consulate in Benghazi

[Tgace]

It's the Obamanation...Blame Bush.

 

[Makalakumu]

My favorite conspiracy theory so far is that Obama orchastrated this thing to have an October Surprise, to have the ambassedor captured and negotiate a release, but it didn't work out right. The ambassador and Americans fought to hard and got everyone killed. That's why the ambassador was being dragged out of the embassy with his cell phone in his mouth.

 

[Big Don]

Sorry Don, you don't get to have it both ways. If in your arguement you bring up Bush, then you shouldn't squack and cry foul when that argument is turned against you.

As far as Benghazi, once again you don't know what happened. Try waiting for facts before you start condemning people, even politicians you don't like. As far as smart diplomacy, Clinton and Obama have done a far better job than the previous administration...especially if you use American body counts as a marker.

You could get a job in the media! Look upthread a bit, I didn't start throwing Bush in...

 

[CanuckMA]

Smart Diplomacy does NOT include letting your ambassadors get murdered and your consulates stormed.

Smart diplomacy also does not include using Specter Gunships to fire at a handfull of terrorists in the middle of a crowd like some seem to be suggesting.

Bottom line is that embasies can never be adequately protected against concerted attacks without the help of the local authorities.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Smart diplomacy also does not include using Specter Gunships to fire at a handfull of terrorists in the middle of a crowd like some seem to be suggesting.

Difficult to say. If they were isolated, then yes. If literally in a crowd of otherwise-innocent people, then no.

Bottom line is that embasies can never be adequately protected against concerted attacks without the help of the local authorities.

US Embassies have a variety of defensive capabilities, including a US Marine detachment. They had none. They *reportedly* had requested such aid in the weeks leading up to the attack and were denied, for what appears to be political reasons. This, in hindsight, would appear to be a stupid decision on the part of the State Department, at the very least. I do not know of the reports are true, but reporting so far suggests that there is some merit to the accusations. I hope we learn more about it.

"They told (us) to open up the Embassy, or "we'll blow you away." And then they looked up and saw the Marines on the roof with the really big guns, and they said in Somali, "Igaralli ahow," Which mean "Excuse me, I didn't mean it, my mistake." ~ Karen Aquilar, in the U.S. Embassy; Mogadishu, Somalia

Two former SEALS is not enough. SEALS are great, but no replacement for a Marine Security detachment with heavy weapons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_Security_Guard

More specifically:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...rity-at-consulatethough-it-lacked-m/?page=all

U.S. defends security at consulate, though it lacked Marine guards

The senior administration official said a force of locally contracted Libyan guards was stationed outside the compound, as is standard practice, and there was “a robust security presence” inside. The guards reportedly fled as the attack intensified in the eastern Libyan city.

...

The Washington Guardian website reported Wednesday that the State Department’s own internal watchdog, its Diplomatic Security office, recently acknowledged it lacked the funding for some recommended improvements, including security training, and was instead looking for workarounds.

If you read the recent interviews, when asked specifically about security arrangements and whether or not the consulate asked for and was denied more security PRIOR to the attack, no one in the Administration will answer the question with a yes or a no. All they will say is that their first priority is to catch the bad guys. Uh, that wasn't the question. Did the consulate or did they not ask for more security, and was it or was it not denied?

Also, while not being touted by the Administration that supposedly wants to catch the bad guys, mainstream media has reported that one suspect has already been killed, another captured in Tunisia. That was days ago. Why no mention from the White House?

Yeah, lots of questions. Lots of stonewalling. I don't like the smell of this at all. And the 'Embassy life is dangerous, **** happens" response doesn't get it for me.

 

[Big Don]

 

[WC_lun]

Embassies no longer have marine detachments. Part of the cut backs made in congress. They have private contractors as security, both from the home nation and from other sources, such as retired Navy SEALS. Supposedly it is the job of the host nation to provide adequete security. Keeping in mind that Lybia lost lives of thier own, I think they did try to live up to thier part of the agreement. I do know that Lybia has increased thier security of all the western embassies now. Looks like we've also increased the security in the embassy as well, though it is kinda like shutting the gate after the cows have walked out of it.

Don, you used Bush in your arguement. Stop whining that your arguement was countered with the same point you used, whether you were the first in thread to mention Bush or not doesn't really matter.

 

[billc]

Some thoughts on Bhengazi from candidate Tom Cotton...

From wikipedia on Tom Cotton...

