Obama and Romney hit the final stretch

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tampa_Dave
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
State Department emails from day of Libya attack show Al Qaeda-tied group on radar

A series of internal State Department emails obtained by Fox News shows some some of the initial assessments of last month’s deadly consulate attack in Libya, including one email within hours of the attack that noted that the group Ansar al Sharia had claimed responsibility.
Ansar al Sharia has been declared by the State Department to be a an Al Qaeda-affiliated group. A member of the group suspected of participating in the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi has been arrested and is being held in Tunisia.
The emails obtained by Fox News **were sent by the State Department to a variety of national security platforms, whose addresses have been redacted, including the White House Situation Room, the Pentagon, the FBI and the Director of National Intelligence.

Fox News was told that an estimated 300 to 400 national security figures received these emails in real time almost as the raid was playing out and concluding. People who received these emails work directly under the nation’s top national security, military and diplomatic officials, Fox News was told.

The third email came at 6:07 p.m. ET and was sent to a different email list but still includes the White House Situation Room address and a subject line of “Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack

**

Good luck trying to explain this Obama
“And the suggestion that anybody in my team, whether the secretary of state, our U.N. ambassador, anybody on my team would play politics or mislead when we’ve lost four of our own, governor, is offensive.” President Obama 10/16/12

Unbelievable!!!
 
Show me the study establishing the causation. Not the correlation, but the causation.
Well, I don’t know if they did a study asking folks “why are you moving from the city to the burb?” That’s a pretty narrow requirement you have there. Anyway, here is a start regarding the types of dynamics responsible for white flight.

From wikipedia:

A practice further reinforcing unofficial segregation in states outside the South, where racial segregation was legal, were exclusionary covenants in title deeds and real estate neighborhood redlining[19] — explicit, legally sanctioned racial discrimination in real property ownership and lending practices. Black Americans were effectively barred from pursuing homeownership, even when they were able to afford it.[17] Suburban expansion was reserved for middle-class and working-class white people, facilitated by their increased wages incurred by the war effort and by subsequent federally guaranteed mortgages (VA, FHA, HOLC) available only to whites to buy new houses. Blacks and other minorities were relegated to a state of permanent rentership.20

I guess I am interested in what drives your skepticism of this well documented phenomena.
 
I disagree that Obama’s entire presidency has been a failure. His signing of the Lily Ledbetter Bill for equal pay for women, his repeal of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” military policy, the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq, setting a timetable for the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan, the crippling sanctions on Iran, the Affordable Care Act of Obamacare that ensures, among other things, coverage for preexisting conditions, the reduction of costs for prescription medication for seniors, the auto bailout, these I view as genuine accomplishments.
Fair enough - but your support betrays a liberal point of view obviously - just as mine betrays a conservative point of view. Obamacare is a two thousand page boondoggle rammed down our throats - filled with unecessary regulations and attacks on the free exercise of religion. We didn’t need Obamacare to help those with coverage for pre-existing conditions. The auto bailout? Doesn’t GM still owe billions to the taxpayers that we’ll likely never see? Obama got bin Laden. He deserves credit for that. But what else has he accomplished? Energy? Obama gave billions in taxpayer $$ to green energy companies that failed. The price of gas at $4/gallon takes a bigger and bigger chunk out of my paycheck - I drive part time to pay bills. The economy? I suppose it could be worse - but that is hardly a rallying cry for someone’s re-election. The deficit? The debt? Al Qaida? Contrary to Obama’s boasting, they are on the rise again. Obama has failed miserably on these issues. Obama is a liberal ideologue. He is concerned about fairness - and imposing fairness on everyone by use of the power of the federal government. He is a liberal. He is for redefining marriage and abortion on demand. He doesn’t understand how to revive an economy. Nothing in his life experience suggests that he knows the first thing about how to revive the economy. Ditto with foreign policy. I can’t understand how, objectively speaking, one can seriously make the case for Obama’s re-election.

