CIA operators were denied request for help during Benghazi attack, sources say

reply to post by VitriolAndAngst


So what's your thoughts about the attack on Benghazi? The US Gov't had no knowledge it was coming nor could they have prevented it?

I agree with you that Fox is garbage.

Check out a statement from Rand Paul released yesterday.

paul.senate.gov...

Sen. Paul Statement on Administration’s Failure in Libya
Oct 26, 2012 WASHINGTON, D.C. - Sen. Rand Paul today issued the following statement regarding new information pertaining to the Obama Administration's mishandling of the attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

The more we learn about the response to the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, the more apparent it is that the Administration completely failed to adequately protect Americans in danger. They failed to provide a Marine detachment to defend our diplomatic facilities in Libya-one of the most dangerous places on the planet-and they failed to act when those facilities came under attack. Americans posted in Libya repeatedly expressed their concern to their superiors that it was unsafe and that they were not adequately protected. Where were the Marines?

The Consulate's annex in Benghazi was under siege for more than four hours, and this came after the first attack on the U.S. Consulate compound. Despite repeated requests for help, dozens of Americans were left to fend for themselves against heavily armed terrorists. With hours to respond, there was more than enough time to dispatch a Special Operations team from Sigonella Air Force Base in Sicily, but no attempt was made. And now, reports are coming out that CIA and special forces that may have been able to help were told to stand down and not intervene.

Four Americans were killed-including our Ambassador to Libya-but their lives might have been saved had we intervened. I ask again: Where were the Marines to protect American personnel in Libya?

Instead of sending Marines to defend Americans in danger, the State Department was focused on "greening" our Vienna Embassy and installing charging stations for its new electric cars.

Someone must be held accountable for this inaction. The American people and the families of those who were killed expect and deserve to know the truth behind the Administration's complete inaction and failure to protect its embassies and citizens abroad.

reply to post by Americanist


Absolutely the CIA not only has the resources but they have UNLIMITED resources while also being above the law.

Originally posted by Americanist

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Americanist

 

What department in the Obama Administration that was speaking to the matter was not selling the lie about the video?

That tells you something, doesn't it?

Those are spirited questions even though the CIA is hardly tethered to an Administration. If that's what people believe, they're party to a lot of loose strings.

Does the POTUS have any influence or control of all the other departments that he appoints the Directors and Secretaries of?

He does appoint his people to head those departments. Doesn't mean anything I guess???

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst
Are you folks listening to yourselves?
This conspiracy is self-defeating, and it sounds entirely pulled from someone's posterior.

FIRST:
The whole motivation for the President to ALLOW an attack or create one, lacks any PAYOFF for the White House. This isn't the PNAC group with allies in Oil and Israel who directly benefitted from 9/11 with their plans to invade Iraq and control Afghanistan (for a gas pipeline to India and an Opium trade as bonus). THAT right there, is a motivation, and you've got prior planning and a history.

With Obama, you've got a hundred and one phantom conspiracies, based on nothing. If anyone brings this up, they are an "Obama apologist." Way to win friends. But the more flimsy the argument, the more passionate the personal attack.

SECOND:
If the CIA "requested" support for Benghazi attacks, then that means they sat on their hands while a small team took out an embassy. If they need backup when they've got prior knowledge -- they are useless as an organization for data collection or intervention. Which I've always suspected anyway. But when the State Department wanted to pull the "underwear bomber" off his flight, the CIA stated he was part of an ongoing investigation. Then they were the first to disinform the press about no passport. History seems to suggest that the CIA has a freer hand --- so where were they if they had all this PRIOR KNOWLEDGE of an attack? I claim total BW on that.

THIRD:

"Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that three urgent requests from the CIA annex for military back-up "

An outfit that has actual Republican candidates on its payroll to speak, and routinely innuendoes complete nonsense with "Is the President behind the recent spike in oil prices?" shows it's hand on a daily basis as a partisan propaganda op. CNN and NPR also put out nonsense -- but it's corporate in nature, it doesn't target a "side" to win.

