Help me nail Drudge! + The Echo Chamber's newest meme

[BarackTheVote]

While spying on the Drudge Report (basically, trying to prove to a friend of mine that it's a shill), I saw this headline pop up:

""PAPER: U.S. WARNED OF EMBASSY ATTACK BUT DID NOTHING""
This links to this article: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/revealed-inside-story-of-us-envoys-assassination-8135797.html

"Revealed: inside story of US envoy's assassination
"Exclusive: America 'was warned of embassy attack but did nothing'

"American officials believe the attack was planned, but Chris Stevens had been back in the country only a short while and the details of his visit to Benghazi, where he and his staff died, were meant to be confidential.

[snip]

"According to senior diplomatic sources, the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted, but no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and "lockdown", under which movement is severely restricted."

Now reading the article, my first thought was, "it's absurd to think that those at the consulate weren't already on high alert, whether this 'credible information' exists or no." Also, the article points out that "the consulate had been given a "health check" in preparation for any violence connected to the 9/11 anniversary" (but obviously this and the 48 hour 'warning' were considerably before this movie became a player, which may have convinced some of the Libyan guards to not protect the consulate--again, THIS assertion comes solely from this Independent article--and caused a demonstration that gave the attackers cover... of course, the Independent doesn't reference discrepancy between what may have been expected and what actually happened that this unknown and spontaneous factor--the movie--caused. Anyway, I'm rambling.

I did a search for "Libya+48 hour warning"; found nothing from any mainstream news sources, but found the Independent article directly quoted on nowtheendbegins.com/blog (very anti Obama) and it looks like at least 3/4 of the hits on the first two google search result pages reference this 48 hour warning story... but, again, all RW pages. So, the echo chamber has a new mantra.

Anyone know if there's any actual source for this 48 hour warning? (Every article references "senior diplomatic sources"; is this a distortion or a flat-out lie? Anyone know what's going on here and how to squelch it?

[NYC_SKP]

1. I won't play their game.

I trust my president will have the right response, otherwise it will probably go away.

Interesting timing, however, with 9/11 and the resurfacing of Bush's daily briefing warning of Osama.

Just too convenient.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

3. Did Romney bring out the dead Osama bin Ladin video again?

I guess Romney is sad that OBL is dead

[msanthrope]

2. Your concern has already been posted in another concerned thread. nt

[RandiFan1290]

4. You guys should try to time it better

Coming in concerned all at once looks a little off.

[BarackTheVote]

5. SRSLY?

I'm trying to convince a once-progressive friend, whose boyfriend has gotten her hooked on Drudge, that Drudge is a scourge upon the uninformed (my original thread asking for help in this quest is here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021306436

If there's already a thread about this, I apologize, I didn't see it. When I find it, I'll self-delete. A link would be helpful, tho

[Honeycombe8]

6. Sounds like a Republican planted story to me. "Senior diplomatic sources." How would...

a sr. diplomatic source know what the White House learned? It would've been top secret.

Also...how do the sources know what was done or that nothing was done?

Also...this has not been Obama's M.O. so far. He generally makes decisions and takes action, when needed, as we saw when the OBL situation arose. Do you really think they'd get info and just sit on it and not do anything? No. That's not credible.

I just hope this story dies and doesn't take hold out of the rightwing wacko world, who are so ready to believe unbelievable stories.

[BarackTheVote]

7. Yeah, it really doesn't pass any litmus of scrutiny, does it?

Who in the room would KNOW that there was a report and KNOW that there was no warning sent (and this would require multiple whoms, as well, since the story sources (senior diplomatic sourcES)? And the people who would be on the other end of the warning aren't exactly around to confirm or deny the story

(Also, this would require us to believe that Obama would have to be willing to accept humiliation and political suicide on the eve of a hotly-contested election... which, all signs point to him being... well... NOT AN IDIOT ).

PNAC people?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

8. I like what you are doing...but I think it's futile. How can you stop this underground

machine. It is truly orchestrated. Even if you manage to discredit, you would have to get the MSM to
talk about it. Get them to agree that the rw is spreading lies, and brainwashing those who don't have
the mental capacity to determine if it is true or not.

On a 2 hr drive today, I listened to a rw radio station. Their rant was:

1. Obama doesn't attend daily security briefings. (which supposedly isn't really true)

2. If Obama DID go to the briefings (instead of playing golf) he would have known there was going to be an attack.

3. Why didn't Obama arm-up ? If he had gone to briefings, he would have known about attack and could have saved those people who were killed.

4. Ergo, Obama killed those people.


See, it is hard to image what could be done to stop this crazy thinking.

We can only hope that the sound and sane middle doesn't believe their trash

[arcane1]

14. Yep, that's Drudge's role, to give the talking heads ripe fruit to speculate on all day n/t

[Sanddancer]

9. I cannot imagine why

American diplomatic centres and offices would be on any kind of alert on September 11th.

[JaneyVee]

10. 200 Americans died in Lebanon on Reagan's watch. 9/11 on Bush'd watch.

But 4 Americans killed is Obama's fault. Simply stupid.

[RagAss]

11. Help me nail trolls !!!!!

Fuck off !

[BarackTheVote]

16. I'm trying to keep a liberal (if "independent") friend from turning to the Dark Side

and you tell me to fuck off? Thanks for that .

But an honest thanks to the other people in this community who are actually giving valuable insight. Appreciated!

--Signed, the guy who just got his wisdom teeth out twelve hours ago.

[valerief]

12. Thank you for your concern. Now go away. nt

[sufrommich]

13. "and caused a demonstration that gave the attackers cover"

According to eye witnesses,there was no demonstration, so it seems an odd thing to add to the article.

[BarackTheVote]

15. I've been hearing other reports around here today...

one poster (name escapes me, sorry) said the there were a number of demonstrators over the course of the day, and later on militants started to arrive in pick-up trucks with weapons. Poster even said some of the demonstrators tried to help the people in the consulate. But that poster never had a link... All Things Considered did report that the ambassador was delivered to the hospital by Libyans.. wish I could remember more of that report. It's a confusing situation.

[deaniac21]

17. I can't help other than to say DU is never an echo chamber

[Warren DeMontague]

18. I guess the only thing left to do is cry, moan, accept Romney's inevitable landslide victory,

throw away all our contraceptives, and burn all our Beatles CDs--- at least the ones after they got all hairy and weird.

OH NO!!!! WHAT WILL WE DO???!?!?!?!?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

19. I Think You Should Give The OP A Little More Credit

For concocting an elaborate but ultimately transparent ruse to post DRUDGE detritus here.

[ZX86]

20. This all well may be true.

But Obama has kept us safe since it happened like 48 hours ago so it really doesn't matter. Perhaps we should invade Venezuela to show how tough we are.

[BarackTheVote]

21. Unbe-fucking-lievable

I didn't even come in here concerned. I knew the article was fishy, but I was looking for some help parsing it out because I'm debating a Drudge die-hard. How many posts have I seen in the last few weeks where the OP was asking for help with convincing their Republican loved-ones of the error of their thinking? And I get hammered because I have a question about something SPECIFIC? That's looking like it's primed to become a Republican talking point that most of us are going to have to deal with tomorrow and in the weeks to come?! Notice I did NOT at any point ask, "Is this true?" No, I asked "is this a distortion or is this an outright lie?"