Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

by
Bryan Preston

Bio

May 7, 2013 - 8:26 am
Page 1 of 2  Next ->   View as Single Page

On Wednesday, at least three State Department employees will testify before the House Government Oversight and Reform Committee on Benghazi. They are expected to say that yes, there was a stand-down order during the battle. They may also testify that the State Department itself has tried to bully them into silence. What else they may say is not yet known.

As the Benghazi story has unfolded, many mysteries have persisted. Why wasn’t the Benghazi mission’s security enhanced? Where was President Obama? What role, if any, did Obama campaign officials play in crafting the government’s communications after the attack? Perhaps Wednesday’s witnesses can help shed some light on them.

1. Who gave the stand-down order, and why? Fox and CBS have both reported that there was a stand-down order issued during the battle in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. Four Americans died, while as many as 30 survived. Assistance could have come in from U.S. bases in Italy or possibly from bases in the Middle East. There was a drone, unarmed, overhead, and there have been reports that an AC-130 gunship was also overhead at some point during the prolonged battle. The question is not, now, whether there was a stand-down order issued. Fox and CBS have independently reported that there was. The question is, how far up in the U.S. chain of command was that decision made, and why was it made? Additionally, how did U.S. forces react to that order? Was anyone relieved of command for considering or attempting to disobey that order, as has been rumored for months?

2. Where was President Obama and what was he doing? As commander-in-chief, the president is ultimately responsible for any U.S. response to attacks on our missions and personnel overseas. According to official schedules and White House answers after the fact, President Obama held a regularly scheduled meeting at 5 pm Washington time with his then Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, around the time that the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi began. No photos from that meeting have been released. The American people have been told very little about the president’s activities that night. He held the meeting, the attack began and would unfold for several hours, and the president reportedly went to bed that night in the White House. By the time he went to bed, news had already broken that U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens was missing. Obama went to bed not knowing his ambassador’s fate, and reportedly learned the next morning that Stevens had been killed. No photos of the president being present or in command during the attack have ever been released by the White House. This in itself is strange behavior from a White House that even released a photo of the president, by himself, holding a moment of silence for the victims of the Boston bombing. In February, Panetta testified that he had no communication with Obama after their September 11 meeting, and in fact had no communication with anyone at the White House at all during the attack, raising the question of whether anyone was in the White House Situation Room monitoring the attack. It’s implausible that the secretary of Defense and president of the United States would not communicate at all during an attack on a U.S. facility overseas, but that is Panetta’s testimony. That mystery deepens when we consider then Secretary of State Clinton’s actions during the attack.

3. Where was Secretary of State Clinton and what was she doing? How much did Clinton know about the security situation in Benghazi before the attack? Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s whereabouts and activities during the attack in Benghazi are similarly mysterious. Clinton’s State Department repeatedly rejected requests for enhancing security at Benghazi, even as Ansar al-Sharia’s power in the area grew over the summer of 2012. Why did State not beef up the Benghazi mission’s security? The Benghazi attack was focused on the U.S. consulate, which belongs to the U.S. State Department. Why Stevens was in Benghazi that night, and what the consulate may have been used for, remains unknown. One of the Wednesday whistleblowers, veteran counterterrorism officer Mark I. Thompson, is expected to testify that Secretary of State Clinton sought to cut the State Department’s counterterrorism bureau out of the chain of reporting and decision-making during the attack. Thompson also claims that the State Department suppressed his account after the attack. Another unnamed State official corroborates Thompson’s account.  But Daniel Benjamin, head of the counterterrorism unit at the time, says Clinton never tried to cut his group out during the attack. All of this brings to mind the question, exactly what was Clinton’s role on the night of the attack? Secretary of Defense Panetta testified that he and Clinton never communicated during the attack. All three of the nation’s top national security and diplomatic officials — President Obama, Defense Secretary Panetta and Secretary of State Clinton — were in Washington that night. Panetta and Clinton were evidently engaged in responding to the attack, independently. Yet according to Panetta, they never talked to each other during the attack. Why would they not communicate during an ongoing attack on a U.S. facility overseas, if indeed they did not? Both Defense and State would surely be involved in any effective response to an attack on a U.S. diplomatic mission overseas.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
The Top 5 questions are:

1)What was going on in Benghazi that this administration is DESPERATE to have us not find out?