"Sources say" on Fox News would mean something, if it ever meant something. Nobody outside of the Tea Party or NeoCons has any credibility for Fox News. So you guys can acquire all the outrage you want, but the last thing you were upset about was based on lies and deception and this is just more cards on a house of cards. You routinely have to ignore the absolute BS that Fox puts out, and then cherry pick "but this MUST be true." They can't lie EVERY TIME, can they? No, just enough to fan the flames.

I do not believe the Executive branch is responsible for the attack of the US consulate in Benghazi (it is not one of those "inside job" deals).

I think that if one examines the evidence utilizing all the information from sources across the spectrum (yes including both left and right leaning media) it becomes clear that the Executive branch launched a well-coordinated messaging campaign to lie to the American people (and the United Nations) by blaming the video for the attack and in the days and weeks following the attacks when it was clear that the video and the attack were not connected the Executive branch continued to push the lie about the video. Their pushing of the video to unprecedented viral view levels were the catalyst for protests and attacks throughout that region endangering Americans across the globe.

Additionally it was CBS News who initially obtained and published those emails, NOT Faux News.

See that Hill - I told you we'd pull it off without a hitch!

reply to post by JacKatMtn

Well seems everything is going according to plans. Always good to leave things in capable hands, the capable hands of Muslim extremists that is. And the guy, well those who live by the sword die by the sword. Or some such as the saying goes. In war people usually die, and when you help overthrow other peoples country, and home, and life, well your bound to have a few people that may be ticked at you. Its not a good ending, but its not like hes the only one that died from that whole free Lydia fiasco, and they did not even have much of a choice in the matter.

Its a brave new world, which one day future generations will wake up in.

Way past time for some people to wake up. Or not, free will and all that. Everybody can do as they will. There is always more then meets the eye, and there is always a whole world more then meets the minds eye. Who knows and Who cares, when tomorrow life will go on as usual and that seems to be the way of it. A strange predicament we put our self's through.

Originally posted by butcherguy

Originally posted by Americanist

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Americanist

 

What department in the Obama Administration that was speaking to the matter was not selling the lie about the video?

That tells you something, doesn't it?

Those are spirited questions even though the CIA is hardly tethered to an Administration. If that's what people believe, they're party to a lot of loose strings.

Does the POTUS have any influence or control of all the other departments that he appoints the Directors and Secretaries of?

He does appoint his people to head those departments. Doesn't mean anything I guess???

Here's a great analogy: CIA are your gunmen - Barack is Tupac (i.e. hologram). I'll let you figure out which song and dance is next. My only interest is canceling this racket they put on as a show for us.

Originally posted by relocator
It's shameful to know that the President shows no shame in the way he behaved after the attack and now after the facts come rolling out...showing how his leadership has failed us all....especially those that gave their life to our country and suffered the consequences of failed policies and human error. Sad to see our President doing soft interviews....going to Vegas and Partying like a rock star...absolutely unbelievable that their isn't more outrage over this kind of behavior from our so called Commander in Chief.

“Presidents don’t have power; their job is to draw attention away from it.” - Ford Prefect

reply to post by NickDC202


So you don't believe it was an inside job but you fully reconize the US gov't and MSM lied their butts off to promote a complete false reality? What? Why would they lie if they had nothing to hide.

The attack was an inside job and most of Washington DC was on in it and it was the American public (& some folks in DC) who were left out of the loop.

The consulate was attacked twice prior to the Sept 11th attack. The ambassordor himself was targeted via the militants Facebook page. The consulate requested security. The US denies security (then lies yet again claiming they had no money to provide security ). The weak & corrupt Libyan Gov't provide security which means the security was also weak & corrupt. The night of the Sept 11th attacks a US drone was overhead (maybe even two). New reports coming out that CIA ex USN SEALs were blocks away and told to stand down resulting in the US Gov't denying the consulate security one last time. Not only were these CIA agents near by but since the attack lasted hours, 4-7, a Special Forces unit could have been dispatched at any time to save the day as well.

