CIA operators were denied request for help during Benghazi attack, sources say

Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by elouina

 

The reason I am not watching the videos is because I am not in America as I have stated in two posts in this forum on this page above your post. For those who do not already know the internet does not run as fast in every part of the world like it does in the US. A 5 minute speech can take 30 minutes to buffer depending on the traffic and near impossible when it starts cuting out. Does that make it easier for you to understand?

I would love to have a fast reliable connection here but I probably wouldn’t be on ATS if I did.

Being in a foreign country does not assure a slow connection, so adding details did help. Some connections are even better than ours. Although my 75/35 may be hard to beat. I can remember years ago cable going up to amazing speeds. Then they lowered them again. Now with fiber optics, up and up they go again.

Anyways I equate watching those videos to painful dentistry work. Until you get to the good points where someone gets burned good.

reply to post by elouina



Yes I know many countries have great internet but where I am it is not plus there are several other people here on the same signal. I am just happy to have a semi stable signal with dedicated power lines. Three days ago the place I was at had solar panels for charging equipment during the day and two deep cycle marine batteries for lights at night but they still had cell service in the area so we ran our equipment when we needed to of a power converter in a truck.

I will watch the videos when I can but if there is a link to the transcripts that would be faster.

To all the defenders of this dying lying corrupt administration......Look at the leadership! Clinton? One of the biggest liars of all time? Panetta? Ha Ha Ha! Just another Clinton corrupt stooge.Ya know liberals, Im not quoting sources at all........It's fact. The fact you defend this man Obama who is not qualified to lead the United States is pathetic. You are pathetic for your defense, but then you are blind and uninformed. Your media, yeah your media feeds you your constant source of deception and because of your foolish pride you listen defend and follow.
HOW did Obama get qualified to be the leader of our Nation? How? Because you drank the bull**** in 2008? What had he done to EARN leadership? What?Zip! Zilch! Then you defend the decision to close ANY college vetting on him....wow.......Condi Rice runs laps around Barack for wisdom, intelligence and getting it done......You liberals are whiners....you cry that freedoms aren't fair while this guy in the white house steals your freedom with the NDAA and steals with his Wall Street and Chicago chumps.......Defend him sickos!

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
Well, well, well... look what a little digging netted. Here is an article from kuna.net (Kuwait News Agency) quoting General Ham. This just gets more interesting all the time.

from 4/23/12

"General Carter Ham warned Monday against a real danger in the African continent resulted from smuggling of large quantities of weapons out of Libya."

Arms Smuggling from Libya Threatens Africa--Africom Commander

Apparently General Carter Ham has been relieved as AFRICOM commander and is apparently going to retire. He is to be replaced by Gen. David Rodriguez.

There are rumors he went "rogue" concerning the stand down order and had Spec Ops teams ready to go into Benghazi and was relieved of duty by his second in command.

Of course Panetta said it was just "routine succession planning." Army Chief of Staff Gen. Dempsey said the rumors were completely false.

I did a search and didn't see these articles posted.

The plot thickens....

www.stripes.com...

www.thedailysheeple.com...

times247.com...

www.examiner.com...

well duh, kinda hard to get rid of links to gun smuggling if you send help to keep him alive? hahaha it wasnt an accident people, wasnt a terrorist plot, i wouldnt be damn surprised if the ones attacking were not cia themselves. welcome to the black market of nation building. he got what was comming to him, thousands of people died or were shot with those guns in a planned coup with rebels. lets just hope the same is returned to obama, he knows whats going on, he just bailed out his buddy running guns to mexico.

Originally posted by antonia
reply to post by milominderbinder

 

This is one thing I don't understand, if there is anything you can get obama on it's F&F. Perhaps the news cycle for that has run it's course though so Fox isn't keen on touching it? F&F could be verified, this can't, but I will concede that even if this is true it may be difficult to get verification as that documentation is likely to be classified.

Exactly. It's a shame...this administration has some very REAL problems and has engaged in some very REAL activities which are disturbing to say the least. The NDAA, the NDRA, F&F, are few of these.

