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

page: 5
116
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 02:39 PM
link   
The part that gets me the most is the mortar site was laser targeted with plenty of time for a gunship, fighter/bomber or drone to take it out.
That is blatantly inept and I do not buy any "fog of war" argument Panetta or anyone else wants to feed me.

Those that want to bury this or discredit intel that makes Obama look bad should be ashamed.
I will also say that this new report laying mistakes at the feet of the CIA makes me lose faith in Petreus too.




posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 02:39 PM
link   
There was some interesting testimony given to Congress to compare and contrast this to. Vitruvian linked to it in another thread related to this:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Originally posted by Vitruvian
... Very significant testimony was presented to the House Oversite Committee - Daryl Issa (again) by Ms. Charlene R. Lamb Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Programs, Bureau of Diplomatic Security
U.S. Department of State
(her actual testimony PDF) PDF - oversight.house.gov...

Text

The diplomatic compound (CIA facility?) was a lot bigger and more fortified than I imagined. It was more than 300 yards long and nearly 100 yards wide according to her testimony. There were several buildings in the compound, including a Tactical Operations Center (TOC). According to her testimony:


When the attack began, a Diplomatic Security agent working in the Tactical Operations Center immediately activated the Imminent Danger Notification System and made an emergency announcement over the PA. Based on our security protocols, he also alerted the annex U.S. quick reaction security team stationed nearby, the Libyan 17th February Brigade, Embassy Tripoli, and the Diplomatic Security Command Center in Washington.

Testimony PDF on Congressional site

So they didn't just hear shots at the CIA annex, they were actually officially alerted. A lot of the other details of her testimony confirm elements of the Fox news story though. Essentially, the Fox news story mostly adds in some missing details.

There really only seem to be a few possible reasons why they would have been told to stand down:

1. They didn't want to send more people into danger.

2. The personnel that would have been sent to help had more important things to do (like guarding the 20,000 MANPAD missiles mentioned)...

3. Everything was going according to plan, and they didn't want other personnel to unknowingly screw up the plan.

#1 and #2 do not explain why they wouldn't fire from the gunship at a target that had already been painted with a laser.

#3 seems to fit what happened the best, but maybe there are other explanations like incompetence.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 02:44 PM
link   
It makes one wonder if the so called film was part of the whole operation.


He continued, going over the newly-released documents that prove the administration was alerted to what was really happening in Libya before spinning a story about a YouTube video:

Now we have [the] beginning of the truth on Benghazi. Five days into the Benghazi scandal, when no one was saying anything, I presented a theory…I told you that [Ambassador Stevens] was involved in running guns, and he was running guns to al-Qaeda in Libya, and he was running guns through Turkey into Syria. And whether it was a deal that went bad, I don’t know, but that’s what happened. And the White House knew…And while everyone else was arguing about whether it was a videotape or not, we were furthering the story.

Today we have evidence that is staggering. We now have a memo posted [at] TheBlaze…to the White House two hoursafter the attacks began. Last night on the TV show I laid it out again…exactly what happened, when. At 1:00, or 12:54 in the afternoon on September 11, the White House was warned that somebody was watching the Benghazi safe house– and so you know, do not let any member of the press get away with calling this an embassy safe house. It is not. It was a CIA safe house. Now why, in the most dangerous place in one of the most dangerous parts of the world, on Sept. 11…why would he be at a CIA safe house? …We now know he was having dinner with the general counsel of Turkey. [Emphasis added]
teapartyorg.ning.com...
Beck reminded that it has been widely reported that President Obama has a close relationship with the Turkish prime minister, before continuing:

An hour after that, the Turkish ambassador leaves through the front door and the front gate, unmolested.

Now you tell me– why was the Turkish general counsel there? …

Why was it so important on Sept. 11 to go to the most dangerous city, into a CIA safe house?

An "hour" after he leaves, the fight begins.

We now know that the White House– somebody, the military, somebody, sent a drone.

So there was a live video feed of what was going on.

They’re watching it in the State Department, they’re watching it at the Pentagon, they’re watching it at Langley, and they’re watching it in the Situation Room.

At 5:00 in the afternoon, Leon Panetta has a meeting with the president of the United States.

The first email comes at 4:05.

So the Secretary of Defense arrives at the White House to have a meeting with the president 55 minutes after the Situation Room and everybody else gets an email saying, ‘Libya, the safe house is under attack.”


and yes,

This president is on the wrong side.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vitruvian

Originally posted by Stormdancer777


HUH> 57?
Weird


Yea - that's the source of Barack Hussein Obama's "slip of the tongue" stupid remark when he said that he had traveled to all 57 states in the United States..................He had the idea of 57 Islamic states in his secretly Muslim mind.
edit on 26-10-2012 by Vitruvian because: txt


He has those slips every so often and the way they roll off his tongue is telling.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by howmuch4another
The part that gets me the most is the mortar site was laser targeted with plenty of time for a gunship, fighter/bomber or drone to take it out.
That is blatantly inept and I do not buy any "fog of war" argument Panetta or anyone else wants to feed me.