2) Why did the FBI roll up into a ball like a hedgehog and completely evaporate, making absolutely no investigation whatsoever?

3) AFTER they arrested the YouTube video guy...KNOWING...that he had absolutely nothing to do with Benghazi...why did they keep him?

4) The military, the CIA, State and the White House ALL knew...that they were going to dummy up the reports on Benghazi...so....why send Susan Rice, who has NO operational or chain of command in ANY of them...out to be the face of the bald faced lies? What was the UN connection to what we had going on behind the scenes and beneath the radar?

5)When Hillary Clinton gets herself in White water...er...hot water...bodies tend to end up with toe tags. But that "really doesn't matter" to her, because...well, she's a leftist Democrat. But...somebody may have double crossed her and Obama. Here's where peeling the onion becomes an all hands on deck job. All things in the Middle East are connected. Obama and Hillary may have been playing footsie with people trained to negotiate like a medieval bazaar. THAT...is where the real story is. Well beneath the surface.
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
Months after film maker Nakoula Basseley Nakoula—whose inconsequential and little viewed homemade video “The Innocence of Muslims” was falsely cited by President Obama, Secretary of State Clinton, and UN Ambassador Rice as inciting and the reason for the Benghazi attack--and he was arrested in the middle of the night on a technicality—in making this film he violated one of the terms of his parole, that he not use computers--he remains in jail, and it is not clear just exactly who ordered him arrested and why, or why he still remains, rotting in confinement.

Thus, I think that another major focus of these hearings ought to be on just who the various actors were who orchestrated this action, in which this man was very publicly scooped up in the middle of the night by several police officers, slammed in jail, and still remains there to this day.

This whole action against an individual citizen is much more reminiscent of the police state tactics of Nazi Germany or the old USSR than it is of the United States, and raises the question--if they can do this to Nakoula, what is to prevent the government from doing this to any one of us, if it is convenient?
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
"...there have been reports that an AC-130 gunship was also overhead at some point during the prolonged battle. "

If you recollect, one of the SEALS had laser-designated targets though no permission to fire was ever given? Those designators, to my recollection, work only if they're synched to a receiving platform. E.g. there was, indeed, an AC-130 orbiting overhead at some point.
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (38)
All Comments   (38)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Start working at home with Google! It's by-far the best job Ive had. Last Monday I got a new Alfa Romeo from bringing in $7778. I started this 9 months ago and practically straight away started making more than $83 per hour. I work through this link, Mojo50.com
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
1. " Who gave the stand-down order, and why?"

Yes, that's an important question. The Dept. of State isn't in the chain of command. Neither, if I'm correct, is the JCS, they're advisory to the President. The question is, who in the chain gave the stand down order. I have a feeling that when the dust clears from this, we're all going to know. Moreover, that will effectively end that officer's military career. Not because he'll be fired. Oh no, it's because nobody from PV1 up will follow such an officer.
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
No soldiers and Obama's comin'
We're finally on our own,
This summer I hear the drummin'
Four dead in Ben-gha-zi
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
Something was going on in Libya that the administration doesn't want the American public to know about. My speculation is that it was gun-running to the Syrian rebels, and the administration didn't want comparisons made to Fast and Furious, which might have hurt Obama's reelection campaign. As for his involvement, he needed his sleep because he had a fund-raising campaign in Las Vegas the next day. I can only speculate that Clinton was either passed out after the fifth white wine, or she saw an opportunity to stab Obama in the back. I loathe them all.
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Any person in the chain of command above can quash an operation."