Unfortunately, those most opposed to Obama make themselves seem far less than credible by being so "outraged" at things that they have ZERO EVIDENCE of ever having occurred in the first place. The sad part is that in the hype of a bunch of unsubstantiated allegations about Benghazi the whole country forgets about the things that they COULD ACTUALLY hope to hold the gov't responsible for.

Here's a piece with the President commenting on the Benghazi attack from this past weekend:

Obama takes 'offense' at Benghazi claims

President Obama says his administration is still investigating the attack on U.S. Consulate in Libya, and is offended at suggestions that it did not do enough to protect American targets there.

"Anytime a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans who were serving our country get killed, we have to figure out what happened and fix it," Obama said in a taped interview with MSNBC's "Morning Joe."

"But," he added, "I do take offense with some suggestion that in any way, we haven't tried to make sure that the American people knew as the information was coming in what we believed."

There is so much very slanted blogs, hitpieces etc, on both sides of this issue, so I am doing my best to avoid the noise. All I want is the truth, and I still can't help but think it is being withheld from the public.

I believe that pieces of the puzzle are still surfacing despite the efforts to play down what happened in Benghazi, and I hope that more and more folks who have a conscience will let the truth surface.

If not for the public, at least for the family's of those who lost their lives that day.

A decent timeline of events can be seen in Brett Baier's special report from this past weekend, which includes updated information from the past week.



Add in a couple more pieces which are the two top dogs .. AFRICOM Gen Ham (relieved, now reported to be retiring), and the Fleet Commander Rear Adm. Charles M. Gaouette being replaced (pending the outcome of an internal investigation into undisclosed allegations of inappropriate judgment.)

This is starting to sound, at least in my mind, how the initial response when the F&F scandal erupted and alot of the key players were suddenly reassigned to DC or other areas...

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by antonia
reply to post by milominderbinder

 

This is one thing I don't understand, if there is anything you can get obama on it's F&F. Perhaps the news cycle for that has run it's course though so Fox isn't keen on touching it? F&F could be verified, this can't, but I will concede that even if this is true it may be difficult to get verification as that documentation is likely to be classified.

Exactly. It's a shame...this administration has some very REAL problems and has engaged in some very REAL activities which are disturbing to say the least. The NDAA, the NDRA, F&F, are few of these.

Unfortunately, those most opposed to Obama make themselves seem far less than credible by being so "outraged" at things that they have ZERO EVIDENCE of ever having occurred in the first place. The sad part is that in the hype of a bunch of unsubstantiated allegations about Benghazi the whole country forgets about the things that they COULD ACTUALLY hope to hold the gov't responsible for.

I am always shocked when I bring up the NDAA to friends/family and they have no idea what I am talking about; then again it wasn't until July when I learned about NDAA. That being said when one explains NDAA to people and share non-partisan documentation of the impact of NDAA they are shocked and ask "how did this happen?" Then you share the story of Brandon Raub with them and cite non-partisan, well-respected media coverage of that ordeal and, if they're really interested, share an audio/video interview with Raub explaining his ordeal and they don't understand how this can happen in America, especially by a man whose purported principles value American rights and not voiding American rights.

Originally posted by ~widowmaker~
well duh, kinda hard to get rid of links to gun smuggling if you send help to keep him alive? hahaha it wasnt an accident people, wasnt a terrorist plot, i wouldnt be damn surprised if the ones attacking were not cia themselves. welcome to the black market of nation building. he got what was comming to him, thousands of people died or were shot with those guns in a planned coup with rebels. lets just hope the same is returned to obama, he knows whats going on, he just bailed out his buddy running guns to mexico.

Thank you for being grounded in reality.

It always blows me away how people still cling to this "good guys vs. bad guys" worldview. I just don't get it.

I'm all in FAVOR of considering alternative hypotheses to see if they "fit" better than the "official stories" given just how many holes those "official stories" tend to have in them. But I just don't understand how people can latch onto wispy threads of conjecture and then start VEHEMENTLY defending it as "fact".

For example, here are A WHOLE BUNCH of alternate hypotheses that I think COULD BE true:

1. As you indicated, the attack was orchestrated by any one of our 72 different intelligence agencies in the United States. This could have been done for reasons as diverse as creating a panic to justify further military action to being a plot of revenge because Stevens was attempting to OPPOSE further military action.