Ishii
 
Of course the left plays the race card. It couldn’t possibly be because parents don’t want their kids spending 2 hours a day on a bus when they have a school right by their house.
Ever heard of the uproar regarding bussing? It was kind of a big story and it wasnt about bus ride length.
 
Ever heard of the uproar regarding bussing? It was kind of a big story and it wasnt about bus ride length.
Yes and it was going on in the 70’s. Now to get back to the 21st century, already in progress…

Ishii
 
Yes, lets all be distracted with rehashing busing and completely ignore the news released tonight regarding the information the White House knew regarding the attack on the consulate.

The third email came at 6:07 p.m. ET and was sent to a different email list but still includes the White House Situation Room address and a subject line of “Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack
 
Yes and it was going on in the 70’s. Now to get back to the 21st century, already in progress…

Ishii
I’m not going to let a blatant and even half-hearted fallacy slide, especially regarding such a serious matter, but certainly, this is off topic.
 
I’m not going to let a blatant and even half-hearted fallacy slide, especially regarding such a serious matter, but certainly, this is off topic.
As someone who goes off topic regularly, I am no one to judge others. As for white flight - as long as we’re being anecdotal and not providing any evidence or citations to back our points up: white flight certainly happened in the 60’s and 70’s as blacks and minorities came into what were up to then, white neighborhoods based party on ethnicity - Italians, Irish, etc. And yes, racism did play a part - but not the whole part. Crime was also a factor - white flight was also a result of that. I think that there were people who wanted to live the suburban lifestyle - larger homes, yards, etc. that they didn’t have available in the urban areas. Add to that, the whole upward mobility impulse that is very American and included blacks and other minorities. Did you know, Ringil, that many Asian minorities lived in neighborhoods that were more racially homogeneous - little Tokyo, Chinatown, Little Saigon, etc. But over the years as the younger generations moved up in income, they moved to the suburbs! I think this impulse explains “white flight” more than any racism. I would suggest reading Thomas Sowell on this issue - he is conservative, but brilliant, and his analysis is very scholarly.

Ishii
 
Yeesh I remmebr in 2008 ppl were replacing Jesus’ pic on candles with obamas pick… he was literally thier Messiah.
Oh, please. Who here “worships” Romney? My experience posting on these forums is that many people came around to Romney somewhat reluctantly and only in the past few months have come to support him enthusiastically. The whole " you guys worship Romney" shtick is a stupid straw-man. Instead of “worshiping” Romney, I have come to admire his performance in the debates, his experience in business, his authoritative manner in speaking on matters of the economy - which derive from his experience in the private sector (something that Obama manifestly lacks). In this last debate Romney successfully showed himself to have a command of the foreign policy issues. I think anyone who was unsure if they could support him based on matters of war and peace would likely come away from the debate thinking that they could trust him to be calm and cool headed and rational when it comes to foreign policy.

Apparently some here on these forums feel the need to act “above the fray” and in so doing, portray themselves as above the partisanship.

Ishii
 
Yes, lets all be distracted with rehashing busing and completely ignore the news released tonight regarding the information the White House knew regarding the attack on the consulate.

The third email came at 6:07 p.m. ET and was sent to a different email list but still includes the White House Situation Room address and a subject line of “Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack
I started a thread with a link to the Reuters article.

Here is the link as well:

We have been lied to again!😦

Reuters) - Officials at the White House and State Department were advised two hours after attackers assaulted the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11 that an Islamic militant group had claimed credit for the attack, official emails show.

The emails, obtained by Reuters from government sources not connected with U.S. spy agencies or the State Department and who requested anonymity, specifically mention that the Libyan group called Ansar al-Sharia had asserted responsibility for the attacks.

The brief emails also show how U.S. diplomats described the attack, even as it was still under way, to Washington.

U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the Benghazi assault, which President Barack Obama and other U.S. officials ultimately acknowledged was a “terrorist” attack carried out by militants with suspected links to al Qaeda affiliates or sympathizers.

