« Beldar on Patterico on Crawford (updated) | Main | On the demise of Dewey & LeBouff »

Saturday, September 22, 2012

Why was almost nothing the Obama Administration initially said about the Libyan tragedy accurate?

I recommend to you Stephen F. Hayes' timely essay entitled "Permanent Spin." Key bit:

So we are left with this: Four Americans were killed in a premeditated terrorist attack on the eleventh anniversary of 9/11, and for more than a week the Obama administration misled the country about what happened.

This isn’t just a problem. It’s a scandal.

By all means, read the whole thing.

Bloody handprints on the walls outside the attack site in LibyaAt least it wasn't Jimmy Carter's administration who made up the fiction that the terrorists who stormed the American embassy in Tehran and took its staff hostage — a terrorist group whose members included the current president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad — were "merely students." Carter just republished that fiction — and indeed, he relied upon it to pretend that Iran hadn't committed what would have been immediately recognized throughout human history as an unequivocal declaration of war through an armed attack. (And should have been so recognized then.)

We can argue about whether this Administration's misinformation was merely incompetent or actively deceptive (i.e., disinformation). Hayes makes, in my judgment, a strong case for the latter, whereas I'd argue it's a combination of both.

But no one can argue that the early information released by the Obama Administration about the Libyan tragedy has been accurate or trustworthy.

I hope that during the foreign policy debate, Gov. Romney spotlights this particularly ugly performance by the Obama Adminstration. That will probably be his best chance to cut through the mainstream media's too-willing fog on these issues. 

Posted by Beldar at 02:48 PM in 2012 Election, Global War on Terror, History, Obama, Politics (2012), Romney | Permalink


Note: Trackbacks are moderated and do not appear automatically. They're also spam-filtered. Feel free to email me if yours didn't go through. Trackbacks must contain a link to this post. TrackBack URL for this entry:

Other weblog posts, if any, whose authors have linked to Why was almost nothing the Obama Administration initially said about the Libyan tragedy accurate? and sent a trackback ping are listed here:


(1) Gregory Koster made the following comment | Sep 22, 2012 11:30:47 PM | Permalink

Dear Mr. Dyer: I'll see your question:

Why was almost nothing the Obama Administration initially said about the Libyan tragedy accurate?

and raise you:

Why did the Obama Administration think the press wouldn't spin for them if they told the truth?

The answer to my question is easy: astoundingly, The Won doesn't think the press is liberal enough i.e. isn't willing to grovel at every single scowl he gives them, every time,right NOW.

Bah. I don't know if you saw The Won's version of the American flag . If not, compare it to the photo you've used to illustrate this post. You won't see much comment about that likeness either.

You may recall back on 5 August you wrote about "legal ethicist" Jack Marshall's squawking that saying Harry Reid was a pederast was unethical, if tit for tat. Think he'll have anything to say about the ethics of Susan Rice going on national TV to lie as she did? I'll email him and see what he has to say. I doubt if anything will happen, but it will be fun to see.

Whatever our differences, and they do exist, we agree (I hope) that The Won needs to be canned at the polls on 6 November. Back to work!

Sincerely yours,
Gregory Koster

(2) Beldar made the following comment | Sep 23, 2012 5:41:10 AM | Permalink

Mr. Koster, thanks for another interesting comment.

I briefly considered using an image for this post that included, and juxtaposed, both the bloody handprint photo and the stylized Obama campaign flag you linked.

I decided to use only the handprint photo because I genuinely believe that even those who currently intend to vote for President Obama's reelection should pause to reconsider why his administration has been so inaccurate in its reporting of basic facts from Libya. All Americans of any political persuasion should find those handprints horrifying, and I'm sure that most Obama supporters do, too (regardless of whether their horror affects their opinions of President Obama's performance in office in the fashion you and I think it ought). And I wouldn't want to equate, or suggest a direct correlation between, some Democratic voters' enthusiasm for a piece of campaign art — one which I personally find tasteless, but de gustibus non etc. — and rooting for al Qaeda.

Editing note: I just added "so recognized" to the parenthetical sentence in this post for clarity.

(3) Leon Dixon made the following comment | Sep 23, 2012 5:09:05 PM | Permalink

I rarely get to add anything of a factual nature but I have read (not on the internet) that the mob in Iran was initially upset with the Planned Parenthood operation in that city. They eventually ransacked the place and what they found enraged them to storm the Embassy. Now, that may have been spin of Iranians or their cover story BUT it wasn't reported in the MSM then or now. I think the story I read had photos to go with their story which were supportive of their report. Duh Media have been protective of their bias points for decades, in other words.

(4) Beldar made the following comment | Sep 24, 2012 7:22:10 AM | Permalink

Instapundit passes word that the "United States of Obama" flag has apparently and unexpectedly been pulled from the campaign web store. If so, score one small victory for good taste.

(5) Neo made the following comment | Sep 24, 2012 3:32:45 PM | Permalink

They must be hiring cretins at State.

Back in the "Olden Days" when "grown-ups" were in charge of our government, they would have used anything to deflect the "incident" from getting bigger. The last thing they would do would be to point out a "useful non-sequitur," like a pathetically bad movie on YouTube, which your adversaries could use to garner more support for their "bad behaviour."

But, that was before the word "snollygoster" became obsolete.

(6) Gregory Koster made the following comment | Sep 25, 2012 2:28:12 PM | Permalink

Dear Mr. Dyer: In re #4, I wish it was good taste that pulled it. Seems more likely it was the flak The Won is taking. It's a sign of how far left this gang is that no one with power to stop it foresaw the possible flareback. Or didn't care.

Sincerely yours,
Gregory Koster

(7) The Drill SGT made the following comment | Sep 26, 2012 12:07:47 PM | Permalink

What the Obama folks are doing is a coverup (misdirection) within another one.

1. the first level is the 'movie made them do it" level.

2. level 2 is the real target and importance of the attack. Yes, killing an ambassador is a political event, but the loss of his life isn't more important than the loss of any of the other three staff at another level.

let me postulate this scenario for you to give you an alternative rationale for the attack and cover-up

a. the attack was planned
b. the presence of Shea was a bonus, not the focus. e.g. the cover
c. the real target was the CIA Bengazi Station, and the files, names of both hundreds of locals friendly to the US and the intll files on local AQ.
d. the tradegy will be the deaths of many more locals whose names were lost.

in effect, this was the OBL SEAL raid in reverse. Everybody focuses on OBL's death, not the MB of data we took out.

PS; AND, if I'm correct, it demonstrates that the local AQ operators are more professional than our WH, because you never ever brag about an intel find or what you do with it for years...

PPS; Donilon and the other WH hacks could not stop from bragging about the treasure trove of intel from the OBL raid, decreasing its value.

(8) Davod made the following comment | Sep 26, 2012 5:00:34 PM | Permalink

Don't forget that in addition to the invasion of the consulate in Libya there is the loss of a squadron of USMC AV8 Harrier aircraft during what was termed as a professional commando raid at Camp Leatherneck in Afghanistan. The largest loss of aircraft since the Vietnam War. The squadron CO was also killed.


The comments to this entry are closed.