Skip to comments.BOMBSHELL: US Troops Wouldn't Have Been Painting Targets on Ground Unless There Was Air Support..
Posted on 10/26/2012 6:30:35 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
BOMBSHELL: US troops in Benghazi would not have been painting targets on the ground unless there was air support overhead. But someone called it off And the decision most likely came from the White House.
FOX News reported earlier today that security officers on the ground in Benghazi had a laser planted on a target that was firing on the annex.
The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Spectre 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.
So there were two drones in the air recording the attack on the ground. And now we know the CIA team at the annex was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. The White House was able to watch the attack live back in Washington DC. Yet, yesterday Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said this,
The U.S. military did not get involved during the attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, last month because officials did not have enough information about what was going on before the attack was over.
How much more information did they need?
* * * * *
Then theres this bombshell at BlackFive from a former Delta operator:
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 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!
This is HUGE. It should be obvious by now that someone is not telling the truth. As Blackfive says,
This is bigger than Watergate! The worst has to be the team on the ground knowing that the President just left you to die.
A caller today discussed this with Rush Limbaugh.
(VIDEO AT LINK)
Here is part of that conversation.
CALLER: Well, theres three networks, Rush. The e-mails that have been released are unclassified e-mails. On the top secret side, a flash traffic message from the embassy Tripoli to the White House Situation Room, its like an IM. I mean, its immediately responded to. You have to acknowledge receipt of it. Okay? So its immediate. It gets to the person, the watch officer sitting there, boom, flashes on his screen, he has to acknowledge receipt. And then theres a protocol for who he then sends it to. He physically turns to someone, the senior guy on watch, This is a critical element of information. POTUS needs to hear this, and thats what would have happened.
So no one in the White House can deny that well, they can deny it, but the fact is the protocol says someone marched their happy little ass up to the senior guy standing next to POTUS and said, Sir, ambassador in Libya is in peril. And if he was missing, that is even a higher precedence. And then the chain would have also gone out automatically to the geographic combatant commander, AFRICOM, and he would have then turned to his special operations commander and said, I want the In-Extremis Force, you know, strip ready in five minutes. And evidently they were strip ready in Sigonella and they would have the assets to penetrate the airspace, you know, an MC-130 papa, which is a C-130 specially equipped with electronic countermeasures. They didnt need permission to enter Libyan airspace, okay?
Im giving you a lot of Inside Baseball stuff, and maybe putting myself in a little peril by doing it, but the In-Extremis Force, they would have been chomping at the bit to do this. It was turned down, POTUS, at his five p.m. Eastern time meeting with the principals, thats when he put the kibosh on everything. It was a conscious act. It has to be because, you know, the In-Extremis Force is required to be prepared to do In-Extremis non-combatant evacuation operations for its geographic responsibility, the entire continent of Africa. So theres always somebody ready to go, and the aircraft are always prepared to go.
Read the rest here. Hat Tip Truth and Common Sense
Cheap costume jewelry at that, which is befitting their *true* profession, which is most assuredly *NOT* "the profession of arms"...
A Predator drone, as opposed to any other drone, would *BY DEFINITION* be armed with Hellfires. *THAT* is what makes a Predator a Predator.
That said, I am unsure if the drone/drones which were overhead at Benghazi were actually Predators, or not. Many folks have gotten into the habit of calling *any* US UAV (drone) a Predator, when that may not actually be the case...
bump for later read. too bad we can’t bookmark threads.
I was a kid when Nixon resigned.
People say "Watergate", but they don't ever mention what it actually was- breaking into DNC headquarters, and cover up.
It seems like a college prank compared to what's on this thread.
Anyone reading this should go to the first post and read everything posted here- it's well worth your time to do so- FYI
From what I understand, the former SEALS were employees of a civilian security contractor. They were not under military orders, but after a couple of requests for support through various channels and being denied, they decided to try to save the Ambassador and others of their own accord. If that is true, and seems many news agencies say so, they are true heroes.
I damn to hell, the person[s] who denied air cover. Like has been mentioned many times, Obama was the ultimate authority to allow cross border incursion. He decided to go to bed to be fresh for Vegas the next day. I thought I couldn't hate anyone more than Clinton for denying the Rangers air/ground support in Somalia (Black Hawk Down).
At least that was a military mission that Clinton managed to botch through micro-management. This is a matter of simply not following protective protocol for a consulate, before and during.
There is a long list of people who will have to account for this debacle. As I posted in my own article, I desire, ask, and expect the various military and clandestine service personnel to come forward and give us their account. If they don't and too worried about their futures, then they have no honor. Like I said, if they have to wash cars and be able to look themselves in the mirror, so be it!
