Benghazi: this year's September Surprise?

[5280]

I think Romney is only condeming the extreme points of view from Muslim. Clearly, moderate Muslims don't support the attack of the embassy.

[Mehmentum]

2 things

1) Can I get a timeline of what the hell happened?

2) What is the mainstream media saying about Romney's handling of this? (Sources? -- CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, NYT, WAPO, WSJ)

Seconded.

[Likely Voter]

Here is timeline
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/09/a-timeline-of-the-attacks-in-libya-and-egypt----and-the-responses.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

Here is short version:

Sept. 9
Egyptian television airs an Arabic-language scene from the Bacile film.

NOTE: I have seen reports that some in Egypt thought this was a big Hollywood movie and not just some video put on YouTube by an a-hole

Sept. 11
6:17 a.m. ET: U.S. embassy in Cairo issues a statement condemning the film

Noon ET  protestors scale the walls around Cairo embassy destroy a flag inside.

4:30 p.m. ET, (Via Twitter) U.S. embassy in Cairo condemns the breach, but stands by its initial condemnation of religiously inflammatory speech, which, it noted, was “issued before the attacks.”

5:41 p.m. ET: U.S. consulate in Benghazi attack reported

7:35 p.m. ET: First report of American consulate staffer killed in Benghazi.

10:09 p.m. ET (under embargo until midnight):  Romney campaign issue a statement noting how it "disgraceful that the Obama Administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks."

10:10 p.m. ET:  Obama admin source disavows the U.S. embassy in Cairo’s statement

10:25 p.m. ET: Romney campaign lifts its embargo on statement.

10:44 p.m. ET: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton condemns the attack in Benghazi.


RE: MSM Reporting Today

Just watched report from CNN which pointed out how Romney is attacking Obama based on something that isn't true (statement from Cairo embassy was issued before attack). They also noted how other Republicans have criticized Romney for acting too quickly without all the facts and criticizing. Thats probably how it will play on the network news shows. Even Peggy Noonan was on Fox saying Romney made a mistake, but tonight FOX will likely have all their shows rally around Romney as they usually do when the MSM lines up against him.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

It's the sort of thing that might be if Romney were a more competent politician, certainly.

[Mehmentum]

Ah, that clears things up.  I wasn't quite aware of what happened in what order.  Anyway, this is a pretty stupid blunder.  Is it really that hard for a campaign to check when what was said?  I guess he was just to eager to land a quick political jab.   

[Link]

2 things

1) Can I get a timeline of what the hell happened?

2) What is the mainstream media saying about Romney's handling of this? (Sources? -- CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, NYT, WAPO, WSJ)

Seconded.

Quote for you...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Link.

Romney really is a piece of work.

[patrick1]

The attack is bad, for everyone involved. But I doubt it will be the biggest moment in this campaign. I think the debates will have much more influence.

Agreed, in all likelihood gas prices will have more of an impact than this will.  W. was still able to win re-election after the graphic murders of Blackwater employees and the resounding setback of 1st Fallujah. For the few still swayable and the fewer still swayed by foreign policy issues, Obama just needs to the perception than he is level headed and more capable than Romney in handling a crisis.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

So the second statement from the embassy in Cairo condemned the attacks while also condemning the film that incited the violence?

If that's the case, then there's a point to be made that the American diplomats sort of were sympathizing with the attackers. I mean, Romney definitely fudged the timeline (and continues to do so), but the bulk of what he's saying isn't necessarily wrong.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

The embassy was condemning it in order to try to prevent what ended up happening.  It was a message directed to the Egyptian people rather than to the makers of the movie. 
At least, I think and hope that's the case, since the alternative is that they are seriously out of touch with reality if they think the filmmakers care about some diplomat's opinion.

[Simfan34]

So the second statement from the embassy in Cairo condemned the attacks while also condemning the film that incited the violence?

If that's the case, then there's a point to be made that the American diplomats sort of were sympathizing with the attackers. I mean, Romney definitely fudged the timeline (and continues to do so), but the bulk of what he's saying isn't necessarily wrong.

No, it doesn't mean that. It means the embassy was going out calling a stupid movie stupid, and trying to distance itself (rightfully) from it, and also saying "you shouldn't go about killing ambassadors, or any one for that matter, over stupid movies".

