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

reply to post by hypervigilant


See I can only go by what I actualy know. I would love to think the military has developed infalibale targeting sytems but that has not been my experience. I have always considered AC-130s as sledge hammers.
Here is some footage from an AC-130 which is the best I have seen for acquiring targets. You may want to keep in mind the reports at the time were that people were missing when you are looking at the little white dots running across the screen.The other thing was this was urban combat tight quarters if that makes a difference to you. It may provide a little perspective when thinking about these claims.



Still I would love to know what kind of rounds that use laser designation are used on AC-130s.

reply to post by Grimpachi

Still I would love to know what kind of rounds that use laser designation are used on AC-130s.

I think you are right.
The option would have been a drone or an fighter/attack jet that was armed with laser guided munitions.

Earlier posts mentioned F-16's which were available at Sigonella. They could have been on site in an hour.

Originally posted by Vitruvian

Originally posted by milominderbinder
Cool. So...correct me if I'm wrong...but it looks like we agree on the following.

8. ????
Can you think of any other ones?
When we really start rattling off ALL of the possibilities...we start to get a pretty complex picture of the events...don't we?

I have a few questions to add to your well thought out list:

8. Does the US government presently have troops secretly stationed in Jordan?
9. Did the president, the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and CIA Director General Petraeus and others have pre - ordained information regarding upcoming events, and were they watching those events as they unfolded in real time? If so who else watched it unfold and who else knows now?
10. Given the fact that presidential candidates get special TS security briefings - does Governor Romney now know all of what happened?
11. How did the "stand down order"(s) come to be and who gave them? Given what we know now about the 9/11 attacks we can see that there was NO attempt to even try to save to save our people in Libya, that we didn’t do anything to rescue them. In fact whoever gave the “stand down(s)” order to our forces at the annex in Benghazi is responsible for the actual killing of ambassador Stevens and Sean Smith because it’s highly likely that the small force from the Annex could have disrupted the attack and likely saved Stevens and Smith.

edit on 30-10-2012 by Vitruvian because: txt

Sure. I'll go with those. Now...do you have any actual evidence for ANY of items 1-11 that are attributable to a named source, have a document which we can reference, or any credible reason why we should think that one scenario is more likely than the other?

I can't find A THING.

Troops in Jordan? -- Well...this is the first I heard of it, and I have no idea at all what it has to do with Benghazi...but I would imagine that we do. We pretty much have a military installation just about everywhere.

Did the Admin have knowledge of anything, watch it unfold in real time, etc? -- No idea. I have no more reason to believe this is any more likely or probable than it the Israeli Mossad or KGB that fired the rocket and the video was a faked. Or space aliens or bigfoot for that matter. I'm certainly not going to just assume that they did because a pundit on TV keeps asking "Didthe president know about the attack beforehand..." and never being able to move past the rhetorical question with some type...ANY TYPE of material evidence OF ANY KIND!!

Does Romney know everything? -- Again. No idea. Has Romney specifically stated that he was not briefed on the situation? I haven't heard that. All I hear is Romney continuing to ask the same "Benghazi Questions" over and over again. For all you or I know Romney could have been briefed in full and in perfect agreement with how Obama handled the situation. However...if it's classified info then Romney could just keep asking the same questions over and over knowing full well that Obama simply CANNOT come out address them openly for Reasons X,Y, & Z. If you have a current video from yesterday or today of Romney stating in no uncertain terms that he has not been briefed on the situation...let me know. It seems like it's just a bunch of wild speculation to me, though.

Stand down order? What stand down order????. During the 9-11 attacks we had the testimony from the US Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta that Dick Cheney personally issued a stand down order. Eyewitness testimony isn't rock solid...but at least SOMEBODY of a fairly decent reputation will stand up and vouch for the validity of the allegation. The guy stood nothing to gain and everything to lose considering he was a member of the Bush Admin's OWN CABINET...but he did it anyways. It's still possible that Mineta misheard, misinterpreted, or is simply lying because he has an axe to grind w/ Cheney...but it DOES at least meet the MINIMUM requirements to be considered circumstantial evidence.

