Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Wages of Libya [clear directives, cover-ups and lost careers]
National Review Online ^ | October 30, 2012 | Victor Hanson Davis

Posted on 10/30/2012 5:12:26 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife

Edited on 10/30/2012 5:30:15 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]

We have had ambassadors murdered abroad before, but we have never seen anything quite like the tragic fate of Chris Stevens. Amid all the controversy over Libya, we have lost sight of the human and often horrific story of Benghazi: a U.S. ambassador attacked, cut off and killed alone, after being abused by frenzied terrorists, and a second member of the embassy staff murdered, as two American private citizens rushed to the rescue, heroically warding off Islamist hit teams, until they were overwhelmed and also killed.


(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government
KEYWORDS: appeasement; benghazi; cic; embassymurders; shadowwars; threatmatrix; vdh; victordavishanson
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-69 next last

1 posted on 10/30/2012 5:12:35 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
A brief communiqué that the CIA did not refuse pleas for assistance was prompted by anonymous administration officials’ allegations that it was our intelligence agencies, not the State Department or White House officials, that prevented assistance to our diplomatic mission.

"Anonymous administration officials"? I heard Joe Biden blame everything on the "intelligence community" before I turned off the vice-president debate rather than smash the television into worthless chips.

2 posted on 10/30/2012 5:18:45 AM PDT by Tax-chick ("Decency requires that they be voted out of office as an act of urgent political hygiene." ~Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

“Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Martin Dempsey at some point supposedly received information about the attack in real time. Why — given the supposed directive of the president to do “whatever we need to” to save our people — he did not order military assistance will have to be explained.”

It is my understanding the JCOS are not in the loop for direct action these days....the orders go from the Sec of Def to the individual service heads. IMO the blame here rests solely with His Excellency and the Sec of Def...my guess is no order was immediately forthcoming from His Excellency and the sec of def was not going to go out on his own and potentially upset the election perhaps because he was the one to actually give the go order for the ben ladin raid and probably took some heat for doing so until it was a success.


3 posted on 10/30/2012 5:20:49 AM PDT by Mouton (Voting is an opiate of the electorate. Nothing changes no matter who wins..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Petraeus cooked his own goose. If he had any honor he would not have supported the video narrative. He should have resigned,called a press conference and gone public to explain what actually happened. Instead, he acted like the typical army perfumed prince.


4 posted on 10/30/2012 5:24:20 AM PDT by Roklok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mouton

Dempsey was so clueless that he actually called Terry Jones on the telephone to ask him to take the movie off youtube. Terry Jones had nothing to do with it.


5 posted on 10/30/2012 5:28:13 AM PDT by MestaMachine (obama kills and none dare call it treason)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MestaMachine

Petraeus acutally did the same thing in 2010 asking the pastor not to burn korans. This is outrageous.


6 posted on 10/30/2012 5:33:43 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MestaMachine

Just tell me one thing: Given the warnings provided to the State Dept, CIA, JCS, and White House why was there so little security already providing protection in place at the embassy and consulate in Libya on 9/11/2012? Just WHY?


7 posted on 10/30/2012 5:34:10 AM PDT by Rapscallion ( Has the House Judiciary Committee also gone AWOL?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

I long for the Ceausescu moment. That moment on the balcony during the speech when the crows begins to boo and the look of confused consternation on Ceausescu’s face.

He couldn’t believe his people, the one’s he starved in the cold, had turned on him. Somewhat later, he was stood against the wall.


8 posted on 10/30/2012 5:37:15 AM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 ..... Present failure and impending death yield irrational action))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Roklok

“Petraeus cooked his own goose.”

As compromised as Roberts was over his shady adoptions, now pwned by the leftists, so is Petraeus now.

First hated and campaigned against by the leftist freaks, then hired by them.

I wonder what Petraeus’ skeleton is.


9 posted on 10/30/2012 5:38:34 AM PDT by treetopsandroofs (Had FDR been GOP, there would have been no World Wars, just "The Great War" and "Roosevelt's Wars".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Roklok

Petraeus & Dempsey are arrogant bootlickers of the first magnitude. When they pass from the earth, I hope they get to meet their mentor; Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitel. I doubt the manner of their passing will be like “Lakeitel’s” but whether that should happen is a matter of debate. They should at least be subject to a public inquiry.


10 posted on 10/30/2012 5:40:39 AM PDT by henkster (If you let them do it to you, you got yourself to blame.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Roklok

What the heck happened to Patraeus? He was Bush’s “go to” guy on the ground at one point. Now he’s a CIA political hack covering for Obama?


