The second piece of news in the documentary is footage of the Islamist show of force in Benghazi in June. That show of force was described in the August report, but footage has been scarce. You’ll see in the 10-minute documentary that it was your typical Islamist militia parade, with masked fighters manning guns mounted in pick-up trucks or waving AKs out the windows. Place yourself in the streets as an average Libyan. You’re happy that Gaddafi is gone but the country is in chaos. You mostly want to be left alone to live your life, but the west is evacuating the place and here’s a multi-battalion strength show of force parading down the streets in your town. They’re honking, waving guns, and the rest, while the westerners are taking down their flags and going home. Who appears to be the strong horse in your neighborhood?
The third new finding in the documentary is the explicit threat to attack the consulate to retaliate for the U.S. killing of a local al-Qaeda big shot. That comes at about the 3:53 mark. The threat aired in June. Its title: “Take U.S. Consulate in Retaliation for Abu Yaya Al-Libbi.”
As the security situation worsened, Ambassador Stevens puts up a brave face as you’ll see in the documentary, talking about education and health care to the press in the newly free Libya, while downplaying the increasing security threat and appealing to the average Libyan’s desire to be free. Behind the scenes, he and his security officers repeatedly asked the State Department for more help. We don’t know if sending more security to Benghazi would have kept him alive. We do know that the terrorists probed security with lower scale attacks in the summer and got no American response, and we do know what they did with that intelligence.
We also know what President Obama was doing with his intelligence in the weeks leading up to the attacks: He was paying little or no attention to it. He had it delivered to his iPad and…that’s all we know. He had attended fewer than half of his Presidential Daily Briefings in 2012 prior to the Benghazi and Cairo attacks.
Can’t help wondering if the reduced security was set-up to get Stenvens “snuffed.”
After all he was a primary witness to what was happening. Both sides needed him gone.
geoffgo, what a great point! It is so logical. And it comports with the muslim-in-chief’s sympathies to the muslim world.
THERE WAS A PREDATOR DRONE OVER THE BENGHAZI CONSULATE DURING THE ATTACK
Why didn’t this drone attack the attackers?
How do we know this?
How do we know this?
1) There is existing video shot from the drone
2) A general on Fox news, about a week ago, mentioned the drone flying over the consulate and called it a ‘predator’ drone, which I believe is weaponized and not just a spy plane.
‘Witness’ is too weak a word; Stevens was a major player in a dirty game.
Exactly, it appears he began hanging out with the AQ affiliated jihadist since 2007; it also appears that he had no issue with these ‘martyrs’ killing our troops on Iraq, at one point ‘being embarrassed to be holding an american passport’; was he playing a double game, while Pres. Bush was still in office or did he began hanging out w/obama and the-like as early as 2007, planning the ‘arab spring’?
Diana West @ http://www.dianawest.net reports the following
The Jihad and Christopher Stevens, Pt. 2
Part 1 is here.
—
To attempt to understand Christopher Stevens’ long-standing interest in ben Qumu, the al Qaeda terrorist suspected of leading the Benghazi attack on September 11, 2012 in which Stevens and three other Americans were murdered, we must seek context in more of Stevens’ cables. (Thanks be to Wikileaks.)
On February 15, 2008, Stevens wrote a lengthy cable titled EXTREMISM IN EASTERN LIBYA. On one level it confirms that Stevens was NOT some liberal naif when he docked in Benghazi in April 2011 to serve as point man to the so-called “rebels”– that cutesy bluff of a name which disguises a movement better described by Clare M. Lopez as “individuals and groups that were, at a minimum, allied ideologically with Al Qaeda.” No real stretch to simplify and call Stevens the Obama administration’s point man to al Qaeda.
This early 2008 cable recounts the analysis of a US-Libyan dual national who regularly visited eastern Libya concerning the “social, political and economic factors that have contributed to and faciliated participation by a disproportionately large number of eastern Libya’s native sons in `martyrdom acts’ and other insurgency operations in eastern Libya.”
