Posted on 10/19/2012 9:56:21 PM PDT by cdchik123
In the spirit of transparency, House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) on Friday released 166 pages of unclassified State Department communications regarding Libya. But hidden in the scores of documents were the unretracted names of several Libyans working with the U.S. government.
Obama administration officials say Issa’s document dump has compromised several Libyans working with the U.S. and put their lives at risk, Foreign Policy’s Josh Rogin reports.
Issa posted the sensitive State Department documents on the House Oversight Committee’s website Friday afternoon as part of his investigation into the security errors and multiple inconsistencies in the Obama administration’s evolving story relating to the deadly terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. The attack left U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans dead.
However, now the documents are getting attention for all the wrong reasons. Foreign Policy has more details:
Issa didn’t bother to retract the names of Libyan civilians and local leaders mentioned in the cables, and just as with the WikiLeaks dump of State Department cables last year, the administration says that Issa has done damage to U.S. efforts to work with those Libyans and exposed them to physical danger from the very groups that had an interest in attacking the U.S. consulate.However, now the documents are getting attention for all the wrong reasons. Foreign Policy has more details:
Issa didn’t bother to retract the names of Libyan civilians and local leaders mentioned in the cables, and just as with the WikiLeaks dump of State Department cables last year, the administration says that Issa has done damage to U.S. efforts to work with those Libyans and exposed them to physical danger from the very groups that had an interest in attacking the U.S. consulate.
(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...
one of them was the mole that advised when to assault the compound and kill the ambassador
We’re told that Libya is now friendly. So why worry about exposing names of those working with us? We don’t worry about exposing Saudis who work with us.
If they are so unfriendly, why didn’t our people have security?
Somebody, IMHO, wants those named Libyans interviewed.
Another Operative word: "Hidden"
The names were "hidden" but amazingly they were found within hours by the media.
And there is a "Declassification Authority" who is responsible for this, and that person is in the State Department.
Why did the administration put sensitive names in an unclassified document? Sounds like they screwed up again, and are trying to blame someone else.
That was my point.....State unclassified but leaves critical info in the public record. They knew the names would be exposed.
Hillary's comment that she accepts full responsibility for security, actually means she'll take responsibility, unless she can slough some it off on other people.
I should have said “good point”, I wasn’t challenging you, I was building on your premise. Cheers!
as you say. It would seem to point back to the state dept...again.
Interviewed = least of their worries.
Interviewed = least of their worries.
How do you propose that they "fight back"? The MSM controls most of the narrative, and will refuse to publish or carry Republican's words. They can fight back in the new media, and are doing so.
The Republicans will have more spine and will "fight back" as the new media grows strong enough to protect them from the MSM.
Most politicians are not of the caliber of Ronald Reagan. He was a genius. He had a photographic memory. He was charismatic.
Newt has most of those characteristics, he fought back, and he was driven from the House by the MSM as a result.
If a Republican jaywalks, it is enough to drive them from public office, in the MSM. Consider the fake Valerie Plame "scandal", a completely made up affair designed to embarrass President Bush. Democrats are given a pass for felonies, until recently, when the new media has taken a few to the woodshed.
Obama put all of SEAL Team 6 at risk when he spouted on about them.
WHY does Charlene Lamb still have her job??? She took total responsibilty for taking away the AMB. 16 person security team in Aug!!!
>> I could almost believe
Yes.
>> the administration says that Issa has done damage to U.S. efforts to work with those Libyans and exposed them to physical danger from the very groups that had an interest in attacking the U.S. consulate.
These scumbags didn’t give two shits about the security of the ambassador and his colleagues, but sure do seem to be making it a priority to protect foreign nationals.
These Libyans must be more “optimal” than the neglected Americans.
You're right, she should be gone. So far I haven't seen anyone resign over this, and wonder if we'll ever know what really happened, and who was responsible. Reminds me of that other famous question that has never been answered: Who hired Craig Livingstone? And as usual, a Clinton is involved.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.