web analytics

It will explain nothing

So, the Benghazi hearings. This is one of those issues that make me feel like I have gone cracked, because nothing about it makes any damn sense.

It looks like State systematically downgraded and denied security in Libya, even as diplomats in country pleaded for more. Why? When the call came for help, it was denied. Why? We’ve always beefed up security in the run up to September 11, but not in this hotbed of Islamism. Why not? (I’ve heard that byzantine thing about a plot to trade Stevens for the blind sheik. I don’t believe a word of it, but it is the only explanation that actually explains any of this screwiness).

Our consulate was burned down and four Americans killed. An attack on a diplomatic compound is universally regarded as an act of war. So that stupid lie about it being a spontaneous riot, not a premeditated attack — why would that have been better? How was that helpful to the ass covering operation? The facility was still undergunned in a bad place and that was going to come out regardless.

And really, MSM? Really? This thing is huge by any objective measure. You have the balls to call the investigation partisan? My, we’ve come a far piece down a dangerous road.

Related: it’s tacky as shit to make Hillary’s presidential aspirations a part of this story. No doubt it’s going through her mind, but to write about the next election as though our biennial horse race is always a natural and important part of any major event is, ummm…excuse me: FOUR DEAD DIPLOMATS.


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: May 8, 2013, 10:16 pm

Also, what was that place? And why was Stevens there?

I’ve heard the gunrunning theory and I’ve heard the Stevens-had-a-lover theory, either of which could explain why State didn’t want to explain itself in public. But neither would explain why they were so under protected.

Comment from Skandia Recluse
Time: May 8, 2013, 10:44 pm

RE: The facility was still undergunned

I’ve seen reports that the attackers numbered between 60-150, heavily armed. We had two guys on the roof, who held them off for hours. Most certainly there were more than two defenders. Today’s testimony includes the cryptic comments about State Department contractors, and CIA contractors going to Benghazi. If the numbers of attackers are accurate, then two to six defenders held off an army of heavily armed, fanatical attackers, and saved the lives of 30 people. That’s heroic by any definition.

The scandal is the President of the United States, and his Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Defense turning the security of an embassy and staff over to a foreign government; a hostile government known to be infiltrated with sworn enemies of the United States.

Comment from Oh Hell
Time: May 8, 2013, 10:49 pm

I listened off and on to the hearings…some of it made me want to scream the throw things.

Comment from S. Weasel
Time: May 8, 2013, 11:09 pm

I had some fun with trolls on HotAir today. The level of trolling there sometimes darkens my enjoyment, so I decided to troll back. I don’t usually link to myself arguing with strangers, but my trolling worked so well that I thought I’d share. It’s an abortion thread, and I show up about nine comments down.

Feel free to try this at home.

Comment from Skandia Recluse
Time: May 8, 2013, 11:21 pm

I think I’ve been banned at HotGas, to hot tempered. Or I forgot my password. Either way, don’t care to go back. Too much of a LGF vibe over there where trolls are tolerated for the hit count they generate.

Comment from S. Weasel
Time: May 8, 2013, 11:24 pm

It’s my favorite news aggregator. But when the trollage is high, I stay out of the comments.

Comment from USCitizen
Time: May 8, 2013, 11:39 pm

I know your blog theme is strictly B&W but a vibrant yellow puddle around Hillary’s heels would be a nice touch.

Comment from Stark Dickflüssig
Time: May 9, 2013, 12:04 am

Hot air does pop-ups, so I disabled javascript for their domain, thus I can’t comment there.

Comment from Mono The Elderish
Time: May 9, 2013, 12:20 am

For some reason that escapes me, this picture gives me the willies. I may just be ignorant of protocol, but, funeral or not, why are they holding hands?

On another note, I’m assuming this whole Benghazi thing will turn out to be obama’s watergate.

Comment from Stark Dickflüssig
Time: May 9, 2013, 12:32 am

I’m assuming this whole Benghazi thing will turn out to be obama’s watergate.

Unlike Nixon, Obama has absolutely no sense of shame, so he’ll never resign. The press is also not going bring any pressure on congress to impeach, & the crying boner wouldn’t do that to his golfin’ buddy in any case.

