CIA Rapid Response Team told to STAND DOWN [Archive]

View Full Version : CIA Rapid Response Team told to STAND DOWN

swpa19

10-26-2012, 10:52

http://www.humanevents.com/2012/10/26/benghazi-endgame-cia-told-to-stand-down-instead-of-helping-americans-under-fire/

Old Dog New Trick

10-26-2012, 11:21

This gets more interesting by the week. At some point the flood gates are going to spill over and anyone in the way will get washed downstream.

MtnGoat

10-26-2012, 12:13

This gets more interesting by the week. At some point the flood gates are going to spill over and anyone in the way will get washed downstream.

Not before NOV, MSM will control it and only report what is needed. They will take the key point that THEY WANT to point out and hit those talking points up.

Like TR said, this is nothing but a real life Wag the Dog unfolding!!! Hell, I bet there really is a Hollywood producer on President Obama team just to deal with this.

Stargazer

10-26-2012, 13:15

Where is Gen. Petraeus in all of this?

Go Devil

10-26-2012, 14:07

It is time to stop using tinfoil references.

JSMosby

10-26-2012, 17:16

Where is Gen. Petraeus in all of this?

Since you asked....DCIA Petraus responds (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/petraeus-throws-obama-under-bus_657896.html)

dadof18x'er

10-26-2012, 17:16

Where is Gen. Petraeus in all of this?

for what it's worth..........http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/petraeus-throws-obama-under-bus_657896.html

The Reaper

10-26-2012, 19:27

This is all George Bush's fault.

Somehow. :rolleyes:

TR

Stargazer

10-27-2012, 08:31

Thank you for the link.

I am not sure what his comments mean... whether he is indicating requests were denied by another party or discounting that the requests occurred as reported. So much smoke being blown in all directions. Unless you are familiar with these type of operations, it's hard to see your way to the truth. Nonetheless, even someone as unfamiliar with these operations as I am, can sense things do not add up.

Clearly, the narratives that came from the WH were intended to divert focus. Further, I have no doubt that those in the CIA Annex would have a plan to send out distress calls. What I don't know is where that call would go. These individuals are highly trained professionals... they would have followed a plan. Where would they call? CIA, central line that would send calls out to???

BrianH

10-27-2012, 09:06

So the overall implications seems to be that the President intentionally allowed these people to die.

Sounds like there is a lot that we don't yet know about what facts and assumptions the commanders, at all levels, were working with.

The Reaper

10-27-2012, 09:56

Well, it looks like someone who knows what they are talking about finally stepped up and explained it to the civilians.

Not going to get into a discussion about Rush, but the facts the caller is laying out are correct and accurate, IMHO.

TR

CALLER: Hi, Rush. Thanks. I wanted to speak to the question of when the president knew and why Secretary Panetta refused to support the CIA annex request either to move to the consulate or to reinforce.

<http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/10/26/obama_regime_denied_requests_for_help_from_cia_her oes_during_benghazi_attack>

Within a few minutes of the consulate being under attack -- I'm a retired lieutenant colonel special operations planner for 15 years -- the personal security detail for the ambassador notified the communications room in Tripoli who then, on the top secret side, sent a message to the White House Situation Room that the ambassador was in peril, okay? And they did that by code word and it would have been within minutes of the attack commencing.

The White House Situation Room has a list of what's called Essential Elements of Friendly Information. That's the military's acronym for it, but they would have a similar thing, a critical information list.
Certain things go right to the person that's standing next to the president, both military and civilian leadership. So he would have known within minutes or it's supposed to be informed within minutes because an ambassador is a four-star equivalent, very high, very important person, you know, represents the president and essentially is the president's -- you know, is the surrogate of the president in that country. So the White House cannot deny that the president knew immediately.

RUSH: They are. They are.

CALLER: Well, it's a bald-faced lie, you know. I'm giving you some inside baseball information --

RUSH: Look, I believe you. You're talking about watch desks. That tells me you know what you're talking about.

CALLER: Well, it's even a little more frustrating than that. So when that message, that code word goes out, flash traffic, that an ambassador is in peril, okay, the --

RUSH: We have heard this. In our parlance, the way we heard this, Doug, was essentially the panic button was hit. That's how this was explained to me the first time. Somebody who knew what they were talking about referenced this as a panic button essentially was hit, and that once that happens, everybody that receives it knows what's going on. There's no doubt about it. So that's pretty much true, right?

CALLER: Right. But it's even more detailed than that, Rush. What it means is when a code word goes out, there's standard operating procedures.
The geographic combatant commander that's responsible for Libya would have been part of that message traffic, and his CINC's In-Extremis Force, which is, you know, a Special Forces unit --

RUSH: Okay, let me stop you there for another question, because what a lot of people have been told, the excuse that has been offered, in fact, from Condoleezza Rice on Greta Van Susteren a couple nights ago the impression is, "Well, there's so much traffic coming in, there's so many e-mails, so many cables, so many memos, it would take somebody hours to sift through it." What you're telling me is that there are systems designed to penetrate all that in a real emergency?

<http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/10/24/e_mails_show_obama_knew_what_happened_in_benghazi_ as_it_happened_took_no_action_to_save_lives_and_th en_lied_about_it>,

<http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/10/26/obama_regime_denied_requests_for_help_from_cia_her oes_during_benghazi_attack>

CALLER: Well, there's three networks, Rush. The e-mails that have been released are unclassified e-mails. On the top secret side, a flash traffic message from the embassy Tripoli to the White House Situation Room, it's like an IM. I mean, it's immediately responded to. You have to acknowledge receipt of it. Okay? So it's immediate. It gets to the person, the watch officer sitting there, boom, flashes on his screen, he has to acknowledge receipt. And then there's a protocol for who he then sends it to. He physically turns to someone, the senior guy on watch, "This is a critical element of information. POTUS needs to hear this," and that's what would have happened.

So no one in the White House can deny that -- well, they can deny it, but the fact is the protocol says someone marched their happy little ass up to the senior guy standing next to POTUS and said, "Sir, ambassador in Libya is in peril." And if he was missing, that is even a higher precedence.

And then the chain would have also gone out automatically to the geographic combatant commander, AFRICOM, and he would have then turned to his special operations commander and said, "I want the In-Extremis Force, you know, strip ready in five minutes." And evidently they were strip ready in Sigonella and they would have the assets to penetrate the airspace, you know, an MC-130 papa, which is a C-130 specially equipped with electronic countermeasures. They didn't need permission to enter Libyan airspace, okay?

I'm giving you a lot of Inside Baseball stuff, and maybe putting myself in a little peril by doing it, but the In-Extremis Force, they would have been chomping at the bit to do this. It was turned down, POTUS, at his five p.m. Eastern time meeting with the principals, that's when he put the kibosh on everything. It was a conscious act. It has to be because, you know, the In-Extremis Force is required to be prepared to do In-Extremis non-combatant evacuation operations for its geographic responsibility, the entire continent of Africa. So there's always somebody ready to go, and the aircraft are always prepared to go.

It's maddening to say that there was not intelligence. An intelligence guy is not a decision-maker. He's just some analyst dude that tells the decision-makers this is what we know. Well, the decision-makers who are so risk-averse now need perfect intelligence. They would have had to have, you know, in the calculus of this, to know that, whatever the attacking force was, if I put 15 or 50 or a hundred operators on the ground, you know, they'll have success. No one knows that. In soft planning, you plan to fail half the time.

RUSH: What about the story we've been told that not only was there so much traffic coming in that it was impossible to find the right stuff, which you've now explained, but they're also telling us that the president wasn't told for a while, and even now, as recently as today, they're saying that the three most recent e-mails -- it sounds like we're talking about -- flash traffic's not e-mails, right?

CALLER: Flash traffic is digital from station to station.