So you really believe this wasn't an inside job?

Not just Obama and his regime are guilty, but multiple, powerful, parties are guilty but since most of them make and enforce the laws they won't be reprimanded. Maybe Washington will give the grieving families and public a fall guy to blame while the real criminals remain safe behind closed doors and in plain sight.

Originally posted by galadofwarthethird
reply to post by JacKatMtn

 

Well seems everything is going according to plans. Always good to leave things in capable hands, the capable hands of Muslim extremists that is. And the guy, well those who live by the sword die by the sword. Or some such as the saying goes. In war people usually die, and when you help overthrow other peoples country, and home, and life, well your bound to have a few people that may be ticked at you. Its not a good ending, but its not like hes the only one that died from that whole free Lydia fiasco, and they did not even have much of a choice in the matter.

Its a brave new world, which one day future generations will wake up in.

Way past time for some people to wake up. Or not, free will and all that. Everybody can do as they will. There is always more then meets the eye, and there is always a whole world more then meets the minds eye. Who knows and Who cares, when tomorrow life will go on as usual and that seems to be the way of it. A strange predicament we put our self's through.

You'll find people are easy to manipulate from extremists - westboro to the couch potato for a son... In this case, all it took was bad acting - fox news and a less than perfect hit on someone.


Don't forget this was on 9/11 too.

I rarely ever post here, but I think this needs to be said. All too often I see threads like this on this site, a site that is supposed to be dedicated to finding the truth as opposed to the BS the media feeds us. Our own personal politics should not influence which media stories we choose to take at face value. When a story comes down the mainstream pipeline people here are so quick to disregard it as make believe if it doesn't conform to their personal world view. However now when this comes out from unnamed sources all of a sudden its true? This is in no way an endorsement of Obama or an apology for him, I will not be voting for him or his opponent. The point is, we can't have it both ways. We can't both say the media is a tool of the powers that be, then all of a sudden hold their information on high as if its absolute truth. Truth is not measured by how much it confirms to what you believe. We don't know what these CIA operatives said, we don't know who they talked to, and most importantly we don't even know if this happened at all. There are countless threads on this site about the evil CIA, now all of sudden they are these benevolent operatives who got screwed by Obama? This thread took a news story from a mainstream media source that is heavily criticized on this site as a propaganda machine, made it true, and then twisted the "facts" from the story to make it about Obama. Its threads like this that make me believe this site is merely a tool to confuse and further alienate the sheep.

reply to post by jcrockva


You do make an absolute good point but the truth is whether Fox is lying their asses off about there being 2 CIA ex USN SEALS on the ground or not it doesn't take away from the big picture which is the US Gov't had knowledge of past attacks, future attacks, watched the attacks via their drones, and knew not only was this was not about an Anti Muslim but also that there were NO protests going at all at the consulate.

reply to post by VitriolAndAngst


Well if the other news agencies would cover the story we might see it there too. But noooooooo, they cant talk about something that might not make the President look good. Thats their GUY!!

I wonder what the Presidents voters would say if CNN, MCNBC and the likes was hitting this story as hard as FOX was. There is a reason why they have the largest audience.

reply to post by Swills


Why did they kill the Ambassador instead?

WANTED FOR MANSLAUGHTER AND TREACHERY

Former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were part of a small team who were at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. Consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When they heard the shots fired, they radioed to inform their higher-ups to tell them what they were hearing. They were told to “stand down,” according to sources familiar with the exchange. An hour later, they called again to headquarters and were again told to “stand down.” Woods, Doherty and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the Consulate which at that point was on fire

frontpagemag.com...