Comment from Redd
Time: May 9, 2013, 12:42 am

No, Mono, it’s disgusting. Who did they think they were fooling with that bullshit?

Comment from Redd
Time: May 9, 2013, 12:52 am

Uh, I like Marcus. He’s one of the few intelligent people over there. So many of the comments are just lame but if you call them out, you get personally attacked. So, I don’t bother. And, no, he is not pro abortion.

Comment from mojo
Time: May 9, 2013, 2:17 am

“But…but… Hillary’s chances!”

I think she was set up to take the fall (for what?), but the thing in Libya (what?) went sideways and she saw the spot she was in. Wouldn’t be surprised if she refused Obie’s order to go out and do the Sunday shows (so they had to sub in Susan Rice), but couldn’t get out of the funeral.

I’d sure like to see comm logs between State and POTUS on that night. Clean ones, if that’s even possible anymore, not the “second set of books”.

Comment from Christopher Taylor
Time: May 9, 2013, 4:16 am

For dead, RAPED diplomats, blamed on a movie and the man who made the film attacked and demonized instead of the monsters who did the killing and raping.

But to me, the most frustrating part of it all is the press, who has just stonewalled this story as much as they possibly can, not because of any partisanship on the Republicans side (which there certainly is a lot), not because of any concerns about racism or violence against Muslims, not even because they are worried this might lead America to war.

No, they do it because they fear it will hurt their guys. Keeping them in power matters more than truth, more than doing their jobs, more than the story, more than anything. News folks used to be ruthless and horrible about following a story no matter who it hurt. Now they’re even worse: they do so only with one side of the political spectrum and utterly bury any story that hurts their buddies.

Its despicable at a level I am unable to even express in human language. Politicians are scum, we know that. They want power more than life its self. But the press is supposed to be the 4th estate, the extra branch of government that holds the other three to account, that’s the enemy of the powerful and the power hungry. Now they’re just a tool of the state, and unlike in a totalitarian nation, they do it voluntarily.

Its evil, through and through.

Comment from SCOTTtheBADGER
Time: May 9, 2013, 5:49 am

They do so voluntarily, so they can share in the power. The media is cut from the same cloth as the Democrats.

Comment from Oceania
Time: May 9, 2013, 11:16 am

Oh how nice, Sweasel knows it to be true!

Comment from S. Weasel
Time: May 9, 2013, 11:25 am

You’re like a toddler, O.

That’s the first I’ve been aware of Marcus, Redd, and he didn’t strike me as especially sharp. He’s employing what I think of as the Job fallacy “sure, God killed your nine sons, but he gave you another nine sons, so that’s okay.” Sux to be one of the first nine, neh?

Comment from weasel’s tablet
Time: May 9, 2013, 12:11 pm

Also – who knew Patrick Kennedy was in the State Dept.? Same one, I assume.

Comment from Redd
Time: May 9, 2013, 1:09 pm

I’m not going to jump into your little spat. I think he is just tired of getting bashed all the time. And, yes, he is very sharp. He’s been an ob/gyn for 30 years. There use to be a neonatologist and another doc who posted there,too, but they were run off.

Comment from weasel\’s tablet
Time: May 9, 2013, 1:24 pm

Eh. Not looking for backup. It was just interesting to me that conservatives don’t make better use of the gross racial inequities of the abortion industry.

Comment from CoyoteKhan
Time: May 9, 2013, 3:47 pm

Inequities in the abortion industry? Well, it’s pretty simple why…most conservatives generally don’t think in racial terms beyond the mundane(he happens to be ). Hence they don’t have the racial card as a standard tactic to use(now, most active conservatives know the tactic but purely from a defensive perspective).

As for this Marcus bloke, just because someone is a physician(even an OB/GYN) doesn’t give them any special insight to the moral/ethical/socioeconomic aspects of abortion anymore than being a doctor gives you any special insight to the legal aspects of abortion.

Now for Benghazi, I’m not going to comment at length on it but I do think you need to keep in mind one of Napoleon’s maxims, “Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.” and I think you can easily ascribe the Benghazi mess to incompetence on the part of the executive branch for both the actions before it(the inadequate security and wishful thinking of the ‘Arab Spring’) and for their actions in covering up what happened to try to protect their ideology and their reputations.

