Skip to comments.Pentagon's hands tied on hunting down Benghazi attackers, transcripts show
Posted on 01/16/2014 4:14:30 PM PST by Brad from Tennessee
The U.S. military cannot hunt down and kill people responsible for the deadly 2012 attack on an American compound in Benghazi, Libya, as long as the terrorists are not officially deemed members or affiliates of al Qaeda, newly declassified transcripts from congressional hearings show.
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Martin Dempsey in testimony on Oct. 10 said the Pentagons hands are tied because the groups involved are not covered by the Authorization for Use of Military Force. The AUMF law allows U.S. attacks anywhere in the world only on al Qaeda and associated forces.
The individuals related in the Benghazi attack, those that we believe were either participants or leadership of it, are not authorized use of military force, Gen. Dempsey told the House Armed Services Committee in his classified testimony during a closed hearing.
The transcript was released on Monday.
In other words, they dont fall under the AUMF authorized by the Congress of the United States. So we would not have the capacity to simply find them and kill them either with a remotely-piloted aircraft or with an assault on the ground, Dempsey said.
The U.S. could seek to capture the Benghazi attackers under the existing AUMF, but it would need to rely on forces in Libya or any other countries where the attackers are hiding to do so. . .
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
This is a lot of cr**. talk about rewriting history
Sad. Very sad.
It was al Qaeda, stupid.
The same al Qaeda that bombed the Pentagon and WTC.
But who cares?
The Pentagon only wants to ARM al Qaeda against the
American People. Why?
Was not giving al Qaeda MANPADs in Benghazi enough?
Was not keeping the borders open enough?
Was not arming narcoterrorists in Fast&Furious enough?
Was not giving al Qaeda sarin in Syria enough?
And here I thought government could do anything as long as it wasn’t prohibited by law
I wonder how things would be different if it were U.S. citizens who perpetrated such a crime. And I’m not talking about Amish either.
Remember when the WH claimed they didn’t send air support because they couldn’t get Libyan legal authorization for US aircraft to enter Libyan airspace...?
This is ridiculous.
They can’t kill the guys who whacked our Ambassador, but please recall that Holder was asked FOUR times in front of Congress and cameras, “Do you think US law would allow you to use a drone to take out a terrorist sitting in a cafe inside of the USA...?”
He was asked that FOUR times and Holder was refusing to answer, indicating he preferred to believe US law DID permit him that.
1. Can’t whack the assasins of an Ambassador
2. OK to blow up Frap drinker in Santa Monica Starbucks
The transverse is also true. If you are deemed to be AQ, you can be killed by assassins from the US Government. Whether you really are AQ doesn't matter.
Sen. Cruz asks Holder if a coffee sipper in a cafe on US soil can legally be blown up by a drone:
He asks the question many times, and Holder bobs and weaves.
It’s nonsense. Maybe we need to go back to some old-fashioned solutions. If the government won’t go after them, they can’t stop concerned private citizens from raising a bounty on them.
Get enough cash on someone’s head, and they are going to run out of hiding places.
The fact that we’ve got rules that prohibit us from attacking the Benghazi killers should make it pretty apparent that they are protected from higher up.
They did say that “Morsi sent us”. And you’ll remember that State and the White House went ape when Morsi was arrested. McCain and Graham flew to Egypt at the White House request to try to spring him. That was just weird.
Does that include the Taliban?
Pentagon to begin issuing name tags to al quaeda members so the Pentagon can tell who they are and issuing them maps of where the gun-free zones are.
Absolute, undiluted, 100%, complete, unmitigated,
To this day I cannot understand why they were so concerned about a 2nd rate British pop star ....
My understanding is that the locals knew exactly who did it. Within 10 days a bunch of pro American libyans marched over to the militia headquarters of Ansar Al Sharia and took over the building and set their vehicles on fire.
[Does that include the Taliban?]
It depends on your definition of “the.”
But it’s okay and perfectly legal for BroncoBama to drona the kid of a terrorist claiming “he should have picked better parents”.
Sick, twisted $%&#*!
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.