Tag: Department of State

We’re sooo doomed.

It looks like the genius that replaced Billary at the State Department pointed out in a speech at UV that neither China nor Middle Eastern instability are as big of a threat to America as Congress is, and by Congress this moron really means those evil people that want government to live within its means:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Secretary of State John Kerry says the greatest challenge to U.S. foreign policy is not emerging China or Middle East instability. It’s Congress.

In a speech Wednesday at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, Kerry cited the adage that “we can’t be strong in the world unless we are strong at home.” He called the budget impasse a threat.

The State Department has said automatic spending cuts would jeopardize $2.6 billion in aid, security assistance and other international programs.

Kerry said legislators need to avoid “senseless cuts.”

Yeah congress is the problem. Not the fact that Team Blue has not passed a budget, now going on 4 years, has spent over $1 trillion more than government collected in taxes to buy votes from people that do not want to work since they took power, that they funneled nearly $1 trillion to their friends, lobbyists, special interests, and own campaign coffers, at the tax payer’s expense, shafted our young with the most costly and destructive collectivist scheme of all times when government took over control of healthcare money and decisions under the pretense that it would improve quality, access, and lower cost, and let us not forget the complete lack of focus on fixing the economy & jobs market while they destroyed the financial future of this country. No, none of those things are really the problem: the problem is with the evil people hell bent on making government live within its means.

You can not make this stupid up. Can you believe the wailing and chest beating if someone that wasn’t part of Team Blue had said something this stupid? Yeah, I thought so too. It’s not like if one guy was in office they would demand immediate help or accuse him of hating black people, while ignoring the fact that 4 months after another hurricane the people are still fucked with their guy in charge.

Shit, at least Mr. “Reporting for duty after I fucking screwed over those people that were better humans than me”, didn’t compound this stupid by talking about some totally irrelevant and idiotic collectivist scheme to rob people of their freedoms and money by instilling fear of something that was settled by something as ridiculous as the concept of “consensus science”, which literally translates to a scam done by a clique of unscientific progressive scumbags. Oh crap, he did.

Secretary of State John Kerry gave his first major foreign policy speech today. In his address, delivered at the University of Virginia, he discussed tackling climate change.

“We as a nation must have the foresight and courage to make the investments necessary to safeguard the most sacred trust we keep for our children and grandchildren: an environment not ravaged by rising seas, deadly superstorms, devastating droughts, and the other hallmarks of a dramatically changing climate,” said Kerry, according to prepared remarks.

“And let’s face it – we are all in this one together. No nation can stand alone. We share nothing so completely as our planet. When we work with others – large and small – to develop and deploy the clean technologies that will power a new world, we’re also helping create new markets and new opportunities for America’s second-to-none innovators and entrepreneurs to succeed in the next great revolution.”


Fuck these people are tediously stupid. No wonder that when the Russians finally called back it was to treat this idiot like a clerk. And it is not like the we have all kinds of horrible stories that show the State Department run by Team Blue is itself the worst enemy of US foreign policy. From the disastrous Arab Spring that led to such wonderful things like Egypt run by radical muslims, Syria in a civil war that is killing thousands, the Libyan “Kinetic Action” event that culminated with a cataclysmic event that has all but been covered over by the fifth column in Benghazi, to more recent revelations that the State Department was hard at work backstabbing our friends while consorting with the enemy. You can not make either the level of stupid up, nor the covering for the stupid. Makes you pine for when the press was really busy trying to convince us all that the people that compared to the imbeciles now in charge look like mental giants where the dumb ones. Heh.

The First Benghazi Report

I know that everyone is shocked shocked that the first independent report on the Benghazi debacle sharply criticized the State Department. Most of the criticism is expected: not enough guards, too much reliance on local militias, ignoring requests for safety upgrades, failure to coordinate between Diplomatic Security and Near Eastern Affairs. But what jumped out at me was this:

The panel blamed American intelligence officials for relying too much on specific warnings of imminent attacks, which they did not have in the case of Benghazi, rather than basing assessments more broadly on a deteriorating security environment. By this spring, Benghazi, a hotbed of militant activity in eastern Libya, had experienced a string of assassinations, an attack on a British envoy’s motorcade and the explosion of a bomb outside the American Mission.

