It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by MsAphrodite
FYI:
Buckrogerstime joined us on 10-31-12
Interesting to note that we have a newbie with so much propaganda.
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by boomer135
i didn't say that fact was false, just incomplete and presented falsely, as it was and still is to this day.
most anyone who listened, left with the impression that the terrorist in Obamas eyes was the video author, not the attackers.
(and, let's not forget how the administration hassled the guy either)
l
you open with ...and at this point, just about EVERYONE knows that's a bold-faced lie.
Obama referred to the attack as an "act of terror" on 9/12 and 9/13
[it's not surprising that you fail to include a link]
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by boomer135
look, the CIA is just as much a part of government as the military.
If Gen Ham can be relieved of duty, so can the CIA and its operatives.
at this point, from all of what i've read, it would be the CIA who provided the greatest response and assistance during the crisis, not the WH or any department of it.
Little said that within a few hours of the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta ordered U.S. military forces to move to Sicily in preparation for an uncertain situation in Libya. “This department took swift action,” said Little. “It did respond, the secretary ordered forces to move. “We were prepared for a range of contingencies in the course of this very tragic incident,” said Little. “We were ready for the need to augment security measures at our facilities in Libya, if called upon. We were prepared for the possibility, for instance, of a hostage situation, as well. These were all the things that we were looking at for an event we did not know was going to happen in Benghazi that night. ”
And we don't know if he waited until the scheduled meeting to discuss it.
actually we do or the CRG would have been convened.
and, let's not forget, from the time it's reported the FLASH was sent, Obama had it for more than an hour without ANY response at all ... not even convening a meeting with the CRG. (i may have that abbreviation wrong but it's the Counter-Terrorism Response team - whatever their alphabet designation is)
i don't deny some form of communication may have been established but any actions resulting from it certainly don't reflect Obamas statement of (paraphrased) "we're expending all available resources to assist our personnel" ... if it did, we wouldn't be talking about it now.
CBS News has learned that during the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Obama Administration did not convene its top interagency counterterrorism resource: the Counterterrorism Security Group, (CSG). "The CSG is the one group that's supposed to know what resources every agency has. They know of multiple options and have the ability to coordinate counterterrorism assets across all the agencies," a high-ranking government official told CBS News. "They were not allowed to do their job. They were not called upon."
As to why the Counterterrorism Security Group was not convened, National Security Council Spokesman Tommy Vietor told CBS News "From the moment the President was briefed on the Benghazi attack, the response effort was handled by the most senior national security officials in governments. Members of the CSG were of course involved in these meetings and discussions to support their bosses."
Absent coordination from Counterterrorism Security Group, a senior U.S. counterterrorism official says the response to the crisis became more confused. The official says the FBI received a call during the attack representing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and requesting agents be deployed. But he and his colleagues agreed the agents "would not make any difference without security and other enablers to get them in the country and synch their efforts with military and diplomatic efforts to maximize their success."
hey now, i was quoting you ... "hard visual evidence" ... you asked if there was any.
i haven't seen any but if it exists, it will leak eventually.
regarding the UAVs (drones?), i am taking the word of those who were there that day, as i don't know enough about them to really argue either side but if those fighting said they were there, then i'm believing them until proven otherwise.
Little reaffirmed that no other American aircraft were involved over Libya the night of the attack beyond the unarmed surveillance drone that arrived 90 minutes into the attack. As for reports that an AC-130 gunship could have been dispatched over Libya at the time of the attack, Little was clear that “there was no AC-130 within a continent’s range of Benghazi” that night.
it'd be kinda hard to hold anyone accountable/responsible without the truth, wouldn't it ??
does it matter, which people ??
Which people on the scene said there were drones for the entirety of the attack?
now, we can dispute IF there is footage all day long.
truth-out.org...
According to a report in the Daily Beast on Oct. 12, administration officials are studying a videotape of a live feed from the drone that "saw" at least the last hour of the assault that led to the killing of the US ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens, and the deaths of three other US personnel in and around the Benghazi consulate.