[h=2]Early life and education
[/h] After Dardanelle High School, he attended Harvard College, where he was as a columnist for the Harvard Crimson, and a member of the Harvard Republican Club; after graduating from Harvard magna cum laude with an A.B. in Government[SUP][1][/SUP], he went on to Harvard Law School, where he received his law degree.[SUP][2][/SUP] He served as a clerk at the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit for Judge Jerry Edwin Smith and then engaged in private practice[SUP][3][/SUP] as an attorney with the law firm Gibson Dunn & Crutcher.[SUP][4][/SUP]
[h=2] Military career[/h] In 2004, Cotton enlisted in the U.S. Army as an infantryman, and served as a leader of an infantry platoon near Baghdad.
In June 2006, Cotton gained fame after he wrote an open letter to the New York Times criticizing the paper's publication of an article detailing a Bush administration secret program monitoring terrorists’ finances in which he called for three journalists, including the Times' editor, Bill Keller, to be imprisoned for espionage.[SUP][5][/SUP] The article was widely circulated online and reprinted in full in several newspapers.[SUP][6][/SUP]
After returning from Iraq, Cotton served as a platoon leader for ceremonial functions at the Arlington National Cemetery.[SUP][7][/SUP] In 2008, he served overseas a second time as operations officer on a Provincial Reconstruction Team in Afghanistan, engaged in counterinsurgency operations.

http://www.hughhewitt.com/blog/g/e2f7d573-5017-4902-ba82-3eba30b1103c

HH: Now as you see all these reports, Tom Cotton, what sticks out with you? And we can stay on that report or anything else. What are your questions?



TC: The President says he wants to have an investigation. We don’t need an investigation. The President knows what he was doing from 4-10PM Eastern time on September 11[SUP]th[/SUP]. We know what he was doing for some of that. He was in the White House with the Secretary of Defense. He was also on the phone with Benjamin Netanyahu, who of all people would understand the need to get off the phone when you’re under attack. We had calls of distress from Tyrone Woods, the ex-SEAL, who was a CIA operative on the ground at the CIA annex in Benghazi, who was requesting air assets, and then requesting military backup. Now there was a security team that moved from Tripoli to Benghazi. I believe that that was authorized by the CIA and within their rules of engagements. But to move military assets from Italy into Libya, which is almost as close as Tripoli was to Benghazi, would require, obviously, approval of the Department of Defense. And I doubt that the Department of Defense would deny or grant such a request without taking it directly to the President. You’re talking about moving military assets into a sovereign country. So we need to know when the President was briefed on the situation in Benghazi, what the military proposed to do, what the President did in response to that briefing, because Hugh, here’s the reporting, and no one’s denied this reporting. Tyrone Woods used a ground laser designator to illuminate an enemy mortar team. For all those veterans out there, you know that infrared discipline in combat is just as important as light and noise discipline. You don’t use an infrared illuminator until you’re ready for fire support. Tyrone Woods is a Navy SEAL. A private in the infantry knows not to do that. He would not have illuminated that mortar team unless he expected air fire immediately as soon as he did so. I strongly suspect there was an armed drone, or even a Specter gunship overhead that did not fire, even though Tyrone Woods expected it to. I wanted to know who gave that order. Was it a local commander? Was it General Ham, the commander of African Command? Was it Martin Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs? Was it Leon Panetta? Or was it the President?

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Embassies no longer have marine detachments. Part of the cut backs made in congress. They have private contractors as security, both from the home nation and from other sources, such as retired Navy SEALS. Supposedly it is the job of the host nation to provide adequete security. Keeping in mind that Lybia lost lives of thier own, I think they did try to live up to thier part of the agreement. I do know that Lybia has increased thier security of all the western embassies now. Looks like we've also increased the security in the embassy as well, though it is kinda like shutting the gate after the cows have walked out of it.

Do you have some support for that statement?

http://www.mcesg.marines.mil/

MISSION
The primary mission of the Marine Security Guard (MSG) is to provide internal security at designated U.S. diplomatic and consular facilities in order to prevent the compromise of classified material vital to the national security of the United States.

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/new...eading-to-libya-to-reinforce-security-091212/

U.S. embassies, particularly in major countries and in unstable or less secure nations, usually have a resident contingent of Marine security guards. Early indications were that there were not at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. A consulate is a branch office in major cities outside the capital. These guards work under the supervision of the senior diplomatic officer at an embassy.

The main role of Marine security guards is to protect classified national security documents, according to the website of the Marine Corps Embassy Security Group, which administers the security guard mission from a Marine base in Virginia. Their secondary role is to protect U.S. citizens and U.S. government property in the event of an emergency.