RUSH: Right. So they're misleading us left and right. They're trying to say, "Well, the president --" They will not explain. They will not tell us what happened to the three e-mails and why he didn't get them or why he wasn't told or when he knew or what. They're basically portraying the president as removed from all this.

CALLER: Well, the bottom line is a flash traffic saying that the ambassador is in peril, or, worse, missing, you know, the protocol is for someone to physically contact with a person in the chain that's supposed to determine what happens next. Now, I wasn't in the Oval Office so I can't --

RUSH: Let me ask you, the question came up yesterday that I couldn't answer, and I need to ask you, just from what you're saying. This is unreal, but let's assume they can't find POTUS, let's assume he's just not engaged. Who has trigger authority on a response to something like that?

I mean, you say we don't need permission to send a C-130 in there to disrupt. Who orders it in there, in a situation like this? Who has the authority to order the C-130s wherever they are, Italy, wherever they are, to take action? If you can't find the president -- is the president the only guy that can give that order?

CALLER: No, sir. Okay? Basically in the absence of permissions, okay, you have standing orders. And one of the standing orders to geographic combatant commander is to observe life of American citizens --

RUSH: Exactly. Precisely.

<http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/pages/static/join>

(Cont.)

The Reaper

10-27-2012, 09:56

CALLER: And he's a four-star, you know, he's in Germany. AFRICOM headquarters is in Germany, and their op-center would have been monitoring this in real time, 'cause it's part of their geographic responsibility.
And they would have been going through the different permutations of courses of action of who can get there the quickest. Now, in their geographic area they have Combined Joint Task Force, Horn of Africa, which is in Djibouti. I served there when it was the Joint Special Operations Task Force Crisis Response Element, and we have responsibility for all of CENTCOM and AFRICOM in Africa because at the time there was no AFRICOM.

And we had the capacity to get from where we were in Djibouti to Benghazi in about three hours, four hours, depending on what we wanted to take.

Now, if we wanted to go in there with a lot of operators, and at the time we had about a hundred operators, it would have taken us probably five hours.

RUSH: Okay, Doug, you're sitting out here, you obviously are intimately familiar with all this. So what's going through your mind, A, in real time when you hear about this, and then in subsequent days when you hear the excuses or explanations that have been offered for why no action was taken? I mean, I may be putting you on spot and you can't share that with us, but I gotta ask you.

CALLER: It stems from Desert One, Rush, it stems from the failure of Desert One during the Iranian hostage rescue. And what commander wants to repeat that, you know. Now, at the lieutenant colonel level, at the colonel level of the In-Extremis Force of all these different headquarters, State Department, everybody was saying, "Let's go! Let's get boots on the ground and kick these people's asses and get our people." But who makes those decisions? It's POTUS, V POTUS, State, and Def. And they had a five o'clock Eastern time meeting, and they said no. You know, we're willing to have the consulate overruled and the embassy overrun -- (phone connection goes bad)

RUSH: The fact that they're afraid of replicating Carter's boondoggle, that's not gonna fly with a lot of people.

CALLER: Well, sir, I hate to break it to you, but the people that are-four-stars right now, okay, were young officers, and they saw what happened to the leadership, okay? I'm not saying on the Special Ops side. You know, Special Ops guys --

RUSH: But I mean there are alternate explanations. There are political campaign explanations that people have conjured up to explain why Obama would not want any military activity taking place there in order to make sure that an image is created for his campaign: We're defeating Al-Qaeda.
They're on the run. We got bin Laden.

CALLER: All those memes, you know, are probably in play, but mostly it's just incompetence and not understanding the principal of you don't leave anybody behind, okay?

RUSH: Doug, look, I know you've stuck your neck out here and you obviously know your stuff intimately well and I really appreciate your call. It's fabulous to get your input and knowledge on this. Somewhere, somebody refused to make a gutsy call.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Doug in San Antonio, Texas, kind of blows Leon Panetta out of the water, and Leon Panetta, we had a sound bite earlier, he said, "Well, we didn't have enough intel. We didn't know enough going on." My guess is that we knew everything, we knew it all. That's what he was basically telling us. We probably had those C-130s -- and we talked about these yesterday, these C-130 Hercules equipped to go in and disperse crowds, buzz low, disperse crowds. They're an hour away in Italy. It's a seven-hour operation. They probably are able to get the video feed in the cockpit knowing what's going on.

<http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/10/24/what_explains_obama_s_libya_lies>

We are United States of America. We are the world's lone remaining military superpower. All of these things that we're being told we're not capable of doing, we didn't have the right intel, none of that is true.

We're the United States of America. We have capability beyond that which anybody can conceive, a civilian, anyway. It's why it's kept secret.

And the story that has been used to explain this is -- they've willingly said that they're incompetent. They've not used the word. They've willingly said that we're inept. "Well, there were so many e-mails coming in."

We find out that there's a special code, flash traffic, it's got top secret code words, you get one of those, it flies to the top, response is required. It has to be walked up to the next person in command. Of course there are procedures like this in place.

It isn't like you sitting at your computer being inundated with e-mails at five in the afternoon or IMs and not knowing what to do. There are systems here, and they worked. They were in place. This was somebody who refused to make a gutsy call. This is why the families are upset. They find out what's going on, because they know the role of the president is to defend and protect the people who are in harm's way in this country, and that did not happen here. You heard him say that there's a lingering fear that's resulted in a defensive posture over the failed Carter effort in the deserts of Iran in 1979 to get the hostages out then, even though there have been many successful missions since. But if you doubt that, as some of you might have been hearing him, "Wait a minute, there really --"
Remember, now, there are two kinds of generals.

There are warrior generals and there are politically correct corporate climb-the-ladder generals and admirals and what have you. And if you find this hard to believe, "Well, I do, Rush, because it's the military." The military is politicized just like anything. Remember the GOP. What is the primary reason the Republican Party is afraid of a conservative presidential nominee? Barry Goldwater's landslide defeat. It's what informs them to this day. They can't get over that. They don't see the Reagan landslides of '80 and '84.

<http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/10/23/flashback_reagan_emphasized_peace_restraint_on_hos tages_in_1980_debate>

They see Goldwater '64. There are plenty of establishment types that do. So what Doug was telling us here is you got enough people in the chain of command who still have lingering fears over the debacle of Jimmy Carter's rescue attempt in 1979. That sounds hard to believe, but believe me, this guy knew what he was talking about. There can be no doubt about that.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

Gypsy

10-27-2012, 10:49

This gets more interesting by the week. At some point the flood gates are going to spill over and anyone in the way will get washed downstream.

Hopefully including Obama.

I am so very angry that our fellow Americans were abandoned. :mad:

Stargazer

10-27-2012, 11:37

Post

Thank you very much. That answered my question.

I read that Gen. Petraeus in a closed door meeting, followed the administration narrative that it appeared to be a response to the video. I hope that is an inaccurate account of his statement. IMV, it will bring his credibility and judgment into question.

Team Sergeant

10-27-2012, 11:50

Having served in one of the CINC's In-Extremis Force and having been a Special Forces Communications Sergeant with a Top Secret clearance I will also vouch for what that individual is saying to Rush is true.
That Ambassador was left out to die and something could have been done to stop it, and we would have killed a large number of muslims that night.

This is the reason we spend billions on CINC's In-Extremis Forces around the world, the dogs of war were standing by.....

And Rush is an idiot fir bringing up Carter's "boondoggle" that's apples and oranges. Operation Eagle Claw was planned for half a year and was a mistake of the plan was services related and a screwup by the Joint Chiefs. The CINC's In-Extremis Force already have plans on what actions they will take in just about any crisis. This one would have included killing a lot of armed muslims.

Now who did the administration save? I know, without a doubt.

TS

Badger52

10-27-2012, 12:01

Now who did the administration save? I know, without a doubt.

TSSounds like the same person supposedly advised by Valerie Jarrett not to take the political risk the first 3 times UBL was in position corpse-candidate. Anecdotal recall only.
Frack.