Those that want to bury this or discredit intel that makes Obama look bad should be ashamed.
I will also say that this new report laying mistakes at the feet of the CIA makes me lose faith in Petreus too.


Certainly Obama or who ever was not "bestest buddy and big toe" that day.

Sounds like on of those flicks like Plausible Deniability or something.

Thye all may have been sacrificed to make MBH feel a little better about Osama.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by howmuch4another
The part that gets me the most is the mortar site was laser targeted with plenty of time for a gunship, fighter/bomber or drone to take it out.
That is blatantly inept and I do not buy any "fog of war" argument Panetta or anyone else wants to feed me.

Those that want to bury this or discredit intel that makes Obama look bad should be ashamed.
I will also say that this new report laying mistakes at the feet of the CIA makes me lose faith in Petreus too.


The part that gets me is how and when did our government get overthrown and by who?



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   
IKONOKLAST -

Yea - thanks for reminding us of that important testimony -
For those who need the actual research material - go HERE
At around the 42 min. mark of part 2 in the 2 part videos on the Issa hearings you see her rather informative testimony.

This is her testifying:

Ms. Charlene R. Lamb (testimony)
Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Programs, Bureau of Diplomatic Security
U.S. Department of State
PDF
edit on 26-10-2012 by Vitruvian because: Txt



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stormdancer777

Originally posted by howmuch4another
The part that gets me the most is the mortar site was laser targeted with plenty of time for a gunship, fighter/bomber or drone to take it out.
That is blatantly inept and I do not buy any "fog of war" argument Panetta or anyone else wants to feed me.

Those that want to bury this or discredit intel that makes Obama look bad should be ashamed.
I will also say that this new report laying mistakes at the feet of the CIA makes me lose faith in Petreus too.


The part that gets me is how and when did our government get overthrown and by who?


Well that certainly gets "right to it" doesn't it!



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 02:54 PM
link   
Apparently the father is as brave as the son

Father of Ty Woods, Slain SEAL: White House Told 'Pack of Lies'; 'They are the Murderers of My Son'


If, in fact, those people in the White House were as courageous, and had the moral strength that my son Ty had, immediately, within minutes of when they found there was the first attack, they would have stepped--they would have given permission, not denied permission, for those C-130s to have gone up there. And this is exact--I don't know much about weapons, but it's coming out right now that they actually had laser targets focused on the mortars being sent to kill my son and they refused to pull the trigger. They refused to send those C-130s.

www.breitbart.com... &utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BreitbartFeed+%28Breitbart+Feed%29



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 03:15 PM
link   
I'd seen a couple comments across the media and such suggesting the CIA Compound and Consulate Compound were some distance apart. Well, Yes...and No...



Overhead of both.



Close overhead of CIA Compound

I guess everyone can make their own judgement from the photos. I wouldn't call it that far personally?



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 03:18 PM
link   
Stormdancer777, like you I wonder how this is tied to the youtube film. I believe the answer lies in why we saw Guy Fawkes masks in Egypt. Time everything where they hide gun running using Libya and Turkey, with international Occupy elements stirring up other locations using the film. Therefore this Administration can look credible when they blame the film.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Here's an article with audio of President Obama's interview on a Philly radio show..

It was posted today, but I am unsure if this was before or after this latest breaking news..

After listening to the tape, I would lean towards this interview occurring before the FNC news..


Obama On Libya: "We Don't Play Politics When It Comes To American National Security"

In an interview on the Philadelphia radio talk show host Michael Smerconish, President Obama said his administration is not playing politics with Libya.

"What's true is that the intelligence was coming in and evolving as more information came up," Obama said when Smerconish asked if his statements were based on the facts at the time.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 03:35 PM
link   
reply to post by JacKatMtn
 


But please bear in mind that Michael Smerconish is PRO -BAMA all the wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy. So take the interview (content notwithstanding) with a G of S

They don't come any more liberal than "Smirky"



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 04:09 PM
link   
The "What" happened seems fairly well known now by the facts coming out,

Its no longer credible to claim the film and protesters did the deed, no longer credible too claim no knowledge by whitehouse or other departments, no longer credible to claim no targets were presented, no longer credible to claim nothing could have been done to save these people.

Bengazi now becomes a question of "Why?"

Why did the administration for lack of better evidence want these people dead?

I am believing its murder by proxy at this point.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Phoenix
 

Don't forget to ask...why the AQ fighters did this. The last time American positions were close to being over-run in a situation known very well was Mogadishu, Somalia and despite Clinton seeming weak at the time....assets moved in are just WILD guess territory to have killed over 1000 Somali's for the men we lost. They could have expected the same here......why didn't they? Were they told in advance that the forces in Italy wouldn't move for a Consulate about to fall? They took a *HUGE* risk....for what?

I just hope that question doesn't get lost in the jumble. This still makes no sense from the other side for the planned and well executed nature of the attack everyone now agrees this was. For......nothing? Naww... I don't buy it. Whatever the 'Why' is, may well be the key to the whole thing in one answer.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 04:27 PM
link   
I just hopped on to add this. It should have it's own thread by rights.

AC-130U Gunship was On-Scene in Benghazi, Obama Admin Refused to Let It Fire (Updated)


pjmedia.com...