The Marines began their security guard mission in 1948. They are trained at the Marine Security Guard School.

In rare cases, the Marines send a Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team, or a portion of the team, to reinforce security at embassies. They were sent to Africa, for example, in response to the 1998 terrorist attacks on the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. A FAST group also provided security aboard a Navy hospital ship in New York following the 9/11 attacks.

 

[Tgace]

 

[billc]

n would shame them:

 

[Tgace]

Ill say it again. If this was a repub administration there is no way this would not be huge news.

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Ill say it again. If this was a repub administration there is no way this would not be huge news.

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk 2

I think you will find that many agree with you.

http://www.statesmanjournal.com/art...Debra-Saunders-there-Benghazi-media-cover-up-

Before FBI investigators ventured into Benghazi, CNN reporter Arwa Damon found the journal of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, who died in Benghazi, at the mission. CNN then reported on Stevens’ concern about security in Benghazi.

From the Rose Garden the day after the attack, President Barack Obama declared, “We will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people.” Yet on Oct. 19, The New York Times reported that Ansar al-Shariah leader and suspected Benghazi ringleader Ahmed Abu Khattala was seen in a crowded Benghazi luxury hotel sipping mango juice as he claimed that no Libyan authorities had questioned him and that, by the way, he had no plans to go into hiding.

...

Now ask yourself this: If George W. Bush were president and the press didn’t know what he did on the evening of the Benghazi attack, do you think there would be the same focus in the media? I think we know the answer.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

From the New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/w...rnings-in-benghazi-attack.html?pagewanted=all

By June, Benghazi had experienced a string of assassinations as well as attacks on the Red Cross and a British envoy’s motorcade. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, who was killed in the September attack, e-mailed his superiors in Washington in August alerting them to “a security vacuum” in the city. A week before Mr. Stevens died, the American Embassy warned that Libyan officials had declared a “state of maximum alert” in Benghazi after a car bombing and thwarted bank robbery.

...

In the heady early days after the fall of Colonel Qaddafi’s government, the administration’s plan was to deploy a modest American security force and then increasingly rely on trained Libyan personnel to protect American diplomats — a policy that reflected White House apprehensions about putting combat troops on the ground as well as Libyan sensitivities about an obtrusive American security presence.

In the following months, the State Department proceeded with this plan. In one instance, State Department security officials replaced the American military team in Tripoli with trained Libyan bodyguards, while it also maintained the number of State Department security personnel members at the Benghazi compound around the minimum recommended level.

So let's be clear here. The NYT is saying that the State Department DID NOT MESS UP when they used OLD DATA to provision security around the consulate in Libya. They based their responses NOT ON THE THREAT but on the situation as it existed immediately after the toppling of the former dictator. BUT THAT'S OK!

...

But the question on the minds of some lawmakers is why the declining security situation did not prompt a fundamental rethinking of the security needs by the State Department and the White House. Three Congressional investigations and a State Department inquiry are now examining the attack, which American officials said included participants from Ansar al-Shariah, Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and the Muhammad Jamal network, a militant group in Egypt.

“Given the large number of attacks that had occurred in Benghazi that were aimed at Western targets, it is inexplicable to me that security wasn’t increased,” said Senator Susan Collins of Maine, the senior Republican on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, one of the panels holding inquiries.

Defending their preparations, State Department officials have asserted that there was no specific intelligence that warned of a large-scale attack on the diplomatic compound in Benghazi, which they asserted was unprecedented. The department said it was careful to weigh security with diplomats’ need to meet with Libyan officials and citizens.

What the State Department is saying is that they chose not to step up security because the threats were not SPECIFIC.

What, GENERAL THREATS are not acceptable? Car-bombings, assassinations, and the general rise in violence in the general area are NOT GOOD ENOUGH TO REACT TO?

...

At one point, Mr. Nordstrom, the regional security officer, proposed establishing guard towers, but the State Department rejected that on the grounds that it would make the compound more conspicuous.

There was no doubt, however, that there were many in Benghazi who knew the compound’s location. On June 6, a bomb was planted near the American Mission’s outer wall, blowing out a 12-foot-wide hole. No one was injured.

Could we have some more security? NO! We don't want to look aggressive. But they blew a hole in the wall! Well, no one was killed were they? DENIED!

...