2. Mossad was behind the attack as a means to influence the presidential election so Netanyahu can get his WWIII he's been pushing for so badly.

3. It was NEITHER a product of a "spontaneous riot" NOR a pre-planned and expertly executed "terrorist attack"...but rather a hybrid of the two. It has been noted how in the video of the attack the Libyan guys "looked drunk". Well...that sort of rules out extremist groups of Muslim fundamentalists, doesn't it? The way get people to ACTUALLY blow themselves up or engage in any activity which puts their own lives in danger is via a LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THEIR RELIGIOUS TEXTS. I'm pretty sure the Qu'ran says you can't be boozing it up. What if these guys were just sort of Libya's version of "gangbangers" who happened to be half in the bag when they flipped on TV and saw riots happening IN OTHER CITIES IN THE MIDDLE EAST? It's not hard to imagine they SPONTANEOUSLY REACTED to what they saw happening ELSEWHERE and THEN decided to SPONTANEOUSLY engage in a TERRORIST ATTACK. RPG's might be hard to come by in LA or NY...but they are laying ALL OVER the Middle East. It's not far fetched to think that random thugs might have picked one up during the chaos of the civil war.

4. What if the ENTIRE ACTION IN LIBYA TO OVERTHROW GHADAFFI in the first place was undertaken without Obama's order to do so? What if Obama SPECIFICALLY ordered our intelligence agencies NOT TO DO IT...and they DID IT ANYWAYS? That would leave him in the position of EITHER trying to play it off as though it was "his decision" OR telling the whole world that the United States has undergone a coup d'état and that it's military and intelligence communities have gone rogue...thus endangering the lives of every single American in the World and paving the way for Russia and China to garner UN support for disarming the United States?? Let's just imagine that this was what REALLY happened for second. Is it plausible to think that a furious Obama might have told the CIA and NATO that they were on their own and that the US wasn't going to send in 19 yr old farm boys from Tennessee and Nebraska to die in order to bail out the CIA...AGAIN!! Maybe he was just keeping his promise to them and showing the CIA that they WILL NOT act as a rogue agency which is not in any manner accountable to the people's elected representatives. Just a thought.

The truth is that WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED and it's pretty unlikely WE WILL EVER KNOW.

However...why don't those who are concerned about this JUST STICK TO CALLING FOR A REAL AND COMPLETE EXPLANATION instead of arbitrarily declare that they "know what happened" or can "personally guarantee" things WITHOUT HAVING ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER. I can think of ALL KINDS of things that "might" have happened...but that DOESN'T mean that they ACTUALLY HAPPENED.

Step #1 is FINDING THE EVIDENCE, DOCUMENTS AND DATA.
Step #2 is FORMING A CONCLUSION BASED UPON THAT EVIDENCE, DOCUMENTS, AND DATA.
Step #3 is WILLINGLY CHANGING OR MODIFYING YOUR CONCLUSION IF/WHEN NEW AND/OR MORE CREDIBLE EVIDENCE, DOCUMENTS, AND DATA BECOMES AVAILABLE.

It's called the Scientific Method...and it's remarkably useful. Instead, we have about 150 million people who START with the conclusion they WISH WAS TRUE...and then pretty much stop thinking right there and focus their efforts on just yelling their ill-formed "conclusion" at the top of their lungs.

Possibly related?

New Libya PM presents cabinet in test of democracy

Zeidan was elected on October 14 after his predecessor, Mustafa Abu Shagur, was dismissed in a vote of no confidence when the GNC rejected his cabinet line-up as unrepresentative of Libya's numerous factions.

Zeidan nominated Ali Aujli, Libya's ambassador to the United States, as foreign minister

Just posting in case the latest Libyan government turnover is somehow connected to what happened in Benghazi..



Found a lengthy article on the Secy State Clinton and her foreign policy vision..

Clinton Seeks Fundamental Changes in American Foreign Policy

Images of the charred U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, flashed around the world as U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton entered the Treaty Room in Washington and spoke about the deaths of four Americans there.
“Today, many Americans are asking, indeed I asked myself, how could this happen?” Clinton said. “How could this happen in a country we helped liberate in a city we helped save from destruction? This question reflects just how complicated and at times how confounding the world can be.”
As she visits Algeria and the Balkans on what may be one of her last overseas trips as the nation’s top diplomat, Clinton is also confronting her legacy, and whether it will be framed by the Benghazi tragedy or her vision that American foreign policy in the 21st Century must utilize social media, coalition- building and export promotion as well as military power.