Shortly before that call, at 4:30 p.m., the Pentagon’s command center had alerted Defense Secretary Panetta and others to the attack. Minutes later, the U.S. military’s Africa Command redirected an unarmed drone from its surveillance mission over militant camps to Benghazi. When the drone arrived at 5:11 p.m. Eastern time, cameras captured images of burning buildings, helping officials in Washington pinpoint which facilities had been targeted by militants. But the images didn’t help the CIA team on the ground respond to the attacks, officials said.
From the moment the President was briefed on the Benghazi attack, the response effort was handled by the most senior national security officials in governments. Members of the CSG were of course involved in these meetings and discussions to support their bosses."
Absent coordination from Counterterrorism Security Group, a senior U.S. counterterrorism official says the response to the crisis became more confused.
do you really believe that ??
But the high ranking officials or designee’s were there to give their support
i'm guessing you haven't even opened my link, let alone read it
With that being said I would like to point out that the teams sent to the region didn't fully arrive until after the attack was over.
world.time.com...
About 3.2 km away from the compound, at the February 17th Brigade’s headquarters, militia members heard the battle raging. “We got in our vehicles in less than five minutes,” says Wisam, a militia fighter. “There were about 18 of us in five pickup trucks.” Within minutes they arrived on the road leading to the mission. There they found the attackers organized in large groups. “There were too many people and we couldn’t resist them,” Wisam said. When the militia told the besiegers that they were trying to reach the mission to verify that their comrades were safe, an attacker fired off two warning shots at their feet. “We were a clear target so we turned around and headed down the street.” Once out of range of the attackers’ small arms fire, the militia set up a position and bombarded the mob with longer-range weapons. “We started shooting back with [Russian anti-aircraft] Dushkas and RPGs. It was a 90 minute firefight.” The militia contingent was reinforced with other February 17th fighters who set up a perimeter along the streets surrounding the U.S. compound.
same link
About 45 minutes into the fighting, a quick reaction team composed of six Americans from what was called the “annex,” an unofficial, low-key “safe house” for U.S. security forces approximately two kilometers away. They came barreling down to the mission in a BMW sedan and a Mercedes Benz SUV. There they encountered Wisam and about 40 other February 17th members, some of whom helped escort the Americans into the compound. “We jogged alongside the cars,” Wisam said. “There were 12 of us. We didn’t know what to expect inside.”
i think i missed a post or two along the way, but this is where i picked up so, if out of sequence, i apologize.
ok seriously, is this my comprehension error or do you see what i'm reading here ?
from your quote of CBS ...
From the moment the President was briefed on the Benghazi attack, the response effort was handled by the most senior national security officials in governments. Members of the CSG were of course involved in these meetings and discussions to support their bosses."
Absent coordination from Counterterrorism Security Group, a senior U.S. counterterrorism official says the response to the crisis became more confused.
"were of course involved" ... assumes they were participants
whereas ... "Absent coordination from Counterterrorism Security" clearly indicates that any coordination was absent/non-existant.
so, which is it ??
But the high ranking officials or designee’s were there to give their support
do you really believe that ??
as for which drone was flying that day, i'm not one to even guess.
was armed or not, i do not know ... however, something was being coordinated for an airstrike or there would be no need to lase a target in preparation of one.
now, please don't take this the wrong way but i have not read all of the msm blubs/stories on this event, simply because i don't trust any of them.
point is, arguing about their printed material or lack thereof is not what i hope to achieve.
fyi, i am not convinced a target wasn't lased, hence, the need/necessity for a 'stand down/abort' order.
perhaps, without this factor in conjunction with Gen Ham's relief, i might be inclined to believe otherwise, however, the moves have been made and we are left to interpret them
(isn't chess fun ?)
thanks for the compliment, right back at ya
it is refreshing to discuss a topic rather wade through all the bickering nonsense so often seen these days 'round here. |~| cheers boomer135
now, please don't take this the wrong way but i have not read all of the msm blubs/stories on this event, simply because i don't trust any of them.
point is, arguing about their printed material or lack thereof is not what i hope to achieve.
really ???
Obama made some off the cuff remark about how 'no act of terror would shake the resolve of this country' or something along that line ... which wasn't even close to indicating this attack was a terrorist attack.
heck, he went on several talk shows and dodged the question repeatedly but that isn't what this topic is about, so ... i thought we were sharing information here ?
”As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe”.
“No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.”
