Marine blogs say U.S. embassy did not authorize service members to carry ammo

Marine blogs say U.S. embassy did not authorize service members to carry ammo

freebeacon.com

U.S. Marines defending the American embassy in Egypt were not permitted by the State Department to carry live ammunition, limiting their ability to respond to attacks like those this week on the U.S. consulate in Cairo.
Ambassador to Egypt Anne Patterson “did not permit U.S. Marine guards to carry live ammunition,” according to multiple reports
 on U.S. Marine Corps blogs spotted by Nightwatch. “She neutralized any U.S. military capability that was dedicated to preserve her life and protect the US Embassy.”

(visit the link for the full news article)

Did not see this posted and just wanted to start a discussion. Not sure how reliable these marine blogs are, if anyone can signup, so I don't know if this story is true or not, but a similar thing did happen on 9/11 where the pilots could not be armed. This does not prove it was a false flag of some sort but you would think a US embassy might have live ammo at the least. I'm sure some people will blame Obama fot this even though it clearly says anne patterson made the ruling, but since when can an ambassador tell marines what to do especially if they are protecting her. Also remember that marines were asked to disarm for the traitor panetta so they have had their past compliances with this order.

freebeacon.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

so the point of them being there is???

reply to post by filosophia



IF this is true...what's the reason to even have armed Marines to defend our Embassy in Egypt....IF this is true...they were sitting ducks in the line of hostile fire at all times.

Des

Originally posted by haven123
so the point of them being there is???

To not protect apparently. Not sure if others will think this is proof of a false flag, but if not, at least the worst security premeasure in history I would think, besides 9/11 of course.

She did not permit US Marine guards to carry live ammunition, according to USMC blogs. Thus she neutralized any US military capability that was dedicated to preserve her life and protect the US Embassy.

www.kforcegov.com...

Not sure exactly which marine blogs they are talking about or if the actual comment was saved. I am not saying this story is ttue, I remain open minded, just trying to report the facts. I do however think all these embassy attacks are coordinated in some way.

reply to post by haven123

The point is "our country is now being run by morons". You are right, why even endanger more lives for what reason? hand to hand combat with a mob?

Our country is going to hell in a hand bag fast. The present administration gave Egypt 1.5 billion dollars to kiss ass and our own troops are not allowed to defend our own people in our foreign embassies. You think we would get something for our 1.5 billion investment.

There is no way we can survive another 4 years of a inexperienced president and lame administration. I do not like the alternative but it is the only thing that even looks remotely sane at this point in time.

Isn't that just insane?

Obama better hope this is not true.

If true....He will be a one term President.

This information "if true" has gigantic implications.

reply to post by filosophia


This is bunk. There is a difference between Consulates and Embassies folks, that being said though. They have armories in both though along with MSGs. They may not have been authorized, UNTIL the protestors showed up. Then that arms room gets unlocked...

Info on MSG
Official Site

ETA: I know 3 MSGs.

reply to post by thesungod


Well the article says embassy and ambassadors, consulates is not mentioned in the story. And not sure what your links are trying to say. Of course marines should be armed, but apparently they weren't so the marine homepage probably would not mention it since the article says the whitehouse has not even commented yet on the security at the embassy.

I wish I could say I was shocked, but I am not.

How great are this administration's foreign policies again?

Typical Bureaucratic BS!

Marines have a phrase........


Cluster F%^$#

reply to post by filosophia


I'm saying they have armories inside each and every consulate and embassy that contains MSGs. This includes foreign embassies here in the US.

Things get hairy and that door gets unlocked. Who do you think was escorting the Ambassador that got killed? Marines wielding bats and golf clubs?

Same with the guards on duty during the Lebanon embassy bombing in 1983.

The government doesnt trust people with guns. Anyone. Unless they're all pointed at a target enemy the government chose. And even then the government is nervous and suspicious.

Dont ever believe any politician or government or supporter thereof is a proponent of gun rights. They are not. None of them.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
Typical Bureaucratic BS!

Marines have a phrase........


Cluster F%^$#

i thought SNAFU was what applied in a case like this
although i'm pretty sure the ambassador is secretly packing anyway

reply to post by filosophia


Hmmm,... Must have had the boys from the Social Security Administration already covering the Embassy.

Now I understand their ammo purchases better.

Originally posted by whyamIhere
Isn't that just insane?

Obama better hope this is not true.

If true....He will be a one term President.

This information "if true" has gigantic implications.

Not really.. It always amazes me how quick Americans are to forget and allow their minds to be misled from the really important issues.

Back in the 80's if these things happened then, the nation would be in an uproar demanding the government find and punish those responsible. In today's world this is simply a footnote that will quickly pass into obscurity. There is something very wrong with our nation today.

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix

Originally posted by whyamIhere
Isn't that just insane?

Obama better hope this is not true.

If true....He will be a one term President.

This information "if true" has gigantic implications.

Not really.. It always amazes me how quick Americans are to forget and allow their minds to be misled from the really important issues.

Back in the 80's if these things happened then, the nation would be in an uproar demanding the government find and punish those responsible. In today's world this is simply a footnote that will quickly pass into obscurity. There is something very wrong with our nation today.

I hope you are wrong...

I think on Nov.4, I think a majority of American's are going to be expressing their outrage.

We will see. Remember, Carter was leading in the polls two weeks before the Election.

This looks like a rerun on steroids.

reply to post by thesungod


I see what you're saying about the armory but without even a pistol these marines are less equipped than Egyptian police officers, so like a lot of posters are asking, why even have them there!?

So in other words, if a US embassy gets attacked, guards have to rush to the armory, unlock it, load their weapons, and report back before rioters storm the embassy? Hard to imagine this is normal security in a post 9/11, post arab spring world.

reply to post by filosophia


It is at the Consulates but not the Embassies. Embassies have armed guards out front, Consulates are more like Business offices. Security at Consulates is rather weak in comparison.

I agree with you though and I hope this may change that.