Originally posted by JacKatMtn

There is so much very slanted blogs, hitpieces etc, on both sides of this issue, so I am doing my best to avoid the noise. All I want is the truth, and I still can't help but think it is being withheld from the public.

I believe that pieces of the puzzle are still surfacing despite the efforts to play down what happened in Benghazi, and I hope that more and more folks who have a conscience will let the truth surface.

If not for the public, at least for the family's of those who lost their lives that day.

A decent timeline of events can be seen in Brett Baier's special report from this past weekend, which includes updated information from the past week.

I totally agree and think that there are still A LOT of unanswered questions. However...I think we really, REALLY, need to be cautious on how much de facto sympathy we give the four Americans who were killed there. I can't COUNT how many times people have likened them or even outright called them "our troops". These guys were NOT "troops". All four them were CIA operatives...they weren't your 20 yr old nephew or the guy you work with who just got called up on active duty.

That being said...we need to remember just how gray those intelligence agencies REALLY are. The only thing we know FOR SURE is that Chris Stevens caused the deaths of 50,000 civilians by orchestrating a civil war as an illegal alien about a year and half before being named "ambassador".

What we DON'T KNOW is who the other players might have really been. What if Stevens was also acting as a double agent for Israel or the KGB? Remember FBI agent Robert Hanssen and hottie Anna Chapman? Now...given the recent backlash and troubles in the Middle East...CAN YOU IMAGINE the chaos that would ensue if the US admitted such a thing in a country whose government we just toppled?

What if the ol' CIA just ran Libya as their own operation and didn't even bother to tell the President until after the civil war was nicely underway? I know that if I was Obama I'd be MIGHTY pissed that the CIA was expecting me to order American military intervention to clean up the mess they made. In fact, if that was the case...I might even turn around and tell the CIA to go screw themselves in regards to "protecting the embassy". What...we should send in a couple hundred poor kids (YOUR friends, relatives, and neighbors) to quite possibly die or be maimed to go save four CIA agents so they can go kill 50,000 civilians in Syria next?

I'm not saying that any of that DID happen...but I am saying that since the ONLY THINGS we know for certain about these guys indicates that they were deeply involved in the most insidious types of warfare known to mankind...we shouldn't just automatically feel so bad for them, because doing so skews our judgement for if and when the evidence DOES come to light.

Remember...the CIA are the same people who brought you the "intelligence" that got us involved in the Iraq war, armed the Afghan Mujahideen, lied to you about the Gulf of Tonkin incident, put the Assad family in power in Syria, armed and funded Saddam Hussein, and plays a large but vaguely defined "War on Drugs", continued looking for Bin Laden in Afghanistan for about 8 years after late-night comedians started joking about him being in Pakistan, and decided that torturing prisoners wasn't such a bad idea after all.

Seriously...isn't it time we stopped regarding the CIA as being "Americans" in the traditional sense?

reply to post by milominderbinder

The only thing we know FOR SURE is that Chris Stevens caused the deaths of 50,000 civilians by orchestrating a civil war as an illegal alien about a year and half before being named "ambassador".

What we DON'T KNOW is who the other players might have really been. What if Stevens was also acting as a double agent for Israel or the KGB? Remember FBI agent Robert Hanssen and hottie Anna Chapman?

I think your post is slanderous - a hit piece intended to taint the reputations of those who died needlessly at Benghazi at the hands of an inept and corrupted presidency!

First you call Chris Steven's a mass murderer - then he's a traitor (and by implication so were his confreres) who is to be crudely compared to the likes of real traitors such as "Robert Hanssen and 'hottie'? Anna Chapman"! Why didn't you throw J Pollard in there for extra measure?


And this unpatriotic - anti-American remark isn't even worthy of a comment -->

Seriously...isn't it time we stopped regarding the CIA as being "Americans" in the traditional sense?