”And make no mistake, we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people.”
“Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.”
1. Terror-
a. Intense, overpowering fear. See Synonyms at fear.
b. One that instills intense fear: a rabid dog that became the terror of the neighborhood.
c. The ability to instill intense fear: the terror of jackboots pounding down the street.
d. Violence committed or threatened by a group to intimidate or coerce a population, as for military or political purposes.
e. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) terrorism
1. terrible
a. very serious or extreme a terrible cough
b. Informal of poor quality; unpleasant or bad a terrible meal a terrible play
c. causing terror
d. causing awe the terrible nature of God
2. Adj. terrible - causing fear or dread or terror; "the awful war"; "an awful risk"; "dire news"; "a career or vengeance so direful that London was shocked"; "the dread presence of the headmaster"; "polio is no longer the dreaded disease it once was"; "a dreadful storm"; "a fearful howling"; "horrendous explosions shook the city"; "a terrible curse"
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by boomer135
with this ...i'm guessing you haven't even opened my link, let alone read it
With that being said I would like to point out that the teams sent to the region didn't fully arrive until after the attack was over.
from the link provided many pages ago
world.time.com...
About 3.2 km away from the compound, at the February 17th Brigade’s headquarters, militia members heard the battle raging. “We got in our vehicles in less than five minutes,” says Wisam, a militia fighter. “There were about 18 of us in five pickup trucks.” Within minutes they arrived on the road leading to the mission. There they found the attackers organized in large groups. “There were too many people and we couldn’t resist them,” Wisam said. When the militia told the besiegers that they were trying to reach the mission to verify that their comrades were safe, an attacker fired off two warning shots at their feet. “We were a clear target so we turned around and headed down the street.” Once out of range of the attackers’ small arms fire, the militia set up a position and bombarded the mob with longer-range weapons. “We started shooting back with [Russian anti-aircraft] Dushkas and RPGs. It was a 90 minute firefight.” The militia contingent was reinforced with other February 17th fighters who set up a perimeter along the streets surrounding the U.S. compound.
and then there's this ...
same link
About 45 minutes into the fighting, a quick reaction team composed of six Americans from what was called the “annex,” an unofficial, low-key “safe house” for U.S. security forces approximately two kilometers away. They came barreling down to the mission in a BMW sedan and a Mercedes Benz SUV. There they encountered Wisam and about 40 other February 17th members, some of whom helped escort the Americans into the compound. “We jogged alongside the cars,” Wisam said. “There were 12 of us. We didn’t know what to expect inside.”
seriously, give it a read ... it pokes numerous holes in the msm tales thus far.
Little said that within a few hours of the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta ordered U.S. military forces to move to Sicily in preparation for an uncertain situation in Libya. According to Little, Panetta ordered forces to move towards the naval air station in Sigonella, Italy, after conferring with Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Gen. Carter Ham, the commander of U.S. Africa Command who was in Washington for regularly scheduled meetings.
Among the units ordered by Panetta on the night of the attack to Sicily, which is less than 500 miles from Libya,were two special operations teams that were moved to Sigonella.
As previously reported, one of the units came from a U.S. military base in “Central Europe.” And Little disclosed that Panetta also ordered another team from the United States to head to Sigonella. Little refused to describe what kind of unit was sent from the U.S., though it was presumably a special operations team trained for hostage rescues.
Little said both the units “did not arrive until after the entire sequence of events was complete. … They were in Sigonella many hours after the attacks.”
to me, absent cooperation is just that ... no extras, no fluff, no cooperation, period.
I do because of the reasons you listed above. It sounds to me like although they didn't officially activate the CSG, they had some of the members there to give advice to the president, i.e. give their support. I'll admit that it's a sketchy paragraph in terms of wording, but that's what I interpret it to be.
no, the seal story about target lasing came from audio in that link ATS censors prevent from linking properly here ... search: Penetta Doctrine.
So you don't trust any of the msm stories and blurps, but you use that SEAL story about the lasering in your post
surely you aren't insinuating that military/artillery movements are public knowledge ??
then a record of the takeoff and landing would be public knowledge
:LOL: Quite likely, most anytime his/her lips are moving since the dawn of Hoover's CIA.