The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Specter gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights. The fighting at the CIA annex went on for more than four hours — enough time for any planes based in Sigonella Air base, just 480 miles away, to arrive. Fox News has also learned that two separate Tier One Special operations forces were told to wait, among them Delta Force operators.


If this has already been shared, my bad,

I stand with the Father of the Navy Seal who wants to know: :"Who made the decision not a save my son?


edit on 10/26/2012 by sad_eyed_lady because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 04:40 PM
link   
www.state.gov...

The Fox report adds more detail to the State Departments Background Briefing on Libya. Including the machine guns on the roof.

"And then there was a barracks. The barracks is a small house by the front gate, the main gate of the compound. In that barracks is a Libyan security force which I’ll describe in a minute. Security on the compound consists of five Diplomatic Security special agents and four members of the Libyan Government security force, which I will henceforth call the 17th February Brigade. It is a militia, a friendly militia, which has basically been deputized by the Libyan Government to serve as our security, our host government security. In addition to all those, there is an additional security force at another U.S. compound two kilometers away. It serves as a rapid reaction force, a quick reaction security team – a quick reaction security team, okay?"

Woods and Doherty was part of the Quick Reaction Team, and they were told to stand down.

"They come up to a knot of men in an adjacent compound, and one of the men signals them to turn into that compound. They agents at that point smell a rat, and they step on it. They have taken some fire already. At this point, they take very heavy fire as they go by this group of men. They take direct fire from AK-47s from about two feet away. The men also throw hand grenades or gelignite bombs under – at the vehicle and under it. At this point, the armored vehicle is extremely heavily impacted, but it’s still holding. There are two flat tires, but they’re still rolling. And they continue far down the block toward the crowds and far down several blocks to the crowd – to another crowd where this road t-bones into a main road. There is a crowd there. They pass through the crowd and on – turn right onto this main road. This main road is completely choked with traffic, enormous traffic jam typical for, I think, that time of night in that part of town. There are shops along the road there and so on.

Rather than get stuck in the traffic, the agents careen their car over the median – there is a median, a grassy median – and into the opposing traffic, and they go counter-flow until they emerge into a more lightly trafficked area and ultimately make their way to the annex.

Once at the annex, the annex has its own security – a security force there. There are people at the annex. The guys in the car join the defense at the annex. They take up firing positions on the roof – some of them do – and other firing positions around the annex. The annex is, at this time, also taking fire and does take fire intermittently, on and off, for the next several hours. The fire consists of AK-47s but also RPGs, and it’s, at times, quite intense."

edit on 26-10-2012 by 2gd2btru because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by sad_eyed_lady
 

That just crosses into willful omission of action leading directly to their deaths.

There may be REAL REAL good reasons Hillary is rumored to be retaining legal counsel. If this all proves out to be as it's being reported, I just cannot imagine how this ends well for those who were in the chain of command to this event. Wow...

On station?! I want to hear from the air crew. Pics or it didn't happen...I mean the accusation and what this means is THAT earth shattering in my opinion. Watergate was a minor petty theft by comparison. Men didn't die there.



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by sad_eyed_lady


I stand with the Father of the Navy Seal who wants to know: :"Who made the decision not a save my son?


edit on 10/26/2012 by sad_eyed_lady because: (no reason given)


He already knows the answer to this. Why aren't the parents of children killed fighting ridiculous wars in Afghanistan, and Iraq asking the same thing?
edit on 26-10-2012 by Sissel because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by sad_eyed_lady
 

That just crosses into willful omission of action leading directly to their deaths.

There may be REAL REAL good reasons Hillary is rumored to be retaining legal counsel. If this all proves out to be as it's being reported, I just cannot imagine how this ends well for those who were in the chain of command to this event. Wow...

On station?! I want to hear from the air crew. Pics or it didn't happen...I mean the accusation and what this means is THAT earth shattering in my opinion. Watergate was a minor petty theft by comparison. Men didn't die there.



Wow! I missed the update on page 2:

pjmedia.com...

This is from a retired Delta who said that ground personnel were painting the target means there was a Spectre on station. So here is his statement:


Having spent a good bit of time nursing a GLD (ground Laser Designator) in several garden spots around the world, something from the report jumped out at me. One of the former SEALs was actively painting the target. That means that Specter WAS ON STATION! Probably an AC130U. A ground laser designator is not a briefing pointer laser. You do not “paint” a target until the weapons system/designator is synched; which means that the AC130 was on station. Only two places could have called off the attack at that point; the WH situation command (based on POTUS direction) or AFRICOM commander based on information directly from the target area. If the AC130 never left Sigonella (as Penetta [sic] says) that means that the Predator that was filming the whole thing was armed. If that SEAL was actively “painting” a target; something was on station to engage! And the decision to stand down goes directly to POTUS!


Thanks Obama, sure looks like you killed more than Bin Laden.


As for pics or it did happen. Well, do you think any footage shot by a Predator controller or AC130 Pilot will see the light of day? I fear for the lives of any living soldier involved in this deed.

more background here:
www.blackfive.net...



edit on 10/26/2012 by sad_eyed_lady because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
116
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join