Team Sergeant

10-27-2012, 12:41

The lies coming from the current administration are not going to be tolerated any longer. This is why some of the Special Operations personnel are making statements as to the lies and deceit emanating from the White House .

This sacrifice of an American Ambassador sends a clear message to all islamic countries, (currently) the United States will not kill muslims to save American diplomats. All diplomats currently residing in islamic countries your lives are not only at risk but the US Armed Forces will not be allowed to rescue you at the risk of killing/offending muslims.

Obama learned a lot from jimmy carter on the handling of a diplomatic crisis occurring in an islamic country, the “Do Nothing” strategy.

Again, the world-wide CINC In-Extremis Forces stand by 24/7- 365 days a year and conduct training year round for this very situation. I’ve no doubt they were stood up for this situation only to be stood down.

And from what I’m reading the last few months on the internet some of the Special Operations Forces personnel would like the American people to know, they are out there, ready, trained and prepared to handle this sort of situation at a moment’s notice, and prepared to die if necessary to save American lives. Anywhere, anytime anyplace.

You tell me who stood down the dogs of war?

And why?

BrianH

10-27-2012, 13:31

You tell me who stood down the dogs of war?

And why?
This is the question I want to know.

Badger52

10-27-2012, 13:51

The lies coming from the current administration are not going to be tolerated any longer.BTW, (no news to QPs) the comms portion Rush's LTC speaks of, in terms of timeliness, has been around for a long time. The procedures themselves are not that new. While damning, the UNCLAS email traffic (that would've been a fax back in the day), pales in comparison to what happens when FLASH traffic with the appropriate codeword(s) hits the Pentagon and a whole shitload of point-to-point destinations simultaneously. The hardware has changed since 77-80 when I worked that, but the system is THERE. The rest is just clutter, helmet-fire as it were.

Figured it was when, not if, that someone would point this out. It's as if the administration is trying to sort out a request for more MREs when someone has already shouted Prairie Fire over the net.

Remington Raidr

10-27-2012, 15:29

I already voted. Even if I keel over right now, my vote will count. I am hoping for a history-making azzwhipping. Lord hear our prayer.:mad:

Pete

10-27-2012, 15:32

RR you have any PM's you haven't responded to?

A few weeks back some folks had some questions for you.

BrianH

10-27-2012, 16:02

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/10/has_general_ham_been_fired.html

If true, this is a big deal.

Stargazer

10-27-2012, 16:20

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/10/has_general_ham_been_fired.html

If true, this is a big deal.

There are multiple blogs discussing rumors of this. I also came across this change that some suggest others were in line with Gen. Ham.

http://www.stripes.com/news/navy/navy-replaces-admiral-leading-mideast-strike-group-1.194780

PSM

10-27-2012, 16:39

Saturday Night Massacre? :confused:

Pat

cbtengr

10-27-2012, 17:08

How could anyone follow this thread and not be sick to their stomach. This is beyond outrageous. How do Obama and his cronies sleep at night. Party affiliation be damned we all need to be concerned about this. I wish we had an ambassador who serves in one of these muslim countries with the nerve to pull himself and his entire staff out, none of these people are safe. God help us.

Team Sergeant

10-27-2012, 17:44

There are multiple blogs discussing rumors of this. I also came across this change that some suggest others were in line with Gen. Ham.

http://www.stripes.com/news/navy/navy-replaces-admiral-leading-mideast-strike-group-1.194780

Someone had to give the order to stand down...... I'd sure like to know who it was myself.

Then again the US military are supposed to follow the orders of its "civilian" leadership.

Had the CINC In-Extremis Forces arrived on site there would have been hundreds of armed & very dead muslim nationals on the tv for all to view.

I've got a very good idea of who told them to stand down, and I'm pretty certain on the why.

No muslims were murdered that day, just good Americans. No justice will be had either. A classic jummy carter move.

Stargazer

10-27-2012, 18:09

I truly appreciate the dialogue as I am trying to sort through all the information. It is important to me.

None of this will bring back those brave Americans who lost their lives that day. Nothing will ease the great loss from their friends and loved ones. But they deserve the truth of that day to be known and told. We all owe them that. I hope those individuals who know continue to push forth the truth. In my humble view, there is no greater tribute to those who fell that day.

Ape Man

10-27-2012, 18:15

10-27-2012, 19:57

Because of the info being disseminated on this thread I just swallowed back a mouthful of bile. What a majestic goatfuck on the higher-ups.
And I though we in Italy were really screwed when it comes down to politicians and decision making. I'm terribly sorry for the losses and incredibly disgusted for the rest.
RIP to those who were killed. I'll refrain myself from spilling what's in my mind concerning the rest just for the sake of common decency.

BrokenSwitch

10-28-2012, 02:23

Edit - Ape Man answered my questions.

Remington Raidr

10-28-2012, 04:09

RR you have any PM's you haven't responded to?

A few weeks back some folks had some questions for you.

My last was on 10/3, where Sigaba hinted I might be banned for something I posted, I did respond.

As far as this thread, they were expendable.

Pete

10-28-2012, 04:28

My last was on 10/3, where Sigaba hinted I might be banned for something I posted, I did respond.

As far as this thread, they were expendable.

Click on your profile and hit find all posts - you've made a number of posts since 10/3.

None of them addressed the issue in question from 9/28.

Sigaba

10-28-2012, 05:09

My last was on 10/3, where Sigaba hinted I might be banned for something I posted, I did respond.

As far as this thread, they were expendable.

RR--

You misread the PM I sent you. Also, if I had wanted others to know the content of that communication, I would not have sent you a PRIVATE message.

Remington Raidr

10-28-2012, 09:28

Click on your profile and hit find all posts - you've made a number of posts since 10/3.

None of them addressed the issue in question from 9/28.

This was an attempt at sarcasm, and with new revelations just how much the current administration has been outright lying, it does ring hollow. That's not me.

Stargazer

10-28-2012, 11:35

Re: The Admiral supposedly being made the scape goat. (http://ace.mu.nu/archives/334311.php)

Edit: I guess I should add that my thoughts are worthless. But if the information in the link above is true it seems unlikely that the Admiral had anything to do with Libya.

Thank you for the link. Again, I am seeing several blogs where individuals doubt the Admiral's temporary removal is linked to Gen. Ham and/or Benghazi. So to me that means it probably is not, but until the facts are known I'll but it in the unknown column. For what it's worth... this link states they arrived at their destination on 9/16. Could they have been in a position on 9/11 to send in support? I have no idea but am sure somebody does.

http://rt.com/news/naval-training-persian-gulf-258/

the exact number of aircraft carriers, battleships and submarines taking part is unclear. Three American aircraft carriers out of the four currently in commission are reportedly gathering in the Persian Gulf for the training. USS Enterprise, USS John C. Stennis, USS Dwight D. Eisenhower have reportedly arrived.

Individuals at SOFREP.com question the validity of Gen. Ham and refer to it as "RUMINT".

Ape Man

10-28-2012, 16:09

I can understand putting the Gen Ham into the unknown column. But personally, I am inclined to doubt that any General/Admiral was all that concerned about it until or unless I see people speaking out or quitting.

As for the Admiral, I don't understand what difference it would make when he arrived on station. Why would you launch a support operation from the Persian Gulf when you had lots of assets in Europe? Maybe there is something I am missing.

I suppose it is possible that he was the source of some leak or other.

Stargazer

10-28-2012, 16:40

As for the Admiral, I don't understand what difference it would make when he arrived on station. Why would you launch a support operation from the Persian Gulf when you had lots of assets in Europe? Maybe there is something I am missing.

What you say makes sense. My comment on the timing was in reference to the first point noted on the page you linked. I believe they indicated fleet didn't arrive until October 17th.