Administration spokesmen, including White House spokesman Jay Carney, citing an unclassified assessment prepared by the CIA, maintained for days that the attacks likely were a spontaneous protest against an anti-Muslim film.

While officials did mention the possible involvement of “extremists,” they did not lay blame on any specific militant groups or possible links to al Qaeda or its affiliates until intelligence officials publicly alleged that on September 28.

There were indications that extremists with possible al Qaeda connections were involved, but also evidence that the attacks could have erupted spontaneously, they said, adding that government experts wanted to be cautious about pointing fingers prematurely.

U.S. intelligence officials have emphasized since shortly after the attack that early intelligence reporting about the attack was mixed.

Spokesmen for the White House and State Department had no immediate response to requests for comments on the emails.

MISSIVES FROM LIBYA

The records obtained by Reuters consist of three emails dispatched by the State Department’s Operations Center to multiple government offices, including addresses at the White House, Pentagon, intelligence community and FBI, on the afternoon of September 11.

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 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 second email, headed “Update 1: U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi” and timed 4:54 p.m. Washington time, said that the Embassy in Tripoli had reported that “the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi had stopped and the compound had been cleared.” It said a “response team” was at the site attempting to locate missing personnel.

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, a government source said that one of the addresses to which the message was sent was the White House Situation Room, the president’s secure command post.

Other addressees included intelligence and military units as well as one used by the FBI command center, the source said.

It was not known what other messages were received by agencies in Washington from Libya that day about who might have been behind the attacks.

Intelligence experts caution that initial reports from the scene of any attack or disaster are often inaccurate.

By the morning of September 12, the day after the Benghazi attack, Reuters reported that there were indications that members of both Ansar al-Sharia, a militia based in the Benghazi area, and al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, the North African affiliate of al Qaeda’s faltering central command, may have been involved in organizing the attacks.

One U.S. intelligence official said that during the first classified briefing about Benghazi given to members of Congress, officials “carefully laid out the full range of sparsely available information, relying on the best analysis available at the time.”

reuters.com/article/2012/10/24/us-usa-benghazi-emails-idUSBRE89N02C20121024
 
Cmatt - I didn’t watch this debate, but if Obama “won” the 2nd debate, then why did Romney continue to rise in the polls after the 2nd debate?
The race may have settled into a period of relative stability. But there is still some bad news for Romney. He still seems to be trailing in the Electoral College.

With 2 wks to go President Obama seems to continue to remain the favorite with nearly a 70% chance of reelection.

fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/oct-21-uncertainty-clouds-polling-but-obama-remains-electoral-college-favorite/

This is not to say the race is not close. It is.

But today NBC narrowed their map. They have Nevada leaning Obama now. PA and MI in the Obama camp. Romney gets NC. Leaving 7 swing: OH, FL, VA, CO, WI, IA, NH.

So I played around with an online interactive Electoral College map today. Even when I gave Romney FL, VA, CO, IA, and NH, Obama still exceeded 270. It does appear President Obama still has more ways to get 270.
 
bump…would like to hear from Obama apologists…
CMatt25? What say you?
Yes, lets all be distracted with rehashing busing and completely ignore the news released tonight regarding the information the White House knew regarding the attack on the consulate.

The third email came at 6:07 p.m. ET and was sent to a different email list but still includes the White House Situation Room address and a subject line of “Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack
 
The race may have settled into a period of relative stability. But there is still some bad news for Romney. He still seems to be trailing in the Electoral College.

With 2 wks to go President Obama seems to continue to remain the favorite with nearly a 70% chance of reelection.

fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/oct-21-uncertainty-clouds-polling-but-obama-remains-electoral-college-favorite/

This is not to say the race is not close. It is.

But today NBC narrowed their map. They have Nevada leaning Obama now. PA and MI in the Obama camp. Romney gets NC. Leaving 7 swing: OH, FL, VA, CO, WI, IA, NH.