I'm in the conclusion that yes msm lies, but when they cover the spokesman for the CIA, they are just transcribing his words into paper. Is he lying?
a whole week ?? 3 days ppl, 3 days.
This is where the rubber meets the road for the Obama administration. They’ve spent the entirety of the last week playing movie critic to a YouTube video that presents an offensive take on Islam.
so, the statement of the Libyan President has no bearing on this investigation ??
same link
The attacks last week, especially in Libya, were well-planned and coordinated beginning months ago, as the Libyan President stated this morning.
the problem here is, back then, ppl really weren't paying attention and so we've evolved to the fiasco that are the stories of today.
Quoting senior diplomatic sources, the paper reports, “the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted.” Nonetheless, “no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and ‘lockdown,’ under which movement is severely restricted.”
It gets worse. According to security sources, the State Department had greenlit a “health check” at the consulate I preparation for 9/11. Nonetheless, the attackers broke the perimeter within 15 minutes of the Libyan mob forming.
kinda hard to separate the two when they are the same ppl who were "contracted" ie. paid to provide security isn't it ?
not people already in the city volunteering to help
considering the circumstances, i couldn't agree more but one question nags at me in that respect as well ... a 7hr siege and none of them was killed ??
These guys did a great job keeping as many people safe as they could.
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by boomer135
i am not claiming to believe one thing or the other, however, when info is being systematically ignored (such as the lasing) there is usually more to the story where those who'd prefer it doesn't get out, wind up getting their way.
my question for you would be this ... how could the attackers land a precision mortar without having a sightable target in advance ?
[it was 3am and this was supposed to be an undisclosed location]
do you really think the seals would have intentionally revealed their position with a laser unless a strike was imminent ?
They requested assistance several times and were denied. They had AQ mortars painted via laser and requested a C130 attack on the target or a missile strike via a F-22 or F-35. Feedback was they did not want collateral damage of friendlies that may have taken to the streets.
Fox News has learned the guns were fitted with PEQ-15 lasers. CIA agents were equipped with Mark 48 machine guns and had two types of laser capability. Each weapon had both a “passive” as well as a “visible” laser that could be used against the Libyan attackers.
Oh so now they had GLD's, as CIA agents, former SEALS, etc...
The Annex team also had Ground Laser Designators, or GLD. This kind of laser equipment emits code and signal when there is overhead air support, unmanned aerial surveillance, drones or Spectre gunships, for instance.
A laser designator is a laser light source which is used to designate a target. Laser designators provide targeting for laser guided bombs, missiles, or precision artillery munitions.When a target is marked by a designator, the beam is invisible and does not shine continuously. Instead, a series of coded pulses of laser-light are fired.
yet, i previously linked sources indicating the drone arrived at 5:11p EST, approx, 41 minutes after fighting began around 4:30 ... not 90 minutes as your source says.
We now know that the drone didn’t arrive until 90 minutes after the start of the attack from the same abc source as above
blogs.cfr.org...
Shortly before that call, at 4:30 p.m., the Pentagon’s command center had alerted Defense Secretary Panetta and others to the attack. Minutes later, the U.S. military’s Africa Command redirected an unarmed drone from its surveillance mission over militant camps to Benghazi. When the drone arrived at 5:11 p.m. Eastern time, cameras captured images of burning buildings, helping officials in Washington pinpoint which facilities had been targeted by militants. But the images didn’t help the CIA team on the ground respond to the attacks, officials said.
blogs.cfr.org...
John McCain, Kelly Ayotte, and Lindsay Graham,
Letter to Leon Panetta, David Petraeus, and Eric Holder,
October 26, 2012.
We are writing to you to request the immediate declassification of all surveillance video in and around the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi for the two days—September 11 and 12, 2012—that it and related U.S. facilities were under attack. It has been reported that the Department of Defense, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the Department of State had assets, both air-and ground-based, that recorded the events of those fateful days, and we understand that video is now in the possession of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and has been classified Top Secret.
It is vitally important that the American people know all of the facts surrounding the attack in Benghazi last month, and this surveillance video can shed important light on the nature of the attack and what kind of response could have been effective while it was ongoing. Many of our constituents are demanding answers to these and other important questions, we need the best possible information to fulfill our responsibilities to our fellow citizens. We therefore request that you declassify this video immediately.
then you should find this one of interest
then we finally have another drone that provides real time video of the attack (which by the way wasn’t stated anywhere in any source I’ve read.