I think your post is slanderous - a hit piece intended to taint the reputations of those who died needlessly at Benghazi at the hands of an inept and corrupted presidency!

Just as I think ^^^this statement^^^ is slanderous.

First you call Chris Steven's a mass murderer - then he's a traitor (and by implication so were his confreres) who is to be crudely compared to the likes of real traitors such as "Robert Hanssen and 'hottie'? Anna Chapman"! Why didn't you throw J Pollard in there for extra measure?

Read the post again. I at no time called Chris Stevens a traitor. I merely ran a HYPOTHETICAL situation by as means to illustrate HOW LITTLE ANY OF US ACTUALLY KNOWS ABOUT WHAT WENT ON IN BENGHAZI.

Likewise...I did NOT call Chris Steven's a mass murderer. I called him a terrorist who played a significant role in funding, arming, and orchestrating a civil war in which 50,000 civilians died in order to overthrow the most prosperous, stable, and civili-rights oriented government on the African Continent while being in the country as an illegal alien. Those are all factual statements which I made, and points which many Stevens supporters actually BRAG about.


And this unpatriotic - anti-American remark isn't even worthy of a comment -->

Seriously...isn't it time we stopped regarding the CIA as being "Americans" in the traditional sense?

In what way? Do you LIKE invading countries under false pretenses? Are you in favor putting the Assad family in power? Do you think it's just swell to send 58,000 Americans to die in Vietnam over an event that never even happened?

I know it's a hard pill to swallow...but these are the facts of what has transpired since WWII. The longer it takes for Americans to admit...the more Americans will die for no good reason at all.

reply to post by NickDC202


there was no WELL ORGANIZED campaign. The President and Hillary said "we are looking into it" the Ambassador jumped the gun and said it was the video -- because 50 miles away, there were protests about the video.

I initially figured it was about US military attacks around the world on Muslim people.

But the motivation was not known, and from the transcripts I've read, this "nailing it to the wall and saying it was the video" was done by Fox News and other outlets jumping on the response. You've heard a lot more reporting of the reporting than you've heard ANY from the White House.

I read it, and the Government responded to criticisms by reclassifying, and retracting and admitting that in Libya -- it's really hard to tell what is going on.

So I'm not seeing a conspiracy to paint the incident from anyone but the usual NeoCons, Breitbart and Fox News.

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst
reply to post by NickDC202

 

there was no WELL ORGANIZED campaign. The President and Hillary said "we are looking into it" the Ambassador jumped the gun and said it was the video -- because 50 miles away, there were protests about the video.

I initially figured it was about US military attacks around the world on Muslim people.

But the motivation was not known, and from the transcripts I've read, this "nailing it to the wall and saying it was the video" was done by Fox News and other outlets jumping on the response. You've heard a lot more reporting of the reporting than you've heard ANY from the White House.

I read it, and the Government responded to criticisms by reclassifying, and retracting and admitting that in Libya -- it's really hard to tell what is going on.

So I'm not seeing a conspiracy to paint the incident from anyone but the usual NeoCons, Breitbart and Fox News.

That all sounds good until you give it a little thought.
The White House spokesman was giving everyone the message that this was about 'the video' five days afterward. That would be okay, if at that point they had ANY indication that what happened was related to 'the video'. The White House knew that it was a terrorist attack before the attack was over. So Jay Carney was sent out there to lie to the American people.

reply to post by milominderbinder

All four them were CIA operatives...

Not sure that I would call the two ex-Seals CIA operatives. They were employed by a private security firm and were listed in the statement by the State Department as being there as security to protect diplomatic personnel.

State Dept

Even if they had been CIA employees, I would hesitate to call them CIA operatives.

Originally posted by JacKatMtn
Here's a piece with the President commenting on the Benghazi attack from this past weekend:

Obama takes 'offense' at Benghazi claims

President Obama says his administration is still investigating the attack on U.S. Consulate in Libya, and is offended at suggestions that it did not do enough to protect American targets there.

"Anytime a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans who were serving our country get killed, we have to figure out what happened and fix it," Obama said in a taped interview with MSNBC's "Morning Joe."

"But," he added, "I do take offense with some suggestion that in any way, we haven't tried to make sure that the American people knew as the information was coming in what we believed."