Comment from Redd
Time: May 9, 2013, 5:05 pm

CoyoteKhan: Yes, it does. And he’s not pro-abortion, jackass. And according to the usual suspects, being an atty for over 30 years give one no special insight into law. It gets old…

Comment from weasel tablet
Time: May 9, 2013, 5:25 pm

Eh. I have a doctor in the family. I’m going with Khan on this one. Biochemistry, yes. Ethics, not so much.

Comment from CoyoteKhan
Time: May 9, 2013, 6:23 pm

Redd: I’m only addressing one line to clear something up.
And he’s not pro-abortion, jackass.
I never stated he was nor was it implied. I’d like to point out that one can find the argumentation of one’s allies unconvincing without disagreeing with the general stand.

Also, I’m disappointed you forgot the pompous in front of jackass.

Comment from Stark Dickflüssig
Time: May 9, 2013, 6:42 pm

And according to the usual suspects, being an atty for over 30 years give one no special insight into law

As a heavy & regular drinker of some decades experience, I would appreciate police, therapists, judges, parents, social workers, & parole officers subscribing to your logic.

Yours in Christ,


Comment from Subotai Bahadur
Time: May 9, 2013, 7:28 pm

Why the Benghazi coverup and rallying of the Left and Institutional Republicans around the Narrative?

All I can say is to recommend that you read some autobiographies and histories centered around the rise of various authoritarian states; Solzhenitsyn, Shirer, there are a number covering events in China. You will see common threads within them. Whether or not you see grounds to extrapolate to current events is up to you.

Add to the political-media alliance the rise of a huge and overarching, purely internal, security apparatus that denies the power of Congressional oversight and claims authority over anything domestic, and then reconsider the extrapolation.

In passing, under my own name and a couple of pseudonyms I have been writing for various defense other publications as a sideline for over 3 decades. The amount of information on all things military that is available open source is huge. If you are willing to dig, you can find out enough to not really need to come close to classified material and still write coherently and relevantly.

Pretty much anything about DHS is classified; numbers, basing, budgets, operational chains of command, roles and missions, and legal/constitutional restrictions [if any]. Even from Congress. Not a good sign.

If something walks, swims, quacks, and nests like a duck; it is probably not a cuddly hedgehog.

Of course, YMMV.

Subotai Bahadur

Comment from CoyoteKhan
Time: May 9, 2013, 7:54 pm

Subotai Bahadur: I think you have a point. Just thinking of airport pat downs, they strike me as a possible attempt to condition Americans to accepting infringements to their liberties for security theater. They were initially politically unpopular, however, the government weathered the initial storm and people generally accept it as a requirement for air travel now.

Now, I don’t think it was some grand conspiracy, it just so happens that the vast majority of the people high up in the government and media have the same ideology that guides them.

Comment from Christopher Taylor
Time: May 9, 2013, 9:00 pm

If it was put up to a referendum, those airport fondling molestations would be shot down in a heartbeat, but that’s not how it works. People sort of put up with it because what can you do? How can you stop it?

Comment from CoyoteKhan
Time: May 9, 2013, 10:49 pm

Oh, no doubt people hate the pat downs and they could stop it if they were serious and voted in some politicians who had some principles. But most people rate getting their thirty pieces of silver from the government over their own freedom so they’ll keep voting for their socialist masters who’ll give them their bennies.

Comment from Cracked SEO Tools
Time: May 28, 2013, 2:55 am

Just Visit to one of the best SEO and Internet Marketing VIP membership website. It’s becoming #1 membership website providing latest SEO tools and SEO coures. Hurry and check out website right now!

Write a comment

(as if I cared)

(yeah. I'm going to write)

(oooo! you have a website?)

Beware: more than one link in a comment is apt to earn you a trip to the spam filter, where you will remain -- cold, frightened and alone -- until I remember to clean the trap. But, hey, without Akismet, we'd be up to our asses in...well, ass porn, mostly.

<< carry me back to ol' virginny