So I played around with an online interactive Electoral College map today. Even when I gave Romney FL, VA, CO, IA, and NH, Obama still exceeded 270. It does appear President Obama still has more ways to get 270.
Not really…RCP does their electoral college map based on an average of the polls…
realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html
 
The race may have settled into a period of relative stability. But there is still some bad news for Romney. He still seems to be trailing in the Electoral College.

With 2 wks to go President Obama seems to continue to remain the favorite with nearly a 70% chance of reelection.

fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/oct-21-uncertainty-clouds-polling-but-obama-remains-electoral-college-favorite/

This is not to say the race is not close. It is.

But today NBC narrowed their map. They have Nevada leaning Obama now. PA and MI in the Obama camp. Romney gets NC. Leaving 7 swing: OH, FL, VA, CO, WI, IA, NH.

So I played around with an online interactive Electoral College map today. Even when I gave Romney FL, VA, CO, IA, and NH, Obama still exceeded 270. It does appear President Obama still has more ways to get 270.
Hi Cmatt- you dodged the question. If Obama won the 2nd debate, why did he continue to rise in the polls after the debate? Do candidates who lose debates usually go up in the polls?

Ishii
 
No administration has recognized Israel’s claims beyond the 1949 armistice lines; not even over Jerusalem. Even the previous administration publicly stated that any such change must be mutually agreed upon by both Israel and Palestine.
Of course they don’t, but none of them called publicly for Israel to withdraw back to the 67 borders.

This administration is pro-Palestinian and a stark deviation because we maintain that Israel is an ally yet we play both sides in the region. I still think that is more or less the smart move as long as we don’t fund terror and I think that Israel can defend itself.
 
So I played around with an online interactive Electoral College map today. Even when I gave Romney FL, VA, CO, IA, and NH, Obama still exceeded 270. It does appear President Obama still has more ways to get 270.
Any state Obama is below 50% in he will lose.
 
Hi Cmatt- you dodged the question. If Obama won the 2nd debate, why did he continue to rise in the polls after the debate? Do candidates who lose debates usually go up in the polls?

Ishii
Ishii, I did no such thing. I provided you with a link saying Obama won the debate. But if you read my first sentence, I said the race more or less had become stable. People still had the first debate in mind after the second. Romney had plenty of debate practice in the primaries. Obama did not this yr. It is not unusual for a President who has not gone through the primary debate process for 4 yrs to lose the first debate. Obama was hardly the first. And some have gone on to win reelection nonetheless. Also in that first debate Obama had no idea a different Romney was going to show up for the month of Oct after yrs of another Romney campaigning for the Presidency. But after the first one, Obama knew what to expect from Romney which was helpful in the President winning the 2nd and 3rd debates as indicated in several polls that he did.

Take for instance this week’s Romney. After being on record saying he would not have announced a timeline to end the Afghanistan war, the new Mitt Romney last night said 2014 is a fine timeline for him. Of course he had no choice because America is tired of a decade of war and had he told the American people this wk what he had actually previously said, he knew that would have hurt his chances. The same goes for Mitt Romney not wanting to move heaven and earth to get Osama Bin Laden nor going into Pakistan without permission. As President Obama explained to Mitt Romney last night, had Mitt Romney been Commander in Chief and had waited for permission, there would still be no justice for Osama Bin Laden and all those grieving families who lost so many loved ones on 911. So then what does the new Oct Mitt Romney do last night? Of course he was glad Obama went into Pakistan and moved heaven and earth. I just know I am praying enough Americans in the swing states see the flip flopping and see through Mitt Romney and give President Obama enough votes to get to 270 Electoral votes. Because as President Obama said today, we may speak of “Romnesia” and Etch a Sketch. But this is serious. It’s now a matter of whether we can trust Mitt Romney when he says something. Even on the single issue for many here. One day when he’s catering to the far “right”, he would be be happy to sign abortion legislation. The next, abortion legislation is not on his agenda. I’ve finally come to understand now why some of the Catholic conservative posters here are voting for a 3rd candidate and not Mitt Romney.

But we’ll know Nov 6 or 7 or when we know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top