There are times when an operator can abort a mission if there is no hope of success. But an order to stand-down the QRF (they where in theater) would only come from the CinC. Again, if a subordinate made the call not to deploy the QRF, the CinC concurred in that decision by not negating it. Google "Command by Direction" and "Command by Negation".

"The thing is, the Africa Commanding General was for intervention. It is one of the top commands. There are only a few people above him."

AFRICOM is a Combatant Command (COCOM). COCOMS report directly to the CinC (through the SECDEF who is Deputy CinC). Obama claimed during the Presidential debates that he "ordered" all available assistance be rendered to the Benghazi consulate. If he gave that order it went to Panetta then AFRICOM.

Obviously Obama is lying because if he had ordered a response, I guarantee you that response would have occurred. US servicemen and women do not disobey orders.
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
1) Why was there substandard 9/11 security in the Benghazi consulate to begin with?

2) Why were repeated requests by Ambassador Stevens for increased security disregarded?

3) What is being done by the State Dept. so this doesn't happen again?

4) Were Navy SEALS/CIA contractors Woods and Doherty definitively told to stand down?

5) If Woods and Doherty were told to stand down...why?

6) Was anyone else at the CIA annex told to stand down?

7) If stand down decisions were made... who made the stand down decisions?

8) Why did they get no backup support despite repeated requests?

9) Were air assets really too far away to respond?

10) If they were to far to respond...why were they so far away?

11) Did Doherty or Woods laser a mortar as reported?

12) Did they assume they would have air cover when they lasered the mortar?

13) Were there commands to stand down on air support for Doherty and Woods?

14) If there were commands to stand down...who made those commands?

15) How many State Dept officials did Woods and Doherty save from terrorist attack?

16) Why has there been no coverage of the State Dept officials that Woods and Doherty saved?

17) What was the CIA doing in Libya?

18) Why has nobody done an interview w/ the accused filmmaker?

19) Who made the decision to have the filmmaker arrested?

20) Were the filmmaker's free speech rights infringed upon?

21) Why was the president unaware of Petraeus affair until 5 pm election day?

22) Was there political timing in Petraeus' resignation decision Friday evening 3 days post election?

23) Were the president, vice president, Secretary of State Clinton and UN Secretary Rice aware of editing of Petraeus intelligence memo?

24) Was National Security Advisor Thomas Donilon involved in the decision to redact "Al Qaeda affiliate" and replace with "extremist" in the CIA memo?

25) Was Petraeus sign off on edits to the intelligence memo compromised by his affair?

26) Was the CIA intelligence memo edited for national security purposes or to support a projected political narrative of the attack that would be favorable to the administration?

27) If it was edited for national security reasons why was this necessary for cabinet members (president, vice president, sec of state, UN secretary) who have the highest level of national security clearance?

28) Was the CIA intelligence memo edited because of concern of leaks within the administration?

29) Is there any merit to CIA Libya to Syria gun running rumors?

30) Did the president mean terrorism in Libya on his initial post Benghazi address or was he just giving a vague platitude on terrorism?

31) If Obama was implying terrorism in Libya (as both he and Candy Crowley said during the debate)...why did the administration then spend several days redirecting attention to the cause of the 9/11 attack as a natural spontaneous response to the film?

49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
http://www.voanews.com/content/more-protests-expected-over-anti-islam-film/1507751.html

The Voice of America report from Friday, September 14, 2012. Concludes with:

(begin quote)

A trailer for the anti-Islamic video was posted on YouTube in July. An Arabic-language translation began circulating in the Middle East in recent days. Clips from the movie depict the Prophet Muhammad as a villainous, homosexual, child-molesting buffoon, among other overtly insulting claims.

The film has been widely condemned across the globe and in the United States.

Called "The Innocence of Muslims," the film was said to have been produced by a man named Sam Bacile, who told news media he is Israeli-American. A consultant on the film says that name is a pseudonym, and there are suggestions that the man behind the film is an Egyptian Coptic Christian who lives in California. There is no record of the film or its producer in Hollywood reference sources.