Notice what’s missing from the list — Islam. It’s not completely missing, of course. Stevens makes note of mosques and “radical” imams who use “phraseology urging worshippers to support jihad in Iraq and elsewhere through direct participation and financial contributions.” Islam itself, however, never is discussed as the doctrinal motivation for jihad “martyrdom.” The following line sums up how it is that the centrality of jihad in Islam is circumvented: “Citing conversations with relatives, [redacted] said the unemployed, disenfranchised young men of eastern Libya had `nothing to lose’ and are therefore `willing for sacrifice themselves’ for something greater than themselves by engaging in extremism in the name of religion.”
The cable also opens a window onto the ordinariness of this hate-filled pathology among the people of the region. Stevens’ source describes a large dinner he attended in Derna — hometown of ben Qumu and hotbed, bar none, of jihad-in-Iraq recruitment — hosted by a family friend. “Conversation among the mostly middle-aged male group of guests focused on news that two young men from Derna had recently killed themseles in suicide operations in Iraq. Dinner guests offered a mix of `condolences and congratulations.’ ” The source “said he was struck by the level [of] sentiment against Coalition forces in Iraq, and by the obvious pride the dinner guests took in the fact that two of their native sons had `struck a blow’ against `occupying Crusader forces in Iraq.’ He emphasized that the dinner was one of the relatively few occasions in Libya in which he felt uncomfortable by dint of having US citizenship.”
Stevens later being point man to the “rebels” would mean being point man also to these dinner guests, still swelled with pride over maiming and killing American troops in Iraq. Such is the poisonous essence of “Arab Spring.”
The flow of eastern Libyan “pride” doesn’t stop. The cable notes: “During [source's] last visit to the east in December [2007], relatives and friends cited media reports to the effect that Libyans, most of them from Derna and points east, comprised the second largest cohort of foreign fighters identified in documents seized during last September’s Objective Massey operation on the Syria-Iraq border. [Redacted] noted that a majority of those in Derna who raised the issue appeared to take pride in the fact that their small cty city had contributed disproportionately to the jihad against coalition forces in Iraq.”
The cable continues, adding more fascinating if also sickening detail. Among other “martyrdom” factors, Stevens discusses “the influence of Libyan fighters who had fought in Afghanistan and now recruited young eastern Libyans for operations in Iraq, the influence of Arabic-language satellite televison broadcasts” — al-Jazeera, the Qatari dictatorship’s greatest weapon — and the difficulties GOL (Government of Libya) had controlling the mosques in this region.
Part of the difficulty for GOL authorities in controlling eastern mosques is that the most zealous imams tend to preach in small suburban and rural mosques. He [source] mentioned the almost festive atmosphere of one trip, when relatives gathered to travel to a remote rural mosque to hear a `controversial’ imam’s sermon.
In his final “comment” section, Stevens writes: “The most troubling and difficult aspect of [redacted's] account is the pride that many eastern Libyans … appear to take in the role their native sons have played in the insurgency in Iraq.”
“Troubling,” yes (putting it way mildly). But what did Stevens mean by “difficult”?
Two months later on April 10, 2008, Stevens wrote another cable detailing the Libyan government’s rebuff over an idea proposing “US-Libyan cooperation on counter-ideological or `soft power’ efforts to blunt the appeal of the extremist message in eastern Libya, arguing such efforts would be counterproductive.”
On June 12, 2008, Stevens wrote a cable noted in Part 1 about the incarceration conditions of two ex-Gitmo detainees, including that of al Qaeda’s ben Qumu, a son of Derna currently leading Ansar al Sharia.
The previous week, on June 2, 2008, Stevens wrote a cable that seems particularly significant. It stands out first for its florid title: DIE HARD IN DERNA.
From the “Summary”:
Frustration at the inability of eastern Libyans to effectively challenge Qadhafi’s regime, together with a concerted ideological campaign by returned Libyan fighters from earlier conflicts, have played important roles in Derna’s development as a wellspring of Libyan foreign fighters in Iraq. … One Libyan interlocutor likened young men in Derna to Bruce Willis’ character in the action picture “Die Hard”, who stubbornly refused to die quietly. For them, resistance against coalition forces in Iraq is an important act of ‘jihad’ and a last act of defiance
Resistance, huh? Didn’t Stevens forget his quotation marks? Or is that how US diplomats think of acts of war against American troops who, if memory serves, were at that moment still attempting to stamp out al Qaeda in Iraq, prevent sectarian civil war from breaking out and “nation-build,” all at the same time.
Also worth noting here is that this “frustration” about eastern Libyans’ inability to challenge Qaddafi regime is not mentioned in the February 2008 cable. In the earlier cable, unemployment, disenfranchisement, etc., are the main political factors cited (as opposed to mosque/jihadist/”pride” factors) for inciting the high flow of eastern Libyan “martyrs” to Iraq. Another factor was opposition to “U.S. military presence in Iraq or any other Muslim country.” There is nothing stipulating that frustration over Qaddafi’s regime per se was inspiring jihad to Iraq.
Stevens goes on to discuss a trip made to Benghazi in early May 2008 during which his party made a side trip to Derna to visit the “old fort.” Just a fun little tourist excursion into the heart of jihad, it seems.
While asking directions to the city’s old fort, P/E Chief met local resident [Redacted] who happened to hail from the same tribe as P/E Chief’s driver/guide. In typical fashion, [Redacted] promptly dropped what he was doing and spent and spent the next several hours accompanying us around Derna, a town of some 50,000 people.
That famous Derna hospitality. Or is it possible, given that the driver was tribal-kin with the source, this was a pre-planned meeting?
P/E/ Chief visited the Baab al-Shiha neighborhood, the site of the town’s old fort (now all but gone) and the district from which a large number of the Libyan foreign fighters identified in documents captured during September’s Objective Massey operation in Iraq had hailed.
Tourism or intelligence gathering? It would be interesting to ask the P/E Chief. Stevens goes on to describe the many mosques tucked away in the ‘hood and also a palpable unfriendliness of the people. Then on to lunch in Derna, described in a section titled:
PERCEIVED U.S. SUPPORT FOR QADHAFI FUELS DESIRE TO FIGHT IN IRAQ.
Over lunch at a popular restaurant just off the waterfront, [Redacted] and his business partner (who declined to give his name) discussed at length the local political-economic, cultural and religious scene, noting that it was “well-known” that a large number of suicide bombers (invariably described as “martyrs”) and foreign fighters in Iraq hailed from Derna, a fact in which the town “takes great pride”. [Redacted] stressed the importance of the link between the domestic political situation in Libya and the flow of foreign fighters in Iraq.
I don’t know how any American just sits there listening to a discussion of the “great pride” Derna men take in blowing up American men, who if they aren’t dead now are fated to live out their lives without limbs, genitals or pieces of their brains. Meanwhile, is it just me, or has a strong line of disinformation just entered the cable? Suddenly and explicitly, it’s not Islamic culture, it’s not the “pride” of Benghazi, it’s not the call of jihad against the wider West, it’s not young Muslim men brainwashed by al Jazeera and incited to jihad by their imams, it’s US support of Qaddafi that is responsible for the flow of men to fight the US in Iraq.
But.
There was a strong perception, [source] said, that the U.S. had decided in the wake of Qadhafi’s decision to abandon WMD aspirations and renounce terrorism to support the regime to secure counter-terrorism cooperation and ensure continued oil and natural gas production.
The source’s perception was correct.
Many easterners feared the U.S. would not allow Qadhafi’s regime to fall and therefore viewed direct confrontation with the GOL in the near-term as a fool’s errand.
Wasn’t that a very good thing? Stevens continues his account:
At the same time, sending young Libyans to fight in Iraq was “an embarrassment” to Qadhafi. Fighting against U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq represented a way for frustrated young radicals to strike a blow against both Qadhafi and against his perceived American backers.
The wheels turn …if we could just get rid of Qadhafi….then the fine young men of Derna would … what?
I wonder: Could Derna 2008 be the real birthplace of “Arab Spring”?
To be continued.
» Read full article on[Most recent blog entries]
The Atrocity of Hoax
Obama, in one of his Rocky XXXVVIII autobiographies channeled Jeremiah “God Damn America” Wright and titled his Narcissus Novelette “The Audacity of Hope”.
au·dac·i·ty/ôˈdasitē/
Noun:
A) The willingness to take bold risks: “her audacity came in handy during our most recent emergency”.
B) Rude or disrespectful behavior; impudence: “she had the audacity to pick up the receiver and ask me to hang up”.
intransitive verb
1
: to cherish a desire with anticipation
2
archaic : trust
transitive verb
1
: to desire with expectation of obtainment
2
: to expect with confidence : trust
— hop·er noun
— hope against hope
: to hope without any basis for expecting fulfillment
Based upon the above definitions, The Audacity of Hope could be defined as Rude or disrespectful behavior; impudence with expectation of obtainment without any basis for expecting fulfillment
My preference would be The Atrocity of Hoax. Let’s take the Benghazi situation which has now passed through the looking glass and couldn’t pass a smell test in a Febreze commercial.
Obama NOW states that he called it a “terror attack” in the Rose Garden the very next day. This is such a damnable lie and disprovable on its face. Obama has NEVER called an act of terror, by anyone, ever…an act of terror.
He has said “workplace violence” at Ft. Hood, or “manmade disaster” for attempts to blow up Americans, requiring “police action” responses. NOT ONCE has he called it a concerted Islamic jihadist act. Ever.
For you non-lawyers, one way to establish the credibility of a statement or act is through subsequent acts. EVERY person in this administration (Jay Carney, Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice and Obama himself) stated REPEATEDLY that it was a spontaneous eruption caused by an internet video trailer. This IS A LIE.
When this President and his administration get caught in yet ANOTHER lie, they coverup. And they get an assist from their Propaganda and Lies Ministry in covering up.
Fast and Furious? Coverup, executive privilege, coverup of the executive privilege.
Leaks of National Security, including sources and methods? Sanctimonious claims of being “offended”, coverup, assign non-independent “invesigators”, coverup of the coverup. (Where IS this investigation by the way)
Credit card fraud allowing dangerous and illegal foreign influence? Coverup, and burial of the issue.
The “most transparent” administration ever….couldn’t be uncovered without a backhoe and an earth mover.
IF Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s ends goals are the same as the Islamists, why in the world would anyone expect him to beef up security, as opposed to leaving it lax, essentially creating a stand down posture?
Herein lies the crux of the matter, and why spinning their tales was the only obvious choice – http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/10/07/further-untangling-of-the-video-the-islamist-in-chiefs-tailor-made-excuse-for-islamic-murder-mayhem-where-the-truth-lies-addendum-to-unraveling-the-video-commentary-by-adina-kutni/
Exactly.
These idiots are more hard at work than a pack of cats with diarrhea.
And the latest story is that now, everybody is accepting “responsibility”. They’re funnier than any comedian with a regular stint on TV. They have no idea what REAL responsibility is, and it gives them the hives when they actually are forced to accept it.
Without any criminal prosecutions, including His Majesty Obama, this will go down in history as just another in a long trail of jokes foisted upon the American People by this Regime.
Have a good laugh, because you might be the next joke in the “news”.
Least we forget, WaterGate and no one died in that cover up!
Who benefits from this obvious lie? Do we actually have a CIC who is not anti-war but on the other side? This is becoming horrifying.