This is the key. The Middle East has grown very unstable. From Tunisia to Iran, the situation has become unpredictable. You have to base security on the environment, not on specific intelligence. It’s a matter of being proactive about embassy security rather than reactive.

The panel has made 29 recommendations for changes and the State Department says it will implement them. But I think the lesson here — once again — is that the Administration was caught preparing for yesterday‘s terrorist attack, not today’s or tomorrow’s.

The Plot Thickens in Benghazi


U.S. intelligence officials, speaking on a not-for-attribution basis, provided reporters Thursday with the most detailed explanation yet of the CIA’s presence in Benghazi, Libya, and the agency’s response to the Sept. 11, 2012, attack, while also identifying the two former Navy SEALs killed that night as being employed by the CIA.

But some news organizations, including the Associated Press, The New York Times and The Washington Post, already knew that the two former SEALs — Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty — were working for the CIA and had agreed not to publish the information at the government’s request.

While AP, the Times and the Post held back this detail following an official request, reporters at other news outlets may also have known or assumed the men were not security contractors given the nature of their work in Libya. ABC News, for example, reported that Doherty had been working to “round up dangerous weapons” in the country. One national security reporter told The Huffington Post that it was an “open secret” in national security circles that the former SEALs were working for the CIA.

Apparently, only 7 of the 30 consulate employees were actually working for the State Department. All the rest were CIA. What precisely they were doing in Benghazi, whether this screwed with the chain of command, what role this played in the confusion in those critical seven hours — that has yet to be determined.

The latest from David Ignatius also dispels a few rumors, claiming there was no “stand down” order, that the drone in question was an unarmed drone that was diverted to provide a view of events and also that fighting appeared to stop at 1 am. Then this:

5:15 a.m.: A new Libyan assault begins, this time with mortars. Two rounds miss and the next three hit the roof. The rooftop defenders never “laser the mortars,” as has been reported. They don’t know the weapons are in place until the indirect fire begins, nor are the mortars observed by the drone overhead. The defenders have focused their laser sights earlier on several Libyan attackers, as warnings not to fire. At 5:26 the attack is over. Woods and Doherty are dead and two others are wounded.

There are still some very big questions to answer, especially why security was not beefed up in the weeks before when it became clear the consulate was a danger point, why Stephens was put in a place that was mostly CIA with such a tiny State Department contingent and why military assets were not used to secure the area, even after the fighting stopped. (As far as I can tell, there is no current information on what our military assets were doing at the time.)

It’s also becoming clear that a lot of our response depended on local cooperation from the Libyan government. This cooperation happened but was often delayed, confused or incompetent. In fact, there are indications that this may have been an inside job by some of those Libyan resources.

So, yes, this dismisses some of the more egregious accusations. But we continue to circle back to the big question: why was a United States ambassador put in harm’s way without the kind of protection he would have in a peaceful country? And why were our military assets not deployed? Why did this remain a CIA op when it become obvious that they were in over their heads?

The cooperation of the media in keeping the CIA’s presence (and, presumably, continued involvement) is a bit concerning. It might have clarified things a lot earlier. But I really don’t have a problem with it. I prefer that the press be discrete about some things. There’s no evidence that the CIA was torturing people or disappearing dissidents. Revealing their presence prematurely could only endanger our operations there.

As I said on Twitter last night, we now have some answers to our questions. But we also have a lot more questions.

Update: More from the LAT:

Senior intelligence and Defense officials say there was some coverage by unarmed surveillance drones during part of the Sept. 11 Benghazi attack, but no feed was available for the president. The Special Operations team arrived on the Italian island of Sicily hours after the attack was over. And “no AC-130 was within a continent’s range of Benghazi,” Pentagon spokesman George Little said.

That begs the question, of course: why weren’t they there?