It may be a stretch pertaining to Gen. Ham. However, he did tell Senator Chaffetz that he had forces ready but wasn't given the order. That seems inconsistent with Panetta's statement that Gen. Dempsey and Gen. Ham made the decision, along with him, not to send in force.

(The) basic principle is that you don't deploy forces into harm's way without knowing what's going on; without having some real-time information about what's taking place," Panetta told Pentagon reporters. "And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation."

My hope is in time more information will surface that will bring clarity.

Dusty

10-28-2012, 16:45

However, he did tell Senator Chaffetz that he had forces ready but wasn't given the order. That seems inconsistent with Panetta's statement that Gen. Dempsey and Gen. Ham made the decision, along with him, not to send in force.

Sho' 'nuff do.

Stargazer

10-28-2012, 19:50

Had the CINC In-Extremis Forces arrived on site there would have been hundreds of armed & very dead muslim nationals on the tv for all to view.

Team Sergeant, Blackfive has an opinion piece called, "Beep... Beep... Beep.... If you go to the comments, an individual posted a link to a podcast where a former member of CIF, like yourself, shares his insight. He mentions that we know 4 died, but hear little about those that were injured. His closing words... "this is a serious issue, people were left to die"

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2012/10/beepbeepbeep.html#comments

LongWire

10-29-2012, 07:11

And another:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/10/benghazi_coverage_reveals_we_are_all_unprotected.h tml

Paslode

10-29-2012, 07:40

It's just keeps on coming.....

On the note of Benghazi and the media. Breitbart is insinuating that CBS shelved a 60 minutes interview between Obama and reporter Steve Kroft that took place on 9/12, the day after the attack in which Obama stated:

"You're right that this is not a situation that was -- exactly the same as what happened in Egypt and my suspicion is that there are folks involved in this who were looking to target Americans from the start," Mr. Obama said.

The clip was apparently brought to light by Fox News when it found the clip embedded in a CBS News article by Sharyl Attkisson (The same reporter who brought Fast & Furious to the MSM).

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/10/25/CBS-Busts-Obama--and-Itself-Hidden-60-Minutes-Clip-Proves-White-House-Lied-About-Benghazi

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57538689/emails-detail-unfolding-benghazi-attack-on-sept-11/

Firelord

10-29-2012, 09:10

I normally refrain from posting but I need to wonder out loud as a father of an active duty soldier: If the current administration is willing to write off an ambassador for what, at least at this point in time, appears to be political expediency, who or what else are they willing to write off?

Old Dog New Trick

10-29-2012, 09:36

Pete

10-29-2012, 09:53

'Cooling Out' the Voters

Another home run by Thomas Sowell

http://www.creators.com/print/conservative/thomas-sowell/-cooling-out-the-voters.html

"Confidence men know that their victim — "the mark" as he has been called — is eventually going to realize that he has been cheated. But it makes a big difference whether he realizes it immediately, and goes to the police, or realizes it after the confidence man is long gone.

So part of the confidence racket is creating a period of uncertainty, during which the victim is not yet sure of what is happening. This delaying process has been called "cooling out the mark."..........................."

Badger52

10-29-2012, 10:13

'Cooling Out' the Voters

Another home run by Thomas Sowell

Not only did the Obama administration keep repeating the false story about an anti-Islamic video being the cause of a riot that turned violent, the man who produced that video was tracked down and arrested, creating a media distraction.

Not gonna debate the "film maker's" past behavior that got him no small amount of probation heat; the Judge ordered him held w/o bail as a flight risk. Still, the Fed was certainly digging for him quickly, and con gusto. The admin made no small effort to get it (Alibi #1) pulled off the internet also, but were told to pound sand by YouTube's parent (Google).

I hope the families get better answers than Brian Terry's parents have.

Team Sergeant

10-29-2012, 10:48

Team Sergeant, Blackfive has an opinion piece called, "Beep... Beep... Beep.... If you go to the comments, an individual posted a link to a podcast where a former member of CIF, like yourself, shares his insight. He mentions that we know 4 died, but hear little about those that were injured. His closing words... "this is a serious issue, people were left to die"

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2012/10/beepbeepbeep.html#comments

I've got no doubts that the American Ambassador and his staff were abandoned and left to die because the moron in the White House decided the lives of hundreds of armed radical muslims were more important than one American Ambassador and his staff.

As a former member of a CIF and as others have states on various blogs and websites this sort of situation is what the CIF's were created and train for and why they stand to 24/7- 365 days a year. I will also say without a doubt that given this mission the members of the CIF would have eager to rescue the American Ambassador and his staff by any means necessary.

The lives of the CIF members would not have been taken into account for this mission as this is what they were created for and why they exist. And by the time any CIF members would have hit the ground there would have been air support on station just waiting for the word to clear a path to the LZ. In just a few short minutes there "could" have been more fire power stationed over Benghazi then than the combined air forces of the entire Middle East. If memory serves there were at least 3-4 aircraft carrier battle groups within striking distance of Benghazi at the time. And I don't even need to mention the ground based units in Turkey and Italy. Think about this for a second, "What if" the United States decided to send a few fighters in for some very low level runs over the American Embassy and broke the sound barrier while doing so? I will guarantee that would have gotten the bad-guys attention knowing armed American were minutes away and closing fast.

More and more folks will be coming forward to answer the American public's questions concerning the lies and deceit originating from the White House.

Soon the real story will be leaked and we will know for a fact who told who to stand down and do nothing and allow the American Ambassador and others to be murdered.

Old Dog New Trick

10-29-2012, 11:26

Very good read, may clear up some important questions while creating others.

[LINK DELETED -- TRIGGERS A VIRUS -- RL]

Seems most logical of anything reported by bloggers in the U.S.

ironyoshi

10-29-2012, 15:18

Very good read, may clear up some important questions while creating others.

[link deleted]

Seems most logical of anything reported by bloggers in the U.S.

That article was very troubling.

As to the central question, was the attack an inside job, Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith was a well-known member of the MMO Eve Online. He posted this, apparently a few hours before he died:

"(12:54:09 PM) vile_rat: assuming we don't die tonight. We saw one of our 'police' that guard the compound taking pictures."

http://minx.cc/?post=332802

I think the dots may be connected.

ChuckG

10-29-2012, 16:48

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2012/10/rogue-u-s-general-arrested-for-activating-special-forces-teams-ignoring-libya-stand-down-order-2487316.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=beforeitsnews

Little more fuel for the fire. I've never heard of this website but saw this article on Facebook. I've known Carter Ham since he was a 2LT in the 1/509th and was quite surprised to hear many sites bad mouthing him for inaction. Also was surprised when the White House announced his replacement at AFRICOM last week. I have always known him to be a stand up guy and if any of this is true, he doesn't deserve to leave the Army this way.

Dusty

10-29-2012, 16:52

More and more folks will be coming forward to answer the American public's questions concerning the lies and deceit originating from the White House.

Soon the real story will be leaked and we will know for a fact who told who to stand down and do nothing and allow the American Ambassador and others to be murdered.

When this incident gets washed out, it'll make Watergate seem insignificant.

cbtengr

10-29-2012, 18:40

When this incident gets washed out, it'll make Watergate seem insignificant.

Let's hope that it does indeed get washed out. I wish that I had the time and the money to be at every stop that Obama makes in the next week, holding a sign asking why he let this happen.

SouthernDZ

10-30-2012, 08:25

This was also posted yesterday on the Robbins Report. If GEN Ham did in fact ignore the order to stand down, I hope he stands up and says, "I did what I did because you don't leave a man behind - I'd do it again."

