in the thread and failed to find exactly how you "know" this.  Though I did find you bitching about Obama criticizing the guy who made that stupid film.  I wonder if that's actually the root of all this.  Obama criticized a dishonest bigot, and that just doesn't sit well with Republicans.  Hits a little close to home.  I mean, there are plenty of Republicans who really don't like Muslims that much, so maybe some took offense at the idea of Obama stating that the assassination could have been triggered by some crazy Islamophobe.