According to a report in the Daily Beast on Oct. 12, [color=amber]administration officials are studying a videotape of a live feed from the drone that "saw" at least the last hour of the assault that led to the killing of the US ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens, and the deaths of three other US personnel in and around the Benghazi consulate.
Originally posted by boomer135
reply to post by boomer135
Continuing, I believe that there is no way that the former SEALS, current CIA agent was lasering a target that night with an AIRCRAFT laser system. He probably had the personal laser on his gun, but if he's firing his weapon and trying to lase a target, then he's a pretty good cat. Either way, unless he was using the "red dot" feature on the gun laser, he would not have given his position away. The fact that he called for an F-35 strike in the initial report further tells me that this story is false. Unless I'm way of the beaten path and the F-35 is out of development phase already and is combat ready...
Bottom line, nobody lased a target that night. Foxnews needed some fuel for the right wing party and made up a wild story about ex-SEALS being on top of a building lasing a target with hopes that an AC-130 or an F-35 would bomb the hell out of an angry crowd filled with terrorists and civilians alike. DONT BELIEVE THE HYPE PEOPLE!!!
a quick google search revealed the F35B achieving successful air-start tests.
Unless I'm way of the beaten path and the F-35 is out of development phase already and is combat ready...
there's more info at the link but i'm not sure if this means they were available or not
ex.democracydata.com...
* Since December 2006, F-35s have flown 3,043 times and accrued more than 4,808 cumulative flight hours.
* On September 4, the Edwards Air Force Base team launched six aircraft (AF-1, 2, 7 and 3 chase) to the Sea Test Range with tanker for three separate missions.
F-35 Deliveries
* 37 F-35s have been delivered to the Department of Defense:
o 12 System Development and Demonstration (SDD) aircraft
o 25 Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) aircraft, including two international F-35s
* This includes 3 LRIP aircraft that have completed DD250 at Fort Worth
Originally posted by Honor93
Originally posted by boomer135
reply to post by boomer135
Continuing, I believe that there is no way that the former SEALS, current CIA agent was lasering a target that night with an AIRCRAFT laser system. He probably had the personal laser on his gun, but if he's firing his weapon and trying to lase a target, then he's a pretty good cat. Either way, unless he was using the "red dot" feature on the gun laser, he would not have given his position away. The fact that he called for an F-35 strike in the initial report further tells me that this story is false. Unless I'm way of the beaten path and the F-35 is out of development phase already and is combat ready...
Bottom line, nobody lased a target that night. Foxnews needed some fuel for the right wing party and made up a wild story about ex-SEALS being on top of a building lasing a target with hopes that an AC-130 or an F-35 would bomb the hell out of an angry crowd filled with terrorists and civilians alike. DONT BELIEVE THE HYPE PEOPLE!!!
now, i've already admitted that i have no real knowledge about the armament, equipment, what's issued, what's deployed or any other such details.
so, in the spirit of learning ... i'm curious why you said this?
a quick google search revealed the F35B achieving successful air-start tests.
Unless I'm way of the beaten path and the F-35 is out of development phase already and is combat ready...
is this the plane you are referencing ?
defensetech.org...
i'm pretty sure the F35A would be much farther along in it's combat ready status, wouldn't you agree ?
guess what? i was curious enough to look and check this out ...there's more info at the link but i'm not sure if this means they were available or not
ex.democracydata.com...
* Since December 2006, F-35s have flown 3,043 times and accrued more than 4,808 cumulative flight hours.
* On September 4, the Edwards Air Force Base team launched six aircraft (AF-1, 2, 7 and 3 chase) to the Sea Test Range with tanker for three separate missions.
F-35 Deliveries
* 37 F-35s have been delivered to the Department of Defense:
o 12 System Development and Demonstration (SDD) aircraft
o 25 Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) aircraft, including two international F-35s
* This includes 3 LRIP aircraft that have completed DD250 at Fort Worth
(although, i tend to think so)
since i have no way of knowing what potential strike power was available in Benghazi, i cannot discount the possibility of an F35, can you ?