There is so much very slanted blogs, hitpieces etc, on both sides of this issue, so I am doing my best to avoid the noise. All I want is the truth, and I still can't help but think it is being withheld from the public.

I believe that pieces of the puzzle are still surfacing despite the efforts to play down what happened in Benghazi, and I hope that more and more folks who have a conscience will let the truth surface.

If not for the public, at least for the family's of those who lost their lives that day.

A decent timeline of events can be seen in Brett Baier's special report from this past weekend, which includes updated information from the past week.

Add in a couple more pieces which are the two top dogs .. AFRICOM Gen Ham (relieved, now reported to be retiring), and the Fleet Commander Rear Adm. Charles M. Gaouette being replaced (pending the outcome of an internal investigation into undisclosed allegations of inappropriate judgment.)

This is starting to sound, at least in my mind, how the initial response when the F&F scandal erupted and alot of the key players were suddenly reassigned to DC or other areas...

I believe RADM Gauette the Stennis Strike Group commander is a different issue. When the Benghazi attack happened, the Stennis group was still transiting the Pacific and made a Malaysia port call, 30Sep-04Oct.

Now he could've strongly voice his opinion concerning the lack of response to the attack and the wrong person heard it and decided to make him go away.

reply to post by milominderbinder


Ok for those of you who read too much about black flags, conspiracy theories, etc etc here on ATS. The former seals were hired as independent contractors to work for the CIA to help in tracking down shoulder fired missiles that disappeared when Ghadaffi fell, What is the big seceret. Most foreign based security forces are made up of exmilitary around the world " soldiers for hire" do you think they want old mall cops. Please be serious, after my enlisted time, I was recruited and employed either directly or indirectly by the CIA, Homeland Defense or other US agencies. Nothing out of the ordinary.

The major issue is our POTUS failed to send aid and support to american citizens under threat.

reply to post by milominderbinder


Well I do want you to know that I never for a moment thought Stevens was totally innocent in all this 'BUT'......so, please see my post on it here. You will find that we are actually much in agreement except for the "mass murderer" and possible "double agent scenario" ..........

EXCERPT 1

By now everyone knows (or should know) that BH Obama, has lied through his teeth regarding the role played by the US government with respect to the smuggling of armaments and munitions to al Qaeda in Libya and Syria. It seems that Chris Stevens really was working with the CIA (as some here have suggested) and it also appears that the CIA provided arms and ammunition to al Qaeda and to several other Islamic jihadist's such as the Muslim Brotherhood, the purpose of which was to infiltrate, and to take down several targeted governments in the middle-east. All this with the direct knowledge of the president.

EXCERPT 2

SO - The big question here is - was Chris Stevens in Benghazi to head up a US gun running operation to al Qaida jihadi's - similar to Fast and Furious - only on a much greater scale? In other words, was Ambassador Stevens the US operational officer in a gunrunning operation to al Qaida linked groups - an operation gone sour? And more importantly - did BHO - along with the cooperation of the CIA - personally and deliberately set up Stevens and the others, Glen Doherty, Tyrone Woods and Sean Smith to die? - as other recent threads of mine seem to suggest See here --> The real reason behind Benghazigate - Was Obama gun-walking arms to jihadists?
and here --> BHObama PERSONALLY Arranged Benghazi Trip That Resulted In Murder Of US AMB Chris Stevens and others
Looks that way from here!

edit on 30-10-2012 by Vitruvian because: txt

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst
reply to post by NickDC202

 

there was no WELL ORGANIZED campaign. The President and Hillary said "we are looking into it" the Ambassador jumped the gun and said it was the video -- because 50 miles away, there were protests about the video.

I initially figured it was about US military attacks around the world on Muslim people.

But the motivation was not known, and from the transcripts I've read, this "nailing it to the wall and saying it was the video" was done by Fox News and other outlets jumping on the response. You've heard a lot more reporting of the reporting than you've heard ANY from the White House.

I read it, and the Government responded to criticisms by reclassifying, and retracting and admitting that in Libya -- it's really hard to tell what is going on.

So I'm not seeing a conspiracy to paint the incident from anyone but the usual NeoCons, Breitbart and Fox News.

Pretty much.