To date, I believe all we have about Benghazi is Newt Gingrich saying that he heard from an unnamed "source" that a different "unnamed source" gave two "unnamed news networks" damning "documents" with orders to stand down from a ret. USMC GENERAL who was the Bush Administrations Supreme Allied Commander of Europe (SACEUR)...essentially the same position as Dwight D. Eisenhower once held.

So...the best that Newt Gingrinch can do is say that the USMC General Jones who was repeatedly asked to be the Deputy Secretary of State by Condoleezza Rice issued a stand down order... MAYBE THERE WAS A DAMN GOOD REASON FOR IT???

Assuming it even happened of course. Right now all we have is a guy that we know lied to and cheated on two of his cancer stricken wives who is involved in a children's game of "telephone".

reply to post by milominderbinder


They watched in real time. This is a member of the committee investigating this.

Hey everyone can you do me a favor? Reply to this below thread to keep it alive. Skip the stars and flags... please.... And share it with everyone. I just want this circulated to as many people as possible. Included is a letter to the president from the committee concerning the Oversight Committee hearing.

Important Benghazi documents that shouldn't be missed.

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
reply to post by milominderbinder

 

They watched in real time. This is a member of the committee investigating this.

LOL. Did you even watch the videos?

Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Programs, Ms. Charlene R. Lamb testifies before Congress and tells everyone that communication kept getting interrupted, it was not clear if the attack was pre-meditated, part of a local protest/riot, or inspired by riots elsewhere in the Middle East. .

Then at 2:20 Rep. James Lankford (R-OK) says "Here's my trouble with that" and attempts to turn her sworn testimony into the exact opposite of what she just said. Charlene Lamb politely indicates that Rep Lankford is incorrect and repeats what she just got done telling him.

Comedically, Lankford touches on how "small the compound was" (at 3:25). I guess there goes the theory that the compound was larger than normal, huh?

Then Bush's former Chief of staff for the Coalition Provisional Authority, Baghdad, Iraq, (2003) and theTransition Unit, Baghdad, Iraq, (2004) Ambassador Patrick F. Kennedy (and no...NOT related to to JFK and Ted. Just like Sophia Bush isn't related to George W. Bush) corroborated both the stories from the Obama Administration, and the testimony of Charlene Lamb that they were getting multiple and conflicting reports. Kennedy then stated that he would need a classified session in order to share some sensitive information ...alluding to but not coming right out and saying, that it pertained to an ongoing operation.

So...tell me.

Why are all of these high-ranking Bush Administration cabinets members supposedly trying to help Obama "cover something up"??

It seems as straight forward as can be. True....I personally much rather NO INFORMATION WAS CLASSIFIED AT ALL...but if that by ITSELF is a reason for such outrage every president in the history of the United States is guilty as charged. Including Reagan and George Washington alike.

THERE IS NO STORY PEOPLE!!

The only thing that is REALLY interesting here is how adamant so many people can be about unsubstantiated hearsay.

It's truly crazy.

Originally posted by milominderbinder
The only thing that is REALLY interesting here is how adamant so many people can be about unsubstantiated hearsay.

It's truly crazy.

Its because its the Closest thing to Dirt they have.
Obama hasnt Farted in a Elevator in weeks.

Spin away, you need to watch the entire hearing. It is not favorable for Obama and his DoS.

Just wondering, where are the orders the president claims he gave? Seems he could put a quick end to this by producing them.

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by milominderbinder
The only thing that is REALLY interesting here is how adamant so many people can be about unsubstantiated hearsay.

It's truly crazy.

Its because its the Closest thing to Dirt they have.
Obama hasnt Farted in a Elevator in weeks.

I know. After three debates the best the Romney campaign can do is create a mountain out of a molehill. Since 1921 our embassies have been attacked 31 times. This is pretty routine stuff. I certainly never remember people being so worked up about it before.

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by milominderbinder
The only thing that is REALLY interesting here is how adamant so many people can be about unsubstantiated hearsay.

It's truly crazy.

Its because its the Closest thing to Dirt they have.
Obama hasnt Farted in a Elevator in weeks.

I know. After three debates the best the Romney campaign can do is create a mountain out of a molehill. Since 1921 our embassies have been attacked 31 times. This is pretty routine stuff. I certainly never remember people being so worked up about it before.

I'm sure your president has the same attitude as your own. Are you aware that this is the first time that we have lost an ambassador since 1979? This is not routine stuff. There is nothing routine about it.

reply to post by MsAphrodite


I totally agree! And it happend on Obama's watch.