By not obeying the order to "stand down" these seals might have screwed up a kidnap attempt.

reply to post by sad_eyed_lady


Ah I see. From earlier reports these CIA ex USN SEALs were told to be working as diplomatic security officers but now it comes out they were CIA officers who were ordered to stand down. Not only that, but when they disobeyed orders and called for back up they were denied. Just goes to show ya the US Gov't really wanted this attack to happen. Now does their involvement correlate to the ambassadors death? It definitely looks that way but the Fox article says that by the time they arrived at the consulate it was already on fire and the ambassador already missing. But in this day and age of disinformation, half truths and lies, who knows what is what. So I'm with you on thinking they foiled the kidnapping.

Our US Gov't is blatantly guilty of murder and nothing will be done about it yet again.

reply to post by girlofmountain1


Good sheep, Fox will set you free. If we get rid of Obama the lies will stop because they started with him, not. Fox like the rest of the "news" networks you named are working for the same people. They want you to believe that by electing a different puppet something will change. Use your long term memory it matters not who sleeps in the white house the lies are part of the job. The current presidents job like the men before him and the men that will come after him is to read what he is told to read. If he was told to announce to us that the Easter bunny killed the ambassador, that is exactly what he would have said. If Romney wins this election please use the same standards to judge his lies, then maybe just maybe people like yourself who still buy the two party manufactured soap opera will wake up.

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by NickDC202

 

So you don't believe it was an inside job but you fully reconize the US gov't and MSM lied their butts off to promote a complete false reality? What? Why would they lie if they had nothing to hide.

The attack was an inside job and most of Washington DC was on in it and it was the American public (& some folks in DC) who were left out of the loop.

The consulate was attacked twice prior to the Sept 11th attack. The ambassordor himself was targeted via the militants Facebook page. The consulate requested security. The US denies security (then lies yet again claiming they had no money to provide security

). The weak & corrupt Libyan Gov't provide security which means the security was also weak & corrupt. The night of the Sept 11th attacks a US drone was overhead (maybe even two). New reports coming out that CIA ex USN SEALs were blocks away and told to stand down resulting in the US Gov't denying the consulate security one last time. Not only were these CIA agents near by but since the attack lasted hours, 4-7, a Special Forces unit could have been dispatched at any time to save the day as well.

So you really believe this wasn't an inside job?

Not just Obama and his regime are guilty, but multiple, powerful, parties are guilty but since most of them make and enforce the laws they won't be reprimanded. Maybe Washington will give the grieving families and public a fall guy to blame while the real criminals remain safe behind closed doors and in plain sight.

edit on 27-10-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)

I believe that a man who is far more concerned about his own place in history and his own need to be reelected acted to justify and downplay this attack to the American people. I think that he, like many others, believe that the American public have a very short attention span and would be easily distracted by some other "news" or "entertainment" event and the public would quickly forget about four Americans killed on the other side of the world. I think their strategy was to hammer the fictional storyline that the attacks were "the result of an offensive video which led to a protest that spiraled out of control" and by saturating the media with this message for weeks that the American public would simply say "that makes sense" and move on to the next NFL game or Kardashian scandal without any thought to question what his administration said happened. When the Executive branch was surprised by members of BOTH political parties and the media questioning their storyline, the administration chose to paint the questions as an exploitation of a tragedy for political purposes (which, of course, was another lie because the questions were raised by members of both parties and not done for political gain). Now the Executive branch finds itself facing a quandry: How to respond to the factual information being leaked by government insiders who for their own safety have been anonymous sources and the statements of fact from CIA Director General David Petraeus. The President likely cannot understand how or why individuals within the government would be more loyal to the United States than to him....

Originally posted by girlofmountain1
I wonder what the Presidents voters would say if CNN, MCNBC and the likes was hitting this story as hard as FOX was. There is a reason why they have the largest audience.

Jake Tapper of ABC News has, very admirably, been pushing for the truth about the attack on the Benghazi consulate and questioning the lies of the Executive branch.

reply to post by NickDC202


Can't say I disagree with any of that. The only thing I disagree with is focusing on Obama and his willy gang of misfits. This betrayal goes much deeper.