Oh and CNN has a headline that it’s time to move on about Benghazi.
I am curious, we all assume there must have been security assigned to Ambassador Stevens however who were they? What happened to them? How many were there? The administration has allowed everyone o falsely presume the two brave former seals were his security however we all know they were good samriatans that gave the ultimate sacrifice for fellow Americans, but what happened to those that were supposed to be there?
“opportunites in the united states for libyans” (6:18)
great,just what we need—more 3rd world welfare recipients who hate us!
M Report,
I agree it’s weak; but I have no evidence yet, that Stevens was a “broker of weapons.” Although it seems likely.
The bad guys receiving the heavy weapons in Syrian may emerge as the reason Stevens got whacked. Or perhaps we’ll never know. But thousands of missing Libyan MANPADs showing up in Syria is worthy of covering up by this admin.
Gunwalking writ larger than Fast & Furious.
The administration response was beyond bizarre, but it seems more and more to fit a modus of operandi of this administration.
In this case, they seemed oiled and ready to blame the you-tube video to trample on our right of free speech, regardless of how absurd the connection to the video was.
In fast and furious, our government armed the cartels with the knowledge that they could use the resulting gun violence to push for more gun control, weakening our second amendment rights.
It is also along the lines of the Travon Martin case, where they seemed ready and waiting for any event, even if not perfect, to create a media storm to rile up the useful idiots using racism as cover to go after the stand your ground legislation and our right of self-defense.
As for the Bengazi attack, I have no idea if they allowed it to happen or as in the Travon Martin case, just found it useful once it did. But what is clear is that were ready and willing to use this event to successfully attack our right of free speech.
The administration response was beyond bizarre, but it seems more and more to fit a modus of operandi of this administration.
In this case, they seemed oiled and ready to blame the you-tube video to trample on our right of free speech, regardless of how absurd the connection to the video was.
In fast and furious, our government armed the cartels with the knowledge that they could use the resulting gun violence to push for more gun control, weakening our second amendment rights.
It is also along the lines of the Travon Martin case, where they seemed ready and waiting for any event, even if not perfect, to create a media storm to rile up the useful idiots using racism as cover to go after the stand your ground legislation and our right of self-defense.
As for the Bengazi attack, I have no idea if they allowed it to happen or as in the Travon Martin case, just found it useful once it did. But what is clear is that were ready and willing to use this event to successfully attack our right of free speech. Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead.
Yeah.. NO security improvements post-June ’12 is eerily similar to the November ’95 Riyadh van bomb which had killed 5 Americans and 2 Indians. Resulting in smoking mirrors ‘security improvements’ whereas 7 months later the Khobar Towers terrorist attack in Dhahran occurred.
The horrible aspect about both Riyadh, Dhahran bombings is the Sauds didn’t and still doesn’t allow our Feds to question, extradite the terrorists responsible.
So WHEN those responsible for the Benghazi attack are cornered, we again can’t touch ‘em.
RIP Ambassador Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty respectively.
Oops.. ‘smoke and mirrors’
I see where our “intelligence community” is flip flopping back to the video tape as at least part of the reason for the attack. I guess it takes a long time to contact everyone to get their stories straight. How in heavens name does this administration expect to have any credibility, EVER, if they keep massaging the evidence to a point where the evidence doesn’t make their boss look so incompetent? The cover-up to make the divider in chief look good is definitely more important than the loss of life to them, specially with the debate on foreign policy right around the corner.
People don’t seem to really get it yet.
Well meaning people like the dead ambassador and Obama have no idea about the true nature of Islam.
Read “The Innocence of Infidels” at:
http://john-moloney.blogspot.com/
8 previous attacks? British pull out? Red Cross pull out? Ummm, where are our investigative daring reporters, our brave newspapers? Not a word until the disaster? Its impossible the “press” didn’t know these on-the-ground facts! Who suppressed the news?