(Updated 10/29) Is an American General losing his job for trying to save the Americans besieged in Benghazi? This is the latest potential wrinkle in the growing scandal surrounding the September 11, 2012 terrorist attack that left four men dead and President Obama scrambling for a coherent explanation.
On October 18, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta appeared unexpectedly at an otherwise unrelated briefing on “Efforts to Enhance the Financial Health of the Force." News organizations and CSPAN were told beforehand there was no news value to the event and gave it scant coverage. In his brief remarks Mr. Panetta said, "Today I am very pleased to announce that President Obama will nominate General David Rodriguez to succeed General Carter Ham as commander of U.S. Africa Command.” This came as a surprise to many, since General Ham had only been in the position for a year and a half. The General is a very well regarded officer who made AFRICOM into a true Combatant Command after the ineffective leadership of his predecessor, General William E. "Kip" Ward. Later, word circulated informally that General Ham was scheduled to rotate out in March 2013 anyway, but according to Joint doctrine, "the tour length for combatant commanders and Defense agency directors is three years." Some assumed that he was leaving for unspecified personal reasons.

However on October 26, "Ambassador" posted the following RUMINT on TigerDroppings (h/t Jim Hoft):

I heard a story today from someone inside the military that I trust entirely. The story was in reference to General Ham that Panetta referenced in the quote below.

quote:
________________________________________
"(The) basic principle is that you don't deploy forces into harm's way without knowing what's going on; without having some real-time information about what's taking place," Panetta told Pentagon reporters. "And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation."
________________________________________
The information I heard today was that General Ham as head of Africom received the same e-mails the White House received requesting help/support as the attack was taking place. General Ham immediately had a rapid response unit ready and communicated to the Pentagon that he had a unit ready.

General Ham then received the order to stand down. His response was to screw it, he was going to help anyhow. Within 30 seconds to a minute after making the move to respond, his second in command apprehended General Ham and told him that he was now relieved of his command.

The story continues that now General Rodiguez would take General Ham's place as the head of Africom.

This version of events contradicts Mr. Panetta’s October 25 statement that General Ham advised against intervention. But so far there is nothing solid to back it up. Maybe Ham attempted to send a reaction force against orders, or maybe he simply said the wrong thing to the wrong people. Perhaps he gave whomever he was talking to up the chain a piece of his mind about leaving Americans to die when there was a chance of saving them. At the very least U.S. forces might have made those who killed our people pay while they were still on the scene. The Obama White House is famously vindictive against perceived disloyalty – the administration would not let Ham get away with scolding them for failing to show the leadership necessary to save American lives. The Army's ethos is to leave no man behind, but that is not shared by a president accustomed to leading from that location.

The question remains why the repeated requests – which is to say desperate pleas – to send a relief force were refused. Perhaps Mr. Obama and his national security brain trust thought the terrorist assault would be a minor skirmish and quickly blow over. When it became clear that the attack was something more serious, they may have had visions of the rescue team getting involved in a Mogadishu-like firefight, a “Blackhawk Down 2.” This would have been too much for the risk-averse Mr. Obama, particularly in a Muslim country, and less than two months before the election. Instead they simply watched the live video hoped for the best. If there were American fatalities, they felt they could shift blame for the circumstance to the supposed Youtube video which they had already blamed for the riot at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo hours earlier. In fact the Embassy had sent out its “apology” tweets even before the Cairo riot commenced.

Hillary Clinton’s freakishly bizarre statement on September 14 is also worth noting. At a memorial service to the fallen she told Charles Woods, father of slain former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods, that “we will make sure that the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted." In that situation one would expect her to vow to take down the terrorists who killed Tyrone, not the supposed instigator of the spontaneous mob action that never happened.
But since when does the Secretary of State feel it is her duty to promise to have an American filmmaker who has committed no crime arrested? For all the bowing and scraping to Islam that has gone on in the last four years, blasphemy against that or any other faith is still not illegal in this country. The First Amendment still exists. It is strange that Mrs. Clinton believed that the parents of the slain Americans would empathize with her outrage at the filmmaker, rather than reserve their anger for the extremists who actually did the killing. But as Mr. Woods said, he "could tell that she was not telling me the truth." Indeed the truth has been the fifth casualty in this entire tragic affair.

UPDATE: On Sunday October 28 I received the following communique from Pentagon Press Secretary George Little:

"The insinuations in your story are flat wrong. General Ham is an outstanding leader of AFRICOM. Future leadership changes at this important command have absolutely nothing to do with the attack on American personnel in Benghazi. The leadership changes have been long planned."

Of course I never suggested that General Ham was anything other than an outstanding leader of AFRICOM and in fact said as much. But why is an outstanding leader of this important command leaving after less than two years when all other combatant commanders have longer tenures? General Ham's predecessor stayed in the job much longer and was generally less well regarded. Further discussion of these issues may help begin to restore the administration's credibility on the Benghazi issue.

UPDATE 2: On Monday October 29 General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff, released the following statement:
"The speculation that General Carter Ham is departing Africa Command (AFRICOM) due to events in Benghazi, Libya on 11 September 2012 is absolutely false. General Ham's departure is part of routine succession planning that has been on going since July. He continues to serve in AFRICOM with my complete confidence."

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/robbins-report/2012/oct/28/general-losing-his-job-over-benghazi/

Stargazer

10-30-2012, 12:46

LYONS: Obama needs to come clean on what happened in Benghazi
The American people deserve to know the truth

There is an urgent need for full disclosure of what has become the “Benghazi Betrayal and Cover-up.” The Obama national security team, including CIA, DNI and the Pentagon, apparently watched and listened to the assault on the U.S. consulate and cries for help but did nothing. If someone had described a fictional situation with a similar scenario and described our leadership ignoring the pleas for help, I would have said it was not realistic—not in my America – but I would have been proven wrong.

Read more: LYONS: Obama needs to come clean on what happened in Benghazi - Washington Times http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/28/lyonsobama-needs-come-clean-what-happened-benghazi/#ixzz2AoFQsRrf
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

I hope those who have knowledge continue to step forward... this really needs to catch the attention of the American public.

levinj

10-30-2012, 13:02

Maybe I'm naive, but the implications of these articles are shocking, even beyond leaving our Ambassador and his personnel to die. Can we really be so stupid as to start providing Islamist terrorist cells weaponry again and just trust they won't eventually use them on us?

Haven't we done this dance before?

echoes

10-30-2012, 15:46

I've got no doubts that the American Ambassador and his staff were abandoned and left to die because the moron in the White House decided the lives of hundreds of armed radical muslims were more important than one American Ambassador and his staff.

Soon the real story will be leaked and we will know for a fact who told who to stand down and do nothing and allow the American Ambassador and others to be murdered.

Some Obama folks continue to banter, "This needs the American Public's attention."

If only they really believed that...but they have been mis-lead to believe that the big O really gives a good god damn, when he could give two shits about our military...period.

If this incident does not showcse his coplete lack of interest in Our Bravest doing what they do for a living....nothing will. What a pos sack of shit this administration is.:mad:

Holly

Dusty

10-31-2012, 09:08

http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/31/gingrich-rumor-says-networks-have-white-house-emails-telling-counterterrorism-group-to-stand-down-on-benghazi-rescue/

On Tuesday night’s “On the Record with Greta Van Susteren” on the Fox News Channel, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said that major news networks might have secret emails proving that the White House canceled plans to assist the besieged U.S. Embassy in Benghazi.

Gingrich said that the bombshell emails could be revealed within the next two days.
“There is a rumor — I want to be clear, it’s a rumor — that at least two networks have emails from the National Security Adviser’s office telling a counterterrorism group to stand down,” Gingrich said. “But they were a group in real-time trying to mobilize marines and C-130s and the fighter aircraft, and they were told explicitly by the White House stand down and do nothing. This is not a terrorist action. If that is true, and I’ve been told this by a fairly reliable U.S. senator, if that is true and comes out, I think it raises enormous questions about the president’s role, and Tom Donilon, the National Security Adviser’s role, the Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, who has taken it on his own shoulders, that he said don’t go. And that is, I think, very dubious, given that the president said he had instructions they are supposed to do everything they could to secure American personnel.”