Wow it is quiet in this thread right now. I hope this means everyone is reading those documents. Or maybe even watching the hearing.

Originally posted by MsAphrodite

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by milominderbinder
The only thing that is REALLY interesting here is how adamant so many people can be about unsubstantiated hearsay.

It's truly crazy.

Its because its the Closest thing to Dirt they have.
Obama hasnt Farted in a Elevator in weeks.

I know. After three debates the best the Romney campaign can do is create a mountain out of a molehill. Since 1921 our embassies have been attacked 31 times. This is pretty routine stuff. I certainly never remember people being so worked up about it before.

I'm sure your president has the same attitude as your own. Are you aware that this is the first time that we have lost an ambassador since 1979? This is not routine stuff. There is nothing routine about it.

The guy wasn't an "ambassador". Chris Stevens was a TERRORIST!! Once again. He was an illegal alien that armed, funded, and orchestrated a civil war which killed 50,000 civilians in order to overthrow the most stable, prosperous, and civil-rights oriented government on the African Continent. After being in the country for A YEAR AND A HALF ILLEGALLY and leaving huge piles of rotting corpses in his wake...he was named "ambassador".

If that's our idea of "diplomacy"...it's no wonder so many countries hate us so badly. The four dead Americans were all CIA operatives. They were not "our troops". What you guys are so upset about is that we didn't send a bunch of our REAL TROOPS...the 19 and 20 yr old kids that got deployed down the block from you... into the meat grinder to save four guys who helped wrack up a body count of more innocent civilians than in all armed conflict and terrorist attacks from all Arab/Islamic groups or nations COMBINED in the ENTIRE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES.

Quite frankly...I feel the world is just a little bit safer place without four more guys like this in it. Don't you think it's about time we stopped toppling governments in the Middle East? It hasn't worked ONE SINGLE TIME since 1948...but this time Libya is going to be all different?

That's insane.

Originally posted by elouina
reply to post by MsAphrodite

 

I totally agree! And it happend on Obama's watch.

Wow it is quiet in this thread right now. I hope this means everyone is reading those documents. Or maybe even watching the hearing.

I watched the hearing. The hearing was a joke. Just a couple of Republican's getting really upset that the answers make sense and are perfectly congruent with one another.

But I will read the documents later.

Originally posted by MsAphrodite

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by milominderbinder
The only thing that is REALLY interesting here is how adamant so many people can be about unsubstantiated hearsay.

It's truly crazy.

Its because its the Closest thing to Dirt they have.
Obama hasnt Farted in a Elevator in weeks.

I know. After three debates the best the Romney campaign can do is create a mountain out of a molehill. Since 1921 our embassies have been attacked 31 times. This is pretty routine stuff. I certainly never remember people being so worked up about it before.

I'm sure your president has the same attitude as your own. Are you aware that this is the first time that we have lost an ambassador since 1979? This is not routine stuff. There is nothing routine about it.

MsAphrodite why did you have to go and ruin that poster's statement by sharing undisputed facts and putting it in a historical context?!?!?

;-)

reply to post by NickDC202


Well you know facts are stubborn things. It's also good to get as much on the record as possible as soon as possible.

More newspaper editorials asking questions about the handling of Benghazi..

Hartford Courant

The Sentinel


Also an interesting possible twist on who could have been responsible for the attack on Sep 11. It's an opinion piece out of India that names a group called Tahloob who are pro Khaddafi loyalists..

Rise of the Libyan resistance

Spin doctors in the United States are finding it hard to explain the September 11 strike in Benghazi that killed Ambassador John Christopher Stevens. Nobody, including powerful lobbyists, politicians, public relations gurus, mainstream media, has managed to present a credible and logically consistent account of the tragedy. The fog engulfing the assassination is rising from the campaign for the U.S. presidential elections scheduled on November 6. In the heat of an electoral battle where princely sums are paid to create perceptions rather than establishing facts, neither the Republican camp of Mitt Romney nor Barack Obama’s legions seem interested in confronting the truth till such time as the votes have been cast and the last ballot box has been sealed.

Ok time for a comedy break. I hope this isn't the closest we will get to the MSM for this. The first link is for just the video. Which has parts of the jokes that are missing from the article. The second, has both the article and video.

