Skip to comments.Exclusive: Classified cable warned consulate couldn't withstand 'coordinated attack'
Posted on 10/31/2012 5:14:45 PM PDT by Mean Daddy
The U.S. Mission in Benghazi convened an emergency meeting less than a month before the assault that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, because Al Qaeda had training camps in Benghazi and the consulate could not defend against a coordinated attack, according to a classified cable reviewed by Fox News.
Summarizing an Aug. 15 emergency meeting convened by the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Aug. 16 cable marked SECRET said that the State Departments senior security officer, also known as the RSO, did not believe the consulate could be protected.
RSO (Regional Security Officer) expressed concerns with the ability to defend Post in the event of a coordinated attack due to limited manpower, security measures, weapons capabilities, host nation support, and the overall size of the compound, the cable said.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/31/exclusive-us-memo-warned-libya-consulate-couldnt-withstand-coordinated-attack/#ixzz2AvPxuIHJ
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Thanks and I did do a search.
Catherine Herridge is doing a phenomenal job on this investigation.
Both she and Jennifer Griffin deserve Pulitzer’s for their investigative reporting. They dig and dig deep, and get some solid info.
I think it’s far better to have duplicate posts than risk missing important articles.
Yes, Jennifer too.
There is too big a paper trail both electronically and in radio communication logs in too many locations for the truth to remain hidden long. Looks like some of our constitutionally minded citizens both in and out of uniform have decided “Let’s Roll”.
Undoubtedly, the story would be covered if Romney had chosen to make an issue of Benghazi. He is not so chosen and, in fact, he chose to walk away from it in the last debate. There are two possible explanations for this decision which come to mind: first, Romney was intimidated by the way the matter was treated by the press in the wake of the second debate. He fears the press will continue to maul him on this issue as they have all along beginning with their mobbing of him in the press conference immediately in the wake of the attack in Benghazi.
Second, Romney has a game plan which calls for him to win this election based on the economy and his internal polls tell him he is comfortably on his way to doing so and there is little or no positive upside from campaigning on Benghazi and potentially a bit of downside from diverting the question away from the economy and onto Obama as commander-in-chief. Romney may also fear that the press will swarm to the support of Obama on this issue thus clouding the election. The press will argue Romney is politicizing foreign affairs, just as they did to him in the wake of the attack.
There is another more upbeat possibility, Romney is content with his position represented by his internal polls and expects to cruise to victory. Why introduce an unknown element? I can think that at least Romney's refusal to make an issue of this matter after the second debate indicates that he is reasonably confident in his victory and feels no pressing need for an issue to turn matters around. I read this as a strong indication of confidence in victory, certainly an indication of absence of desperation.