After noting that the rumor, if true, would have a substantial impact on the presidential election, Gingrich pointed to another possible “October surprise” in the coming days.

“The other big story, I think, that is going to break is on corruption and extraordinary waste in the solar power grants and direct involvement by the Obama White House, including the president, in the solar panel grants involving billions of dollars, and I suspect that’s going to break Wednesday and Thursday of this week,” Gingrich added.

Snip

Badger52

10-31-2012, 10:32

I get my CRS attacks from time to time but not once can I ever recall - SoM, Bn promo boards, guard mount, reception station to final 214 - having to include the national security adviser in my recitation of my chain-of-command.

[url]“The other big story, I think, that is going to break is on corruption and extraordinary waste in the solar power grants and direct involvement by the Obama White House, including the president, in the solar panel grants involving billions of dollars, and I suspect that’s going to break Wednesday and Thursday of this week,” Gingrich added.

SnipThanks for that - LMAO. Bad loans to solar companies? How many does it take?

bjm300

10-31-2012, 10:34

Cool Breeze

10-31-2012, 12:07

Unfortunately, the lack of response is nothing new. REMFs and politicians pull strings to cover their asses and guys on the ground suffer. How many times did the army and USMC studs call for air support (denied) when the young jarhead and others tried to get the four guys out of the village in AFG? A MOH and many deaths after the fact brought that to lite.
It is always an issue when guys are left to die by some mother f'r who is worried about promotion points or re-election and not the guys they are responsible for. Sad fact is that it has happened since Roman times and will continue to happen.
Best thing we can do is stop it if we are on the ground, or bring it out in the open so those responsible can pay. Hopefully this thread will help with that but I have my doubts.

Utah Bob

10-31-2012, 13:33

Screw it up. Cover it up. Dance around. Look for scapegoats.
Same ol s***.
Just more evidence of aTotally incompetent administration. Disgusting!:mad:

head

10-31-2012, 13:48

The President will use Hurricane Sandy to avoid this scandal until after the election.

Cake_14N

10-31-2012, 14:37

And from what I’m reading the last few months on the internet some of the Special Operations Forces personnel would like the American people to know, they are out there, ready, trained and prepared to handle this sort of situation at a moment’s notice, and prepared to die if necessary to save American lives. Anywhere, anytime anyplace.

You tell me who stood down the dogs of war?

And why?

TS,

I am not Special Forces, I am not specially trained, but... given any chance at all my old, fat butt would have had my bags packed, weapons locked and loaded and I would have beat the crap out of anybody to get onto any type of aircraft inbound to help the Ambassador.
Cake

echoes

10-31-2012, 14:42

The President will use Hurricane Sandy to avoid this scandal until after the election.

Until this POS Administration is voted out of office..

For shame that They perpetrated this murder.

Holly

Stargazer

11-01-2012, 12:37

I am going to let my voice be heard via the pen. If others are interested, I found this resource where you can send out a mass message to various media outlets.

http://www.congress.org/congressorg/dbq/media/

Also, I will be sending a message to members of the following committees:

House - Government Oversight & Reform Committee
House - Intelligence Committee
House - Foreign Affairs Committe
Senate - Intelligence Committee
Senate - Armed Services
Senate - Foreign Relations

SF18C

11-01-2012, 19:31

Hey wait...MSNBC is saying that there was no dely in the resuce plan!

http://t.news.msn.com/us/us-officials-timeline-of-events-surrounding-libya-rescue-effort

Old Dog New Trick

11-01-2012, 21:53

Hey wait...MSNBC is saying that there was no dely in the resuce plan!

http://t.news.msn.com/us/us-officials-timeline-of-events-surrounding-libya-rescue-effort

MSNBC - laughter :rolleyes:

MtnGoat

11-01-2012, 22:48

Hey wait...MSNBC is saying that there was no dely in the resuce plan!

http://t.news.msn.com/us/us-officials-timeline-of-events-surrounding-libya-rescue-effort

Man this is playing out to be a Wag the Dog as TR said.. Reminds me of Sam Shepard when him and Ryan Reynolds are talking at the end of the movie.

Before elections, a spin-doctor and a Hollywood producer join efforts to "fabricate" a [war] in order to cover-up a presidential [sex] scandal.

Good thing Sandy came and walked all over the broadwalk.

Less than an hour later, a heavily armed Libyan military unit arrives at the CIA annex to help evacuate all U.S. personnel and takes them to the airport.

First time I've heard this.. Saw an interview with Libyan President and he never said anything about this?? Hummm

Box

11-02-2012, 03:34

MSNBC can eat a di...

...a dinner
...a special dinner of steak and gravy

cbtengr

11-02-2012, 07:34

BKKMAN

11-02-2012, 09:30

Recd. this from a friend and tried to verify on MSM outlets but can only find it all over the fringe news outlets. If true he cannot possibly fire everyone who opposed his decision to let those men die. Why is there not more of an uproar out there about this.

http://dyn.politico.com/members/forums/thread.cfm?catid=2&subcatid=7&threadid=7179985

Just f'in stop. This nonsense about the admiral and the Stennis Carrier Group has to stop. Those ships were in the Pacific Ocean on September 11th. They were in Thailand in early October.

More importantly:

"On Oct. 17, the strike group first entered the U. S. Fifth Fleet region, which is the Arabian Sea and surroundings."

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/oct/31/navy-denies-stennis-skipper-removed-over-libya/

http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/military/navy-denies-stennis-leader-removed-over-libya/article_fcca70c5-75cf-55be-90b6-16f3f95f2821.html

http://www.facebook.com/stennis74

http://www.dvidshub.net/news/96120/stennis-strike-group-departs-thailand

http://www.phuketgazette.net/tv/details.asp?id=3225

Some of these rumors and RUMINT / CONSPINT coming out about Libya take less than 5 minutes to debunk. FFS, take the additional time when you hear a story and do some independent investigation and analysis.

This is the start of the article in the link to the forum post you posted:

Obama Fires Top Admiral As Coup Plot Fears Grows

"U.S. military commanders say Obama is incompetent as Commander n' Chief. Obama is guilty of dereliction of duty during the terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya.

A shocking new report prepared by the Foreign Military Intelligence Main Directorate (GRU) of the General Staff of the Armed Forces, and circulating in the Kremlin today, states that President Obama has fired one of the United States Navy’s most powerful Admirals over growing fears the US Military is planning an overthrow of his government."

If you want to frequent sites and read posts on forums where everyone wears tinfoil hats , that is your business, but please refrain from bringing that crap in here because it detracts from having an actual informed discussion on the issues (unless you want to put it over in the Comedy Zone, where it rightfully belongs)

Stargazer

11-02-2012, 11:31

Back on post #4 in this thread, I asked the question where is Petraeus in all of this. His initial narrative that was reported, with the ensuing silence.. never sat right with me.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2012/11/petraeus-becomes-target-benghazi-finger-pointing/58636/

Cracks are beginning to show in the Obama administration's united front on the Benghazi consulate as blame for security failures shifts between the State Department and the CIA. Last night, starting around 6 p.m., the CIA began circulating the most comprehensive timeline yet of its response to the September 11 attack to reporters. The timeline showed that within 25 minutes of receiving calls for help, CIA operatives left their compound to assist the besieged consulate. But later on Thursday night, officials in the Obama administration leaked a series of damaging remarks about the CIA's handling of Benghazi to The Wall Street Journal with a slew of grievances directed at CIA Director David Petraeus.

Of all the players in this situation, I would have thought he would have been the first to do all he could to bring our guys home. But, I recall words a friend once shared with me.. 'it's all about the mission'... I am not sure what to think at this point.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204712904578092853621061838.html

Petraeus falling into the backdrop raised a flag that there was more to the story -- CIA wise... I had no idea what it was and asked questions about how plausible the idea is about transferring arms to those fighting in Syria. I don't know all the details of the story, and for my part don't need to. For me, it's always been about supporting those in the fight... I guess for those like me, it becomes a double-edge. I believe it is a double-edge for those in the fight too, such as the times when you let a brother fall or send them into harms way knowing they may not come home... Because 'it's about the mission' at the strategic and tactical level -- but about the individuals at the personal/heart level. Did we lose those brave Americans because of dereliction of duty from those in command or it was necessary in order to protect the mission? It's why, I as a civilian and patriot, need to step back at this juncture. Not because I don't care but because I do -- out of my respect and desire to honor those who serve and stand for freedom. The cost of war has always been a heavy burden to bear whether you are the warrior in the battle or the one who stands silently beside them. We are truly a blessed nation. A nation with a long history of valiant warriors. Thank you.

Paslode

11-02-2012, 11:42

Hammock

11-06-2012, 09:09

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/nov/4/behind-crisis-in-benghazi-a-lack-of-firepower/print/

"A military source familiar with the eight-hour Benghazi firefight provided this timeline to The Washington Times to answer the most central question surrounding the death of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans: Why did the U.S. military take no direct action to stop the two terrorists assaults? [...] But on Sept. 11, AfriCom was still a command "in paper only," as one former Bush administration official put it.

The military source told The Times, "AfriCom has very few assigned forces."

Gen. Ham lacked what is called a commander in-extremis force, which other combatant forces have set up to respond to crises such as Benghazi. He also lacked the assets to assemble a generic quick-reaction force.

As a result, the four-star general turned to a national response force in the United States on call 24 hours a day. He worked through the European Command to tab its commander in-extremis force. This unit was conducting training in Central Europe. It had to be briefed on the mission and taken to an airfield, a process that took hours. The national and European strike forces finally arrived in Sigonella air base in Sicily on Sept. 12.

"They both had something in common," the military source said. "When they both arrived on the 12th, the evacuation of the CIA base had already been completed."

As the two units flew to Sicily, Gen. Ham, a combat veteran of the Iraq War, looked at other options and saw few. He had no AC-130 gunships, which can be effective in urban combat by isolating and firing on enemy targets. He also had no armed drones such as the missile-carrying Predator that can strike a gunman precisely."

BrokenSwitch

11-08-2012, 06:31

If it's true that GEN Ham had no In-Extremis Force, or any other response capability... then why was he even in the chain of command?

Firelord

11-10-2012, 10:59

A Question I would like to see asked and answered at the upcoming hearings on Benghazi in light of the Pentagon's recently released timeline. Keep in my mind I'm a layman here and I make no claims at being a tactician or strategist so my question may be self-explanatory to some.

In light of the multiple demonstrations across the middle east at American embassies, wouldn't it have been prudent to pre-position a quick reaction force somewhere? Particularly notable was the scaling of the embassy walls in Cairo, which I believe happened prior to the attack in Benghazi, which IMHO, should have made somebody nervous and say, "Hmm, maybe we should do something to be prepared in case an embassy is overun?"

While it seems to me that we are being spoon fed information; I still haven't seen anything that doesn't say we had a failure of leadership at the senior most level.

Badger52

11-10-2012, 18:40

If it's true that GEN Ham had no In-Extremis Force, or any other response capability... then why was he even in the chain of command?I'm sure that, at some point, Congress will ask him if the 200-man Marine TF he briefed them on in his annual posture statement - broken into 14-man dets that rotate thru Sigonella - were all on leave.

Post-election there are simply lots of things that will just wither. The list is long.
:rolleyes:

rtj731

11-11-2012, 16:39

Where is Gen. Petraeus in all of this?

in bed with his friend:boohoo

Dusty

11-11-2012, 17:31

http://washingtonexaminer.com/house-asked-clinton-to-testify-on-benghazi-but-she-declines-due-to-scheduling-conflict/article/2513151

House investigators asked Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to testify next week about the September 11 terrorist attack in Benghazi, but she declined citing a scheduling conflict.

“[Clinton] was asked to appear at House Foreign Affairs next week, and we have written back to the Chairman to say that she’ll be on travel next week,” State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told reporters yesterday. “She has a commitment with the Secretary of Defense to the AUSMIN Ministerial.” Per AFP, “AUSMIN is the highest level forum for Australia and US consultation on foreign policy, defense and strategic issues.” The United States is reportedly concerned about Australia’s plan to cut their defense spending.

Clinton has not been asked to testify at any of the other hearings next week, Nuland said.

House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., has been frustrated with the State Department’s failure to provide information that she has requested.

“While I understand that investigations by the FBI and the State Department’s own Accountability Review Board are ongoing, it is imperative that this Committee, having direct oversight responsibility, be kept informed every step of the way of developments in the matter,” Ros-Lehtinen wrote to Clinton on November 7th. “[P]lease be prepared to present State Department officials to testify on these issues when Congress reconvenes later this month.”

Snip

Badger52

11-11-2012, 17:41

House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., has been frustrated with the State Department’s failure to provide information that she has requested.She should go ask Darrell Issa for advice since he's done so well with the DoJ.

Old Dog New Trick

11-13-2012, 18:34

Badger52

11-13-2012, 18:45

The flood gates are open, and hopefully soon they will be blown off the hinges.

http://wolf.house.gov/press-releases/wolf-calls-for-establishment-of-select-committee-to-investigate-benghazi-attack/

Representative Frank Wolf (VA R.) calls for select committee to investigate Benghazi and subsequent revelations surrounding the White House, DOJ and CIA.Thank you. While I've poked some fun at the increasing facets of the Petraeus resignation "affair" (pun 100% intended) this is something I want them to get on the table. And the House is the only direction it could come from.

SF18C

11-13-2012, 18:58

Old Dog New Trick

11-13-2012, 19:05

Should have been done over a month ago :mad:

I agree, but it's not going to happen with this admin. The really sad part as I watch and read various forums and blogs is that those who voted to keep the status quo really don't care or understand why Benghazi is a total CF and the president's foreign policy is such a joke.

Let the impeachment trial begin. :munchin

Sigaba

11-13-2012, 19:20

Should have been done over a month ago :mad:MOO, that it didn't happen sooner may be a blessing in disguise.

If the Select Committee is run in a bipartisan manner, the investigations and subsequent hearings can become a matter of institutional politics rather than electoral politics or party politics. A show down between Congress and the White House is long over due.

BOfH

11-13-2012, 20:58

MOO, that it didn't happen sooner may be a blessing in disguise.

If the Select Committee is run in a bipartisan manner, the investigations and subsequent hearings can become a matter of institutional politics rather than electoral politics or party politics. A show down between Congress and the White House is long over due.

FWIW, I agree. This administration is inheriting it's own mess, and I am awaiting that showdown as well. The $64000 question is: Is it still Bush's fault during BHO round two?

Box

11-13-2012, 21:04

The $64000 question is: Is it still Bush's fault during BHO round two?

Yes.

Badger52

11-14-2012, 15:02

POTUS says Amb. Rice shouldn't be taking the heat. (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/14/obama-challenges-republicans-hammering-rice-on-libya-to-go-after-me/)

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., one of the lawmakers Obama was addressing, swiftly fired back.

"Mr. President, don't think for one minute I don't hold you ultimately responsible for Benghazi. I think you failed as Commander in Chief before, during, and after the attack,"

cbtengr

11-14-2012, 16:38

What ever became of "it's the seriousness of the charge" or did that only count when the dems controlled the house and it was a republican administration being questioned? This is a bipartisan issue but will the other side stand up to the plate and have the guts to say enough is enough?

