It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: neo96
That, in and of itself, is an outrage.
When a military unit is deployed into a hot zone, it is absolutely imperative that before they get there they have had time to handle, check, and re-check all weapons which will be deployed with them in the field, and had the opportunity to put all the miscellaneous items they will need into their fatigues and assault harnesses. This should be done while they are still airborne in normal circumstances, but changing kit several times adds far too many possible variables to a mission profile, like someone leaving their grenades in the wrong pants (I know it seems stupid, but stupid things happen from time to time).
When time is a factor, the chances of something going wrong increase, because the amount of time preparing for a given action is necessarily lower, the approach to the location where the action is will be necessarily faster, the risks are simply greater. You do not put fast response troops through an amateur dramatics style wardrobe change four times, before you deploy them to their operational area. That is just absolutely bloody stupid from an operational stand point. I know these people are professionals, but give the dudes a break!
The following facts are among the many new revelations in Part I:
•Despite President Obama and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta’s clear orders to deploy military assets, nothing was sent to Benghazi, and nothing was en route to Libya at the time the last two Americans were killed almost 8 hours after the attacks began. [pg. 141]
•With Ambassador Stevens missing, the White House convened a roughly two-hour meeting at 7:30 PM, which resulted in action items focused on a YouTube video, and others containing the phrases “f any deployment is made,” and “Libya must agree to any deployment,” and “[w]ill not deploy until order comes to go to either Tripoli or Benghazi.” [pg. 115]
•The Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff typically would have participated in the White House meeting, but did not attend because he went home to host a dinner party for foreign dignitaries. [pg. 107]
•A Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team (FAST) sat on a plane in Rota, Spain, for three hours, and changed in and out of their uniforms four times. [pg. 154]
•None of the relevant military forces met their required deployment timelines. [pg. 150]
•The Libyan forces that evacuated Americans from the CIA Annex to the Benghazi airport was not affiliated with any of the militias the CIA or State Department had developed a relationship with during the prior 18 months. Instead, it was comprised of former Qadhafi loyalists who the U.S. had helped remove from power during the Libyan revolution. [pg. 144]
Rep. Mike Pompeo (KS-04) released the following statement regarding these findings:
“We expect our government to make every effort to save the lives of Americans who serve in harm’s way. That did not happen in Benghazi. Politics were put ahead of the lives of Americans, and while the administration had made excuses and blamed the challenges posed by time and distance, the truth is that they did not try.”
benghazi.house.gov...
originally posted by: buster2010
Actually the nitwit admitted the reports were a failure.
Trey Gowdy Just Accidentally Admitted That The House Benghazi Report Is A Total Failure
Gowdy said, “You read the report, and if you think it is an overzealous prosecutor. We mention Secretary Clinton’s named less times than the Democrats do despite the fact the report is twice as long. So I would ask you and all my fellow citizens. Put aside what the Democrats say the report is going to be like. It’s actually out. Read it for yourself, and read all the new information that we found, and what our focus is on. It is not on one person. It’s is on four people whose political ideations. I have no idea what they are.”
Still, even Gowdy declined to say that the two Americans who died later in the attacks — Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, members of that six-man team — would have lived if the administration showed better coordination. “I’m not going to make a reckless allegation that [they] could have been saved,” Gowdy said. Asked directly if Gowdy thought Americans who read the report should find culpability for Clinton, Gowdy declined to say so. (Source)
originally posted by: StoutBroux
I suggest people quit being lemmings and read the report.
originally posted by: TheBulk
a reply to: Gryphon66
So you dont care how corrupt or bad Hillary is, just that Republicans lose?
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Gryphon66
For anyone with half a brain, these should have damaged Clinton's career. Her State Dept. was woefully mismanaged and all parties were more concerned with the optics of the situation than the lives on the ground. There were multiple experts who warned the State Dept. repeatedly that Benghazi was a disaster waiting to happen because of the way it was being handled months out from the incident and nothing was done to change that or try to avert anything.
This happened on Clinton's watch.
So the conclusion is that power matters more than people to her and those she will put in power with her. So if you want an administration that cares more for its own power and the perception of what it is rather than the truth, sure this vindicated her.
originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Gryphon66
I said quite a long time ago that it wouldn't matter if these investigations cleared the administration and the SD of any wrongdoing. The Right Wing conspiracy has been created, refined and set in to the minds of the brainwashed.
They desire her to be guilty of something and through that conspiracy, they will twist and weasel around the facts to create and justify guilt in their own minds.
The report indicates that political considerations were on the minds of State Department officials learning about the attack. Before the Benghazi attack even ended, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland sent an email to two other, high-level Clinton aides, Jacob Sullivan and Phillipe Reines, that noted top Obama aide Ben Rhodes was worried or upset about Mitt Romney’s comments on the attack. As Jordan and Pompeo put it:
"And so on this highly charged political stage — just 56 days before the presidential election — events forced the administration to make a choice about what to tell the American people: Tell the truth that heavily armed terrorists had killed one American and possibly kidnapped a second — and increase the risk of losing the election. Say we do not know what happened. Or blame a video-inspired protest by tying Benghazi to what had occurred earlier in the day in Cairo. The administration chose the third, a statement with the least factual support but that would help the most politically."
Obama’s reelection campaign was a prominent consideration, but Hillary Clinton’s signature policy achievement was her push to invade Libya, so the political ramifications were serious for her as well. As her Deputy Chief of Staff and Director of Policy Jacob Sullivan characterized it in 2011, Clinton had “leadership/ownership/stewardship of this country’s Libya policy from start to finish.” Buddy Sidney Blumenthal, who had business interests in Libya, praised Clinton for following his advice on invading Libya and encouraged her to take full credit for the invasion.
Rhodes said, “The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns… They literally know nothing.” Thus they will believe what he tells them. He also tells friendly non-governmental organizations and think tanks what he is telling the journalists. Those outlets produce “experts” whose expert opinion is just what Rhodes wants it to be. These ignorant young journalists thus have quotes that look like independent confirmation of the White House’s lies.
According to the summary report, “Some blame the deplorable security conditions in Benghazi on the facility’s ‘made up’ State Department designation. To them, the fact the Department labeled the facility ‘temporary’ excused shortcomings in the compound’s physical security. A ‘temporary’ designation enabled the facility to skirt a host of written internal security requirements that applied to more permanent locations. We also learned it was an improvised designation not used at any of the State Department’s other 275 facilities around the world.”
In addition to Ambassador Chris Stevens’ pleas regarding security made before he was killed, Clinton received a memo about the danger of keeping Americans in Benghazi in August 2012. The memo was alarming, for something so bureaucratic. It used words such as “urgency,” “lawlessness,” “unpredictable,” “lack of effective security,” “limited success,” “widespread violence,” and “act with increasing impunity.” Clinton, who was in charge of American policy in Libya, chose not to remove Americans from Benghazi or beef up security.
Finally, we learned troubling new details about the government’s military response to the attack. Until now the administration has led us to believe the military did not have assets — men or machines — close enough or ready enough to arrive in Benghazi in time to save lives. As one earlier committee put it, ‘given their location and readiness status it was not possible to dispatch armed aircraft before survivors left Benghazi.’ The first asset to arrive in Libya — a Marine ‘FAST’ platoon — did not arrive until nearly 24 hours after the attack began. What is troubling is that the administration never set in motion a plan to go to Benghazi in the first place. It is one thing to try and fail; it is yet another not to try at all. In the end, the administration did not move heaven and earth to help our people in Benghazi, as Americans would expect. The contrast between the heroic actions taken in Benghazi and the inaction in Washington — highlights the failure.
Republicans on the committee reveal that the Obama administration did not cooperate with the investigation but “stonewalled at virtually every turn.” The committee did manage to uncover Secretary Clinton’s breathtaking use of a private email account and server, something no previous investigative or oversight committee had known. But “the White House in particular left large holes in the investigation by denying the Committee access to documents and witnesses.” The Obama administration wouldn’t let the committee speak with anyone who was in the White House Situation Room on the night of the attacks or see the email communication between White House staffers.
WASHINGTON— Today, a Democratic spokesperson for the Select Committee on Benghazi issued the following statement in response to Republicans’ decision to leak versions of their partisan report to reporters and continue to keep the full report secret from all committee members and the public: “There is a reason Republicans leaked pieces of their report in the middle of the night and continue to hide it from Democrats even now -- they don't want us to fact check it against the evidence we obtained.
Based on press reports, the Republican Benghazi report seems like a conspiracy theory on steroids -- bringing back long-debunked allegations with no credible evidence whatsoever. To this day, the Republicans are still withholding transcripts from Democrats and the American people that contradict their conspiracy theories. Republicans promised a process and report that was fair and bipartisan, but this is exactly the opposite.”
BACKGROUND: Democrats issued their report yesterday along with all the available transcripts so that the American people-- and reporters-- can see the underlying evidence first hand to ensure the accuracy and integrity of our work.