You are right. It’s a side by side of Stevens and Gaddafi. Both are horrific.
Issa said there are many whistleblowers who have been anxious to give them information. He said they are very angry and are holding back nothing.
If true, this regime will topple.
Imagine a game of chess where you don’t have to wait your turn to make a move, you only have to wait your turn to take a piece. That is the way a tactical operation is prosecuted. As soon as there was a chance that a specter gunship might be needed, it would have been on it’s way. This would not be a liability, and it might be a critical asset. The decision to use it doesn’t have to be made for it to be proper for it to be deployed.
If there was not a gunship on station, the military chain of commend with responsibility should be immediately put out to pasture. If it was on station, and not used, Obama’s entire state department should be tried for treason.
Where do you want the “facts” to come from before you are a believer? There is testimony of the laser targeting from someone who should know something about how and why it is done.
Are you waiting for confirmation from the white House before you become convinced?
People in high places need to swing for this Treason.
“Obama could have been directing terrorist traffic to the consulate and the MSM would sill cover for him.”
What makes you think he wasn’t?
The Predator overhead was unarmed and only capable of a video feed.
The Predator overhead was unarmed and only capable of a video feed.
I ran across a story on FB that is admittedly hearsay at this point, but it would indicate that Gen. Ham actually attempted to DEFY the “stand down” order to provide air support, but within a minute of that decision was apprehended by his second in command, and relieved of his duties.
If that story is true, it could shed some light as to who made the decision at that point to call off the air support. If Ham actually managed to get the order out in defiance of the “stand down” order, then it would make sense why the strike was called off AFTER the C-130 was in the area.
Following is what I read, and shared over on FB. Like I said - I realize this is hearsay right now, but thought it perhaps may shed more light on the truth...
RE: General Ham, former head of Africom - word is he was ready to defy orders, and send a rapid response team to assist, but was apprehended and relieved of his duties by his second in command within 30 seconds - 1 min. after he made that decision. We need to know what General Ham’s side of the story is... (Ken DeWitt is the person who originally posted this at FB, I received it through a “share” from a friend...)
Gen Ham was fired 30 seconds after deciding to intervene in Benghazi: I heard a story today from someone inside the military that I trust entirely. The story was in reference to General Ham that Panetta referenced in the quote below.
(The) basic principle is that you dont deploy forces into harms way without knowing whats going on; without having some real-time information about whats taking place, Panetta told Pentagon reporters. And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.
The information I heard today was that General Ham as head of Africom received the same e-mails the White House received requesting help/support as the attack was taking place. General Ham immediately had a rapid response unit ready and communicated to the Pentagon that he had a unit ready.
General Ham then received the order to stand down. His response was to screw it, he was going to help anyhow. Within 30 seconds to a minute after making the move to respond, his second in command apprehended General Ham and told him that he was now relieved of his command.
The story continues that now General Rodiguez would take General Hams place as the head of Africon.
I found this story when I got home after hearing this story.
President Barack Obama will nominate Army Gen. David Rodriguez to succeed Gen. Carter Ham as commander of U.S. Africa Command and Marine Lt. Gen. John Paxton to succeed Gen. Joseph Dunford as assistant commandant of the Marine Corps, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced.
As I was typing this I heard John Bolton on Greta say that there are conflicting reports of General Hams comments on this tragedy and why a rapid response unit was not deployed. Bolton says someone needs to find out what Ham was saying on 9/11/12.
I think we need millions of people calling the NYTimes, CNN etc and asking directly to people in the newaroom why they are not running this story.
Question — Was Gen. Hamm relieved of his duties DURING the attack? Do we have any way of knowing exactly when he was relieved of his duties as head of Africom?
The reason I ask is that I ran across another story on FB today/last night that may shed light on the calling off of the airstrike if the C-130 was indeed overhead already... That story can be read in post #194 of this thread. I do realize that it is hearsay at this point, but thought it may perhaps be of relevance to this discussion.
See the post I just put up in #194. Some are saying that Hamm actually got a rapid response team ready, told the pentagon, received the order to “stand down” and then made the decision to defy the Pentagon orders and was immediately relieved of his duties by his second in command. Granted, the story I posted IS hearsay at this point, but could explain why the strike was called off after the plane was already in the air (if it was).
I’m still catching up on the stuff here at FR after spending a while reading about this on FB, where - at least among conservative circles - it is perhaps the ONLY thing being discussed...
We already know why. These people are incredulous prix, that's why! The question should be WHEN are they going to run the story!
The MSM is going to have too run this, because with or without them this country is not going to stand by and not get answers on Benghazi.
People are POed, and rightfully so!
Sept 19 story - reporting Ham’s replacement.
The data keeps pouring in...