11 posted on 10/30/2012 5:43:36 AM PDT by RacerX1128 (Cornered in CA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mouton

-——.my guess is no order was immediately forthcoming ——

That is the crux of the events. You are dead on.

My belief is that the Messiah seeing visions of the coming crucifixion, uttered some rambling gibberish that is now remembered as an order. He went to bed in the belief he had saved the mission, but like Hitler in the bunker, the subordinates could not discern any directive in the meaningless ramblings.

There was certainly no direct order such as “Go kill the enemy and save the ambassador.” There was definitely no strong words “stand Down” . Obama is incapable of making any such non lawyerly unambiguous statement.


12 posted on 10/30/2012 5:45:17 AM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 ..... Present failure and impending death yield irrational action))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

This is a great article but it address the “what” of actions during the attack and actions of the coverup. I am waiting for someone to address the following as to “why”:
Why did Clinton deny request for security forces upgrade prior to the attack, why was the Ambassador at Benghazi on 9/11 without sufficient security, WHY did the Turkish official meet with the ambassador and leave without incident that evening, WHY are the networks not covering, WHY did the heavily armed force show up at that time with low security and the ambassador unprotected, why was there a drone overhead, why was there no official US response with military force, why was a standdown ordered, why was the video narrative given as the reason for the attack. I am afraid this leads to a hypothesis that the ambassador was to be kidnapped by the Muslim brotherhood the video was to be the initiator (evil US, not associated with Obama policy and already part of the script) and the kidnap went down in a terrible manner as the standdown order was ignored by the heroic ex-seals. If the hypothesis is proven wrong, it is terrible that in this country it is believable.


13 posted on 10/30/2012 5:49:59 AM PDT by affan76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bert

I must confess that I’ve been a little surprised that everyone’s been interpreting Obama’s comment as indicating that he gave a directive to come to the aid of the Benghazi consulate. The manner and tone in which he made the statement has always come across to me as meaning he was ordering security for all of our OTHER facilities and personnel, with the parenthetical assumption that Benghazi was already lost.


14 posted on 10/30/2012 6:02:47 AM PDT by william clark (Ecclesiastes 10:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: bert

“I long for the Ceausescu moment. That moment on the balcony during the speech when the crows begins to boo and the look of confused consternation on Ceausescu’s face.”

Perhaps that will occur at the polls next Tuesday.


15 posted on 10/30/2012 6:09:25 AM PDT by billhilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
It's funny how the Liar in Chief's recollections tend to morph to whatever best spins his latest screw up.

How can ANYONE serving in the Foreign Service or the Armed Services not believe the kenyan wouldn't abandon them to the same fate if it were politically expedient?

Any authority as Commander in Chief has seriously been compromised!

16 posted on 10/30/2012 6:18:16 AM PDT by The Sons of Liberty ( For AMERICA's sake: Vote for the Mormon, NOT the muslim; The Capitalist, NOT the Communist! FUBO!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife; Eaker; Absolutely Nobama; afnamvet; AK2KX; Ancesthntr; An Old Man; APatientMan; ..

Did Obama withhold Cross-Border Authority?

Please help me. I am trying as hard as I can to get out the word about cross-border authority. I just can't believe reporters don't know enough to ask the right questions! It's infuriating. Libya, as far as standing down the rescue, is 100% Obama's show, and nobody else's. Only he can grant CBA, not Biden, not Panetta, not Dempsey, not Hillary, and certainly not Ham in Germany.

The entire episode is explained perfectly inside the context of not granting CBA. The CIA QRF in Tripoli? No problem, send them on the local Tripoli station chief's say-so. He merely informs up COC that he has done so. CCs them so to speak. "This is what I am doing." Ditto if Predators were in country, no problem using them.

But the big rescue air armada streaming toward Libya right away after the alarm got to Stuttgart and Africom? That has to stop. I believe at the 5pm meeting with Panetta and Biden in the Oval Office, he said, "No outside military intervention," on the basis that the last report was the "lull" from the consulate, at about 1030 p.m. in Benghazi, when the attack appeared to be over and the situation stabilizing.

(As a soft exception, Obama may have authorized sending an unarmed Predator from outside of Libya, but I am thinking the two Predators were already in-country, and hence available to use within “no CBA granted” rules.)

"No outside military intervention" equals "no cross-border authority" and that constitutes "standing orders" until POTUS changes them. Nobody else can “un-decide” the POTUS decree. The rescue air-armada of C-17s, C-130s and SOF helos like MH-47 Chinooks and Pavehawks cannot proceed directly to Libya without CBA being granted, so instead they are all staged at Sigonella, Sicily.