Republican Abuses in Benghazi Investigation Scandal
A. Republicans admitted that their purpose in establishing the Select Committee was to attack Secretary Clinton’s candidacy for President. 262
B. Republicans targeted Secretary Clinton from the beginning. 263
C. Republicans proceeded with no Select Committee rules. 264
D. Republicans proceeded with an unlimited timeline and budget. 265
E. Republicans refused to define the scope of their investigation or identify the questions the Select Committee was trying to answer. 266
F. Republicans abandoned their own hearing plan to focus on Secretary Clinton. 267
G. Republicans excluded Democrats from interviews and concealed exculpatory evidence. 268
H. Republicans selectively released Sidney Blumenthal’s emails after proclaiming that “serious investigations” do not make selective releases. 271
I. Republicans subpoenaed Sidney Blumenthal to conduct political opposition research that has nothing to do with the attacks in Benghazi. 273
J. Republicans blocked the release of Sidney Blumenthal’s deposition transcript showing numerous questions about the Clinton Foundation. 276
K. Republicans leaked inaccurate information about Cheryl Mills’ interview, forcing Democrats to release her transcript to correct the public record. 281
L. Republicans began withholding interview transcripts in violation of House rules to retaliate against Democratic efforts to correct the public record. 282
M. Republicans inaccurately accused Secretary Clinton of compromising a covert CIA source. 285
N. Republicans held an 11-hour hearing with Secretary Clinton that was widely condemned even by conservative commentators. 286
O. Republicans inaccurately inflated their interview numbers to counter criticism of their glacial pace. 288
P. Republicans inaccurately claimed the State Department had not provided a single “scrap” of paper. 288
Q. Republicans inaccurately claimed that no other committee had ever received Ambassador Stevens’ emails. 289
R. Republicans issued a unilateral subpoena to retaliate against the Department of Defense for exposing the Select Committee’s abuses. 290
S. Republicans exploited the attacks in Benghazi to raise money for political campaigns. 292
T. Republicans threatened to withhold $700 million in State Department funding supposedly to speed up document production. 294
U. Republicans ignored a letter from 33 current and former U.S. ambassadors explaining how the State Department actually works. 295
V. Republicans abandoned the Select Committee’s final two hearings on improving security. 297
W. Republicans took a costly and unnecessary congressional delegation to Italy and Germany. 299
X. Republicans used taxpayer funds to conduct one of the longest and most partisan congressional investigations in history. 300
Y. Republicans drafted their partisan final report in secret with no input whatsoever from nearly half of the Select Committee’s members. 301
Z. Republicans forfeited any credibility by delaying their report until the eve of the presidential conventions. 302
originally posted by: ketsuko
1. Administration Misled Public Immediately and Continually
President Obama, White House Rose Garden, September 12, 2012, Day After Benghazi Attack -Source - CNN
"No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.
originally posted by: ketsuko
2. Weak Benghazi Security Points to Clinton’s Political Considerations
The Hill, September 18, 2012
House Republicans did not meet the president’s request for the department’s worldwide security protection program, which funds local guards and security enhancements such as bollards to restrict vehicle traffic, according to an aide familiar with the debate. Embassy security, construction and maintenance funding covers structural renovations, such as increasing a building’s distance from a public road and reducing vulnerability to car bombs.
House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.), who formerly headed the subcommittee with jurisdiction over the State Department, has worked to improve the security of diplomatic facilities since the 1998 embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania. That effort has resulted in the completion of 94 new diplomatic facilities and the transfer of 27,000 people to more secure places, according to a House GOP aide. But the GOP aide acknowledged, “In these tight budget times, the committee has had to make some tough choices to prioritize funding.”
originally posted by: ketsuko
3. Military Never Sent Men or Machines to Help
Huffington Post
Democrats pointed to at least one hearing in 2013 where former-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta admitted that forces did not embark for Benghazi because they could not get there in time, although a six-man embassy security team did arrive from Tripoli, Libya. Still, even Gowdy declined to say that the two Americans who died later in the attacks — Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, members of that six-man team — would have lived if the administration showed better coordination. “I’m not going to make a reckless allegation that [they] could have been saved,” Gowdy said.
originally posted by: ketsuko
4. Terrorists Weren’t Brought to Justice
Benghazi 'mastermind' captured without a single shot fired - CNN -June 17, 2014
Benghazi attack suspect Ahmed Abu Khatallah was watched by U.S. commandos, law enforcement and intelligence for days before his capture, several U.S. officials said Tuesday.
originally posted by: ketsuko
5. Administration Obstructed Investigation
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Wardaddy454
Well they called a press conference.
They were right there. The cameras were already rolling, and you cannot be telling me that there were not some VERY right wing media people there waiting to hang Clinton like a piñata, and swing like they were at the batting cages later. If one network had failed to carry it, you can bet your last shiny dollar that someone in that room would have been transmitting live till the end of the show.
Your argument seems to have only a little less weight than the report itself, if what we know of its contents so far are anything to go by.
I don't think you understand the MSM climate in America..
originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Gryphon66
Not only did he refuse to blame Clinton, he stated clearly that there is no way those four Americans could have been saved.
There WAS a way to save Stevens, and the others.
Was for Obama not to bring 'freedom and democracy' to Libya.