On June 11, the lead vehicle of the British ambassador’s convoy was hit by an armor-piercing rocket-propelled grenade, wounding a British medic and driver. The British envoy left Benghazi the next day, and the British post in the city was closed on June 17.

About the same time, the Red Cross in the city pulled out after it was attacked a second time. “When that occurred, it was apparent to me that we were the last flag flying in Benghazi; we were the last thing on their target list to remove,” said Lt. Col. Andrew Wood, the head of the military security team in Tripoli.

...

American intelligence agencies had provided the administration with reports for much of the past year warning that the Libyan government was weakening and had little control over the militias, including Ansar al-Shariah.

By early September, some Libyan officials in Benghazi were echoing the same security warnings as Mr. Stevens was relaying to Washington.

...

Looking back, Mr. Nordstrom told a House hearing last month that a major question was the inability of the administration to react to the worsening environment on the ground.

“I was extremely pleased with the planning to get us into Libya,” Mr. Nordstrom said. But after the initial security teams began rotating out of Libya months later, he said, “there was a complete and total absence of planning.”

Anyone still unclear on this?

This is very much like the Marine Barracks bombing in Lebanon in the 1980s. There was a lack of security, a lack of planning, a lack of understanding of the threat at high levels. When it happened, President Reagan did not run from responsibility. He stepped up and took it. He said it happened on his watch, he was ultimately responsible, the blame was his.

Where is President Obama?

How about his Secretary of State?

Dodging and ducking. Not their fault, nope. None at all. No one is to blame. Can't stick anything to me, by golly!

There are your leaders.

 

[WC_lun]

"This is very much like the Marine Barracks bombing in Lebanon in the 1980s. There was a lack of security, a lack of planning, a lack of understanding of the threat at high levels. When it happened, President Reagan did not run from responsibility. He stepped up and took it. He said it happened on his watch, he was ultimately responsible, the blame was his."

Didn't watch the 2nd debate? He actually did take responsibility, saying that Secretary Clinton was not responsible because he was the president and ultimately he is responsible. He's also said that in an interview. Yes, there were failures in Benghazi. Yes it needs to be investigated to find the details. This constant blaming of Obama is nothing more than politics.

 

[billc]

Is the media sitting on e-mails that could show the White House called off the rescue mission...

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.”

I guess we will see in the next couple of days if the obama minions in the media are sitting on these e-mails...

​

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Is the media sitting on e-mails that could show the White House called off the rescue mission...

I guess we will see in the next couple of days if the obama minions in the media are sitting on these e-mails...

​

I would like to see those emails, if they exist. I'm not a New Gringrich fan, but it seems he's being pretty clear. However, given the recent 'bombshell announcement' made by that idiot Trump, I have my doubts. We'll see.

 

[Josh Oakley]

There is a rumor floating that General Han was fired in relation to this attack. Can anybody corroborate?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[Bill Mattocks]

There is a rumor floating that General Han was fired in relation to this attack. Can anybody corroborate?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

General Ham's retirement is going to seem rather coincidental, and it may well be that he was pushed, and didn't jump. However, the reports that he had been 'arrested by his second in command' and so on appear to be at the very least, wildly inflated.

In other words, something happened, and Ham is retiring. However, the reason could be nearly anything, from he's just ready to retire (and it's not unusual for a person with his time in service and major command under his belt) all the way to he is the reason assistance was denied and not the White House and he's retiring to avoid having to stand before a courts-martial, and anything in between. No idea what the truth is; if I had to guess, I'd say it was somewhere in the middle, probably a bit less on the paranoid tip, but not as innocent as "I'm just ready to pack it in now."

 

[billc]

And a nice take down of obama's situation room picture from hurricane Sandy...vs. Bhengazi non-intervention...

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-...mer-SLAMS-Obama-Over-Hurricane-Sandy-Photo-Op

Charles Krauthammer: “Well, he says he’s not concerned about the impact on the elections. I’m sure he’s very sincere on that. But it is a little odd that he shows up in the Briefing Room where he hasn’t shown up in the Briefing Room for what, a month-and-a-half? For Libya or for anything else for that matter. Then you get the photo-ops of him in the Situation Room deploying I guess the utility crews who restore power all over America. Where you would think he might want to use the Situation Room to convene high level people during the night hours when our people were under attack in Benghazi. It’s hard to look at this, playing the president, playing the Commander in Chief in what’s a natural disaster that really doesn’t require a lot of from the White House. It’s up to the governors mostly. The White House and the government release money. That’s all they do and he’s really good at releasing money.”