[Politico]

We appear weak right now, especially in light of the reported division between us and Israel (which is probably what sparked this incitement since some folks in the Middle East now believe they can possibly get us to abandon Israel if we simply endure a few more losses). The president must respond with force or Romney will soon have an impressive photo-op involving a number of retired generals following their endorsement of Mitt. If the president responds with force and the results are disastrous, he's got a Mogadishu on his hands and it's over for his campaign given the economy and the fact foreign policy is his lone bright spot. That said, if the president responds with force he will likely turn off a number of his anti-war supporters. Most importantly, if anybody in the Middle East overruns another one of our embassies but instead take hostages this time, Obama would be staring at a 400+ EV landslide LOSS if he is unable to secure their unharmed rescue before the election. After this event, nothing must happen to our embassies anywhere in the world from here on out or it's a huge negative for Obama since foreign policy is one of the few areas he seems to be handling well.

I would prefer to be Romney right now, who simply needs to tighten his belt, watch the gaffes, and get ready for the debates.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

First thing they did was condemn the Americans. Second thing they did was condemn the attackers. Obviously the folks at the embassy were just desperate enough to hope that appeasing the attackers would work. But they can't have seriously thought a tweet would actually quell the violence. They were scared.

So it's not totally outlandish to suggest that the Cairo diplomats were projecting a tone of weakness and appeasement. It's not the strongest argument to make and Romney probably would've just been better to keep quiet... but it's not like he's pulling the whole thing out of thin air.

[Simfan34]

First thing they did was condemn the Americans. Second thing they did was condemn the attackers. Obviously the folks at the embassy were just desperate enough to hope that appeasing the attackers would work. But they can't have seriously thought a tweet would actually quell the violence. They were scared.

Normally, I'd agree with you, but considering that this whole thing was started by a stupid YouTube video, I'd digress.

[Likely Voter]

we have just seen clear evidence that these people working in Embassies and consulates in Muslim countries are literally risking their lives. Mitt Romney chose to launch an attack on them literally while the State Dept. was still counting bodies.

This is why he has very little support for his attacks even within his own party.

[patrick1]

First thing they did was condemn the Americans. Second thing they did was condemn the attackers. Obviously the folks at the embassy were just desperate enough to hope that appeasing the attackers would work. But they can't have seriously thought a tweet would actually quell the violence. They were scared.

So it's not totally outlandish to suggest that the Cairo diplomats were projecting a tone of weakness and appeasement. It's not the strongest argument to make and Romney probably would've just been better to keep quiet... but it's not like he's pulling the whole thing out of thin air.

God forbid, diplomats being......diplomatic.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

^Well, that's unfortunately the thought process for much of the GOP base. I guess that's why Romney continues along the route he's going.

There were better ways to do it though. As it stands, I doubt this situation will significantly move the polls one way or the other. Romney probably neutralized what would've actually been a net Obama loss.

[Wiz in Wis]

We appear weak right now, especially in light of the reported division between us and Israel (which is probably what sparked this incitement since some folks in the Middle East now believe they can possibly get us to abandon Israel if we simply endure a few more losses). The president must respond with force or Romney will soon have an impressive photo-op involving a number of retired generals following their endorsement of Mitt. If the president responds with force and the results are disastrous, he's got a Mogadishu on his hands and it's over for his campaign given the economy and the fact foreign policy is his lone bright spot. That said, if the president responds with force he will likely turn off a number of his anti-war supporters. Most importantly, if anybody in the Middle East overruns another one of our embassies but instead take hostages this time, Obama would be staring at a 400+ EV landslide LOSS if he is unable to secure their unharmed rescue before the election. After this event, nothing must happen to our embassies anywhere in the world from here on out or it's a huge negative for Obama since foreign policy is one of the few areas he seems to be handling well.

I would prefer to be Romney right now, who simply needs to tighten his belt, watch the gaffes, and get ready for the debates.

Or not.   Seriously, how anyone sees any positives from this for Romney politically just indicates how tinted our political glasses have become. Take the shades off buddy.

[Simfan34]

The fact Politico has even admitted Romney made gaffes is a worrying sign in and of itself.

[patrick1]

^Well, that's unfortunately the thought process for much of the GOP base. I guess that's why Romney continue along the route he's going.

There were better ways to do it though. As it stands, I doubt this situation will significantly move the polls one way or the other. Romney probably neutralized what would've actually been a net Obama loss.

What I find to be the ham handed, simplistic foreign policy is one of the many reasons that I am no longer a Republican.  I hardly see it as a weakness to condemn an offensive and incendiary hit piece of a 'film'. One has to understand that a people who have lived in crap conditions for decades tend to be overly sensitive and are super serial about the God thing. It is basic cultural competence. All this is no excuse for murder and I don't see how one people can derive that from it.  

I agree that this is a blip as it stands now. However, things can lurch out of control rather quickly in an unstable region; so people making concrete predictions either way should probably settle down.