USN ships are in position to "lilypad" helos for long over-water flights. Airborne tankers are coming into position. SOF forces in Sigonella are going over their gear for different contingencies. Fuming all night as officers keep checking in with operational commanders. "Hold in place, no rescue yet. We can't find the President, it sounds like," say the colonels to the majors and captains. 100s of military must know about this. I keep waiting for the conclusive whistle-blowers to come forward BEFORE the election. After won't matter, it will be for the historians.

Panetta is falling on his sword for Obama with his absurd-on-its-face, "The military doesn't do risky things" defense of no rescue. Panetta is destroying his future reputation entirely, to save Obama. The question is why? Loyalty?

Petreaus was probably "used" in some way early, about the supposed CIA intel link to the Mohammed video, and now he feels burned. So he conclusively said via his PAO, "The stand-down order did not come from CIA." Well, what is higher than CIA? Only White House. Obama, nobody else. Petreaus is naming Obama without naming him.

Now, as far as Obama / Huma Abedin / Valerie Jarrett etc actually wanting Ambassador Stevens dead, to terminate the end of the very dirty Libyan arms to Syrian AQ programs, I can't speculate. Obama is not competent enough I'm thinking.

But for sure, the ambassador going to unsecure Benghazi on 9-11 of all days stinks to me of a setup. You can bet Stevens would have told the Turks, "No, 9-11 is not a good day for us," and stayed in Tripoli behind many high and thick walls. For him to go to dangerous Benghazi on 9-11 means the Turks totally insisted, but why would they care about the meeting date, unless they were in on a “hit” as the Judas goat?

Alternatively, ordering Stevens to meet the Turks in Benghazi on 9-11 may have come from down OUR chain of command. Stevens seems to have been wearing two hats as ambassador and CIA arms shipper. Moving between more-secure Tripoli, the Benghazi "consulate," and the CIA "annex." So orders to him might come down the State or the CIA commo channels, or both. I am unclear on his job title and true position, but either the CIA or State sends him final instructions. How this works with “dual-hatted” ambassadors, I haven’t a clue.

But Stevens meeting the Turks at the unsecure Benghazi "consulate" on 9-11 stinks to me of a deliberate setup. The Turks left the meeting and probably flashed their headlights to the attack team commanders lurking in shadows. A coded text, a word on a phone, meaning, "The ambassador is there, with minimal security: proceed with the attack plan."

But that is all pure speculation. What I know FOR SURE is that the big "stand down order" issue revolves around granting or withholding cross-border authority.

Every SOF officer and ops officer all the way up has this drummed into his head. We can make Obama respond to this question, even if reporters must shout it at him while he's doing storm cleanup photo ops. If the reporters KNOW enough to ask the quesion. That's why I am shouting all over the internet about CBA.

I can't believe cross-border authority permission is not one of the top discussion points about Benghazi.

That, and who "set him up" by sending him to Beghazi to meet the Turks on 9-11, with them leaving after dark.

And of course, down the road, was the military rescue-in-progress turned back because Obama actually wanted to make sure the consulate was wiped out? Is that why the spooks at the annex were refused permission to travel the under one mile to intervene? That would connect it all together, but for now, the best focus is on Obama either granting or withholding cross-border authority for the rescue.

Feel free to repost these musings of a long-ago SOF officer anywhere you please.


17 posted on 10/30/2012 6:24:09 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bert
There was certainly no direct order such as “Go kill the enemy and save the ambassador.” There was definitely no strong words “stand Down” . Obama is incapable of making any such non lawyerly unambiguous statement.

Another possibility: Obama made his rambling speech about "do whatever we need to do," just as he said... but that he's leaving out what he said next: "just don't screw up the reelection campaign."

Or maybe "whatever you decide to do, run it past the political desk before you pull the trigger."

18 posted on 10/30/2012 6:25:22 AM PDT by Steely Tom (If the Constitution can be a living document, I guess a corporation can be a person.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty

How can ANYONE serving in the Foreign Service or the Armed Services not believe the kenyan wouldn’t abandon them to the same fate if it were politically expedient?”””

My thoughts exactly.

There are Democrats serving in the military as well as in the diplomatic corps.

They have to be haveing nightmares about what kind of ‘backup’ they have awaiting them.

The ineptness and arogance of this administration is fodder for authors for the next 50 years.


19 posted on 10/30/2012 6:28:26 AM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

Passed this on to Facebook and my Call Tree list as well...


20 posted on 10/30/2012 6:32:04 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-69 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson