I don't know if you've ever noticed this, when watching the Sunday morning talking heads programs, but a favorite technique of politicians and other con men, is not to answer the question that is asked them, but to give the answer thtey have prepared to give, whether they are asked the question or not. Such, I noticed, was the case with the snot nosed, former spokesweasel for the National Security Council, lying weasel Tommy Vietor. (My apologies to weasels everywhere!)
"We didn't know definitively that the ambassador was dead until late that evening".So, we knew people were shooting at him and about thirty other people there at the compound, firing mortars at them and attacking them, but we didn't know until sometime that evening that he was dead dead. Why would we have send troops in there to support them before that?
"We were unbelievably nervous, ah. about his safety, his well being and others in that facility."So, it made you nervous? But, not nervous enough to actually do anything. That must be a great comfort for the surviving families of those four dead Americans to know! 1:51
"There is no way anyone knew definitively the motivations of the attackers that evening."More navel gazing from the Rear Echelon Mother Weasels. Regardless of the "motivation", when the mortar shells started falling, the actions of the mob became crystal clear, and that is what the administration should have been concerned with. I'd like to put little Tommy Vietor downrange for some gunnery practice, and give him a field telephone with two lines, ask him to call one or the other, when the mortar shells start to fall:
Line One connects him with someone who can stop the shelling.and see which one he calls first? I'm sure he will want to definitively identify the motivation behind it before he takes any definitive actions. Right? Right?? Notice his biggest lie, via more misdirection at 10:14 :
Line Two connects him with someone who can explain the motivation behind the men who are firing the mortars.
"And I also think that this idea that the military had the capability to rescue those individuals but chose not to, I think is extremely unfair to the military.""The military had the capability...but chose not to..." The military does indeed have the capability. Men train for it 24/7. I ask you, who in the world, other than this snot nosed, little creep, is suggesting that it was the military that chose not to send help, and not the civilians of the Obama administration who commanded them? Everything I've seen is that the military was ready, willing and able to run to the sound of the guns and at least attempt a rescue, and it was the weak kneed, lily livered, wet finger in the air, craven civilian politicians getting ready for a Vegas fund raiser who chose not to even try.
If liberals were not irony impaired, this dude Tommy V, whom Iowahawk suggested "was graduating from Huggies pull-ups to Spiderman Underoos" two years before, might notice the irony of claiming something is "extremely unfair to the military" the moment after something extremely unfair to the military, that no one else was saying, left his mouth.
Cross posted at Proof Positive