Several news organizations have linked the inflammatory film to an Egyptian American, 55-year-old Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, who lives in California and once was convicted of bank fraud. Nakoula says he handled logistics for the production.

Another California man who says he served as a consultant, Steve Klein, has given conflicting accounts of the film's origin and funding. Klein is the founder of anti-Muslim and other hate groups.

(end quote)

To a 't' the admin's position at the time. Note the perp is a Jew AND a Christian.

===

PJM readers know oft-commenter Adina Kutnicki. I noticed this URL

http://adinakutnicki.com/tag/northeast-intelligence-networkcanada-free-press-too/

...in a search for a wrap to this 'origin of the video' story as it stands. In the middle of the text you'll find the name "Montagraph" hyperlinked. Please go there, and watch the sleuthing story lead through a youtube channel called 'NewsPoliticsNow' right to The Stanley Corporation and The Analysis Corporation, CEO at the time, John O. Brennan.

The Stanley Corp was awarded a nearly $600 million passport file reorganization contract by the state dept three days after the date of the breach --during which candidate Obama's file could've been altered, items added or removed, so say the reports you can find still on the web. CNN had a great three part series on the scandal, i read it only a couple weeks ago. Oddly (i noticed just now, in writing this comment) all those URLs are scrubbed --"internet explorer cannot find the website" message comes up. See fo' yo'self:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2008%2FPOLITICS%2F03%2F22%2Fpassport.files%2Findex.html%3F_s%3DPM%3APOLITICS&form=IE8SRC&src=IE-SearchBox

In the passport-breach spring of 2008, of course, Obama was vying with Hillary for the nomination, so CNN was lavish with Obama-tainting stories. Someone very recently has decided that CNN position ought to go down the good old memory hole. Outrageous news organization behavior, at least 'twas in other times.
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
All sensible important questions, Bryon, but they will never be answered. We may get a squint of the truth here or a glimmer of something real over there, but most of what happened will remain a mystery forever. Why? Because they all lie all the time about everything and even they let down their guard a bit they merely obfuscate. They do it because THEY CAN. They can lie without a care because they know the media will carry all the lies forward until Obama is out of office and hailed as Our Greatest President Ever and Madam Clinton is installed in the WH. They have no morals, no scruples, no conscience and no desire except a greed for power.
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
The Top 5 questions are:

1)What was going on in Benghazi that this administration is DESPERATE to have us not find out?

2) Why did the FBI roll up into a ball like a hedgehog and completely evaporate, making absolutely no investigation whatsoever?

3) AFTER they arrested the YouTube video guy...KNOWING...that he had absolutely nothing to do with Benghazi...why did they keep him?

4) The military, the CIA, State and the White House ALL knew...that they were going to dummy up the reports on Benghazi...so....why send Susan Rice, who has NO operational or chain of command in ANY of them...out to be the face of the bald faced lies? What was the UN connection to what we had going on behind the scenes and beneath the radar?

5)When Hillary Clinton gets herself in White water...er...hot water...bodies tend to end up with toe tags. But that "really doesn't matter" to her, because...well, she's a leftist Democrat. But...somebody may have double crossed her and Obama. Here's where peeling the onion becomes an all hands on deck job. All things in the Middle East are connected. Obama and Hillary may have been playing footsie with people trained to negotiate like a medieval bazaar. THAT...is where the real story is. Well beneath the surface.
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
During the Viet Nam war, every carrier in the gulf, regardless of where it was in the strike cycle, had both an alert CAP bird full of fuel with the crew strapped in ready to launch (until they were replaced by the next watch) and an alert tanker with a ready crew able to be airborne in minutes.
Having F-16's in Aviano with no alert tankers ready to roll is like inserting combat troops into a fight without ammunition.
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 3 Next View All