Link to the Leno show video clip

Leno Pounds Obama on Benghazi-Gate

Last night, he let loose on President Barack Obama for his role in Benghazi-Gate.

“Well, ‘Don't Ask, Don't Tell’ is back - not for gays in the military. It's President Obama's new policy for questions about Libya. Don't ask, don't tell."

Leno also chided the Obama campaign for Lena Dunham's ridiculous ad comparing your "first time" to voting for Obama.

“Have you seen that new Obama campaign ad that equates voting with sex? It’s kind of clever. It uses innuendo to try and woo young female voters.”

“Like one line says,” he continued, “'Your first time shouldn't be with just anybody. It should be with a great guy who really understands women.’"

“But, on the other hand, if it is your first time, you might want to do it with someone who doesn't need eight years to get the job done. That's all I'm saying. That's all I'm saying.”

Not certain if this is even accurate news. But it is out there that an Al-Qaeda Linked Radical Was Hired By Obama Administration to Run Security at Tripoli Embassy. Just thought I would post this in case there was any truth to it. Myself, I am not certain what to think. Once I hear it from a more reputable source then I may tend to believe it.

Al-Qaeda Linked Radical Was Hired By Obama Administration to Run Security at Tripoli Embassy

Leaked security documents reveal the Obama Administration hired a top al-Qaeda brother to run security at the US embassy in Tripoli.

A treasure trove of secret documents has been obtained by a Libyan source who says that secularists in his country are increasingly wanting to see Mitt Romney defeat Barack Obama on November 6th. This charge is being made despite Muslim Brotherhood losses in Libyan elections last July which resulted in victory for the secularists. One of those documents may help explain this sentiment.

The document can be found here:

Libyan Leaks: Secret Document reveals Al-Qaeda ‘brother’ put in control of U.S. Embassy in Tripoli

It shows that in supporting the removal of Gadhafi, the Obama administration seemed to sign on to an arrangement that left forces loyal to Al-Qaeda in charge of security at the U.S. embassy in Tripoli from 2011 through at least the spring of 2012

Originally posted by NickDC202

Originally posted by MsAphrodite

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by milominderbinder
The only thing that is REALLY interesting here is how adamant so many people can be about unsubstantiated hearsay.

It's truly crazy.

Its because its the Closest thing to Dirt they have.
Obama hasnt Farted in a Elevator in weeks.

I know. After three debates the best the Romney campaign can do is create a mountain out of a molehill. Since 1921 our embassies have been attacked 31 times. This is pretty routine stuff. I certainly never remember people being so worked up about it before.

I'm sure your president has the same attitude as your own. Are you aware that this is the first time that we have lost an ambassador since 1979? This is not routine stuff. There is nothing routine about it.

MsAphrodite why did you have to go and ruin that poster's statement by sharing undisputed facts and putting it in a historical context?!?!?

;-)

The post isn't "ruined". Chris Stevens WASN'T a "diplomat". Assuming all of the "bragging" points are true... by any conventional definition Chris Stevens he was a terrorist and the only embarrassment is that we had to rely on Libyans to put down our own rabid dogs for us.

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by NickDC202

Originally posted by MsAphrodite

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by milominderbinder
The only thing that is REALLY interesting here is how adamant so many people can be about unsubstantiated hearsay.

It's truly crazy.

Its because its the Closest thing to Dirt they have.
Obama hasnt Farted in a Elevator in weeks.

I know. After three debates the best the Romney campaign can do is create a mountain out of a molehill. Since 1921 our embassies have been attacked 31 times. This is pretty routine stuff. I certainly never remember people being so worked up about it before.

I'm sure your president has the same attitude as your own. Are you aware that this is the first time that we have lost an ambassador since 1979? This is not routine stuff. There is nothing routine about it.

MsAphrodite why did you have to go and ruin that poster's statement by sharing undisputed facts and putting it in a historical context?!?!?

;-)

The post isn't "ruined". Chris Stevens WASN'T a "diplomat". Assuming all of the "bragging" points are true... by any conventional definition Chris Stevens he was a terrorist and the only embarrassment is that we had to rely on Libyans to put down our own rabid dogs for us.

What is the basis for your inflammatory statement about Stevens?