Dozer523

11-14-2012, 17:13

I agree, but it's not going to happen with this admin. I'll take that bet. If its not investigated by the Republican controlled House it sure wont be because the democratic administration is impeding it.
The Democrats got to the heart of Watergate and that was a long running criminal activity run by the AG and it was a full on coverup "ya'll going to jail lose your job Mr P" . Even the most stalwart Republicans recognized the truth and their obligation to the country -- first.
When this went south it did it on its own time schedule. There wasn't time to have a nefarious motive * for what happened. The rescue mission, I honestly don't know. I want an investigation of that. Decisions were made. Definitely.
Errors were made. Probably, good men are dead.
A cover up and a conspiracy to hide errors and maintain a cover up? I hope not but time will tell. I am ever hopeful. Even as a 16 YO I had a solid enough understanding of our government to really really hope what W&B were reporting was not true.
I am ever trusting, too. So let's go. . . Chips where they may . . . Truth will out . . . Bring it.

Personally, part of me hopes this ends up confirming the theory this really is about all the Generals and Admirals that have been relieved being part of a huge coup attempt in planning since the Air Force attempted to hold President Bush hostage with theB-52 that was "accidentally" loaded with a bomb-bay of nuclear weapons.

No Sh!t. I read it on the Internet..

11-15-2012, 21:04

11-15-2012, 21:06

Also, on the table you've got USMC FAST company europe in Rota, Spain. We trained with them. Those guys know how to kick ass.
Nothing. Not a damn thing happened.

Old Dog New Trick

11-15-2012, 21:30

One of my biggest unresolved questions about this whole thing is this...

Where and what were the five DSS agents doing when the attack on the mission and the ambassador was going down?

These guys are very much (wannabe) like us...they are heavily armed with M4s, 249 SAW, pistols and other special weapons as needed. I would think everything they had access to was needed!

Having performed protective detail missions in my past, they should have been stacking bad guys like cordwood at the gate and around the grounds, never given them access to the building where the ambassador and Mr. Smith sought refuge, killed everyone with an RPG or five gallon can of fuel and/or all died in the process of doing exactly that.

It appears all of them got rescued an hour later by the CIA and they didn't even know where the ambassador was...

Something doesn't add up for me!

Did they all hide under the bed? :confused:

11-15-2012, 23:22

Sir,
it must have been a considerably tall bed. Or they were spooning real tight.
Sad humor apart, I see your point. Your train of thought definitely adds on to the list of stuff that doesn't add up.
Media reported FAST being sent on the 12th. How in the blue hell could those guys be useful a day AFTER the attack? For what. Evidence collection? A local national additional force protection/qrf/protection detail team hired locally?
REALLY? In what lysergic stupor does that make sense?
That's dumber that the stereotypical fox guarding the coop. I could go on for hours.
That was a majestic goatfuck. To be hopeful.
Or a well devised plan if one wants to be a conspiracy theorist. Or just an outside-the-box thinker.

Badger52

11-16-2012, 11:10

One of my biggest unresolved questions about this whole thing is this...

Where and what were the five DSS agents doing when the attack on the mission and the ambassador was going down?
Given the timeline that's generally being circulated (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57544719/timeline-how-benghazi-attack-probe-unfolded/) the comment "U.S. special forces team arrives in Sigonella, Sicily, becoming the first military unit in the region" (24 hrs later) still has me wondering where this AFRICOM USMC AirGnd TF's dets were that were already supposed to be at Sig.

Lots of questions. Answers... not optimistic.

Kai

11-25-2012, 05:39

Given the timeline that's generally being circulated (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57544719/timeline-how-benghazi-attack-probe-unfolded/) the comment "U.S. special forces team arrives in Sigonella, Sicily, becoming the first military unit in the region" (24 hrs later) still has me wondering where this AFRICOM USMC AirGnd TF's dets were that were already supposed to be at Sig.

Lots of questions. Answers... not optimistic.

Seems like a single F-18 from NASSIG would have done wonders. ETA of under an hour, right?

Stargazer

02-07-2013, 11:33

Team Sergeant

02-07-2013, 11:53

I hope some on this BB are listening to the Benghazi Consulate Attack on C-Span. I am most interested in General Dempsey's stance on putting forces in motion and the reasons for halting.

Listening to this become a discussion more about the budget / sequester is a distraction from the reason they are there. Perhaps those on the Hill, lead by the President, should have taken the agreed upon actions when the 'deal' was made.

General Dempsey stated that the quickest they could have had assets on the ground was 13 to 15 hours (best case scenario). It appears that they did not consider (as some have suggested) having a F16 to fly over. I recall Rep. Kinzinger (of IL) who is a former Airforce Pilot stating that F16s can do many things outside of firing to provide a show of force.

Sorry that's a bold faced lie.

There's a reason we have Military Free Fall teams. All CIF's are airborne, some specialize in Military Free Fall. The CIF's are prepared to respond 24/7, that's their job. I know I was a CIF member. Jets should have been dropping flares within the hour over the embassy, and breaking the sound barrier with low level flyovers. We have AFB's in Turkey and Italy that could have responded. I also find it hard to believe we didn't have assets floating in the Mediterranean that could have responded.

We also could have called the Israelis, they are professionals in hostage rescue.

Bottom line, the "current" administration was not going to kill hundreds of bloodthirsty muslims over 3-4 Americans. Ain't going to happen. So if you're curently serving as a civilian in a muslim country you can expect no US military assistance if teh shit hits the fan, you are on your own, period. Stupid American sheeple forget the Iran hostage situation? 444 days. Who cares now, no one.

But as the witch said, "Who cares now?"

Stargazer

02-07-2013, 12:02

Sorry that's a bold faced lie.

There's a reason we have Military Free Fall teams. All CIF's are airborne, some specialize in Military Free Fall. The CIF's are prepared to respond 24/7, that's their job. I know I was a CIF member. Jets should have been dropping flares within the hour over the embassy, and breaking the sound barrier with low level flyovers. We have AFB's in Turkey and Italy that could have responded.
We also could have called the Israelis, they are professionals in hostage rescue.

Panetta just said that some of the FAST teams did not have 'air lift' capability. If that is in fact true, I find that surprising. Of course, they immediately took measures following the attack to resolve this issue.

Team Sergeant

02-07-2013, 12:10

Panetta just said that some of the FAST teams did not have 'air lift' capability. If that is in fact true, I find that surprising. Of course, they immediately took measures following the attack to resolve this issue.

I am so over the horsesh#@.

I don't know what a FAST team is and don't care. If he's talking the CIA teams they are civilians, period. There were hundreds of islamic combatants on the ground. No FAST team would ever go into a situation knowing some of them WILL be killed. The Special Operations CIF's would, that's their job. They could have jumped in, secured the Americans and defended until relieved. That's what we're trained to do, recover Americans. But hundreds of islamists would have been killed had the CIF's arrived. Picture that on the news and the uprising afterwards.

No "airlift" is a joke...... a poor excuse from civilians. So what you cant get out, secure the good guys and defend yourselves until the cavalry arrives.

CIA is civilians, they CAN quit at anytime, no law or oath holds them to serve. No gov civilian is going to go to a gunfight knowing they might in fact die.

This is your elected civilian government and they really don't care.

Old Dog New Trick

02-07-2013, 12:22

tonyz

02-07-2013, 12:33

Team Sergeant

02-07-2013, 12:34

TS, a FAST (Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team) is the U.S. Marines. :p

And they should have already been on the ground in Tripoli and the Ambassador should have been there with them...

But all this "prior intelligence and threat info" is being swept under the rug, because the current admin failed big time to read a calendar (9/11).

I know they were also talking about a CIA response team.

The Marines would have also been a great choice. And again, there would have been hundreds of dead islamists in the streets.

I doubt they stood down because of no airlift out of the target area...... Marines don't stand-down. They would have gone in, secured the Americans and defended until airlift arrived.

Michelle

02-07-2013, 16:53

It appears from Panetta's testimony, not only did the President not bother to "stick around" as the events unfolded, he never even called for a Sit Rep on the attack. That seems shocking to me...........

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/panetta-obama-absent-night-benghazi_700405.html

ddoering

02-07-2013, 17:44

Probably he was still tired from taking out Bin Laden.....