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 Vitruvian
... Very significant testimony was presented to the House Oversite Committee - Daryl Issa (again) by Ms. Charlene R. Lamb Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Programs, Bureau of Diplomatic Security
U.S. Department of State
(her actual testimony PDF) PDF - oversight.house.gov...
When the attack began, a Diplomatic Security agent working in the Tactical Operations Center immediately activated the Imminent Danger Notification System and made an emergency announcement over the PA. Based on our security protocols, he also alerted the annex U.S. quick reaction security team stationed nearby, the Libyan 17th February Brigade, Embassy Tripoli, and the Diplomatic Security Command Center in Washington.
He continued, going over the newly-released documents that prove the administration was alerted to what was really happening in Libya before spinning a story about a YouTube video:
Now we have [the] beginning of the truth on Benghazi. Five days into the Benghazi scandal, when no one was saying anything, I presented a theory…I told you that [Ambassador Stevens] was involved in running guns, and he was running guns to al-Qaeda in Libya, and he was running guns through Turkey into Syria. And whether it was a deal that went bad, I don’t know, but that’s what happened. And the White House knew…And while everyone else was arguing about whether it was a videotape or not, we were furthering the story.
Today we have evidence that is staggering. We now have a memo posted [at] TheBlaze…to the White House two hoursafter the attacks began. Last night on the TV show I laid it out again…exactly what happened, when. At 1:00, or 12:54 in the afternoon on September 11, the White House was warned that somebody was watching the Benghazi safe house– and so you know, do not let any member of the press get away with calling this an embassy safe house. It is not. It was a CIA safe house. Now why, in the most dangerous place in one of the most dangerous parts of the world, on Sept. 11…why would he be at a CIA safe house? …We now know he was having dinner with the general counsel of Turkey. [Emphasis added]
teapartyorg.ning.com...
Beck reminded that it has been widely reported that President Obama has a close relationship with the Turkish prime minister, before continuing:
An hour after that, the Turkish ambassador leaves through the front door and the front gate, unmolested.
Now you tell me– why was the Turkish general counsel there? …
Why was it so important on Sept. 11 to go to the most dangerous city, into a CIA safe house?
An "hour" after he leaves, the fight begins.
We now know that the White House– somebody, the military, somebody, sent a drone.
So there was a live video feed of what was going on.
They’re watching it in the State Department, they’re watching it at the Pentagon, they’re watching it at Langley, and they’re watching it in the Situation Room.
At 5:00 in the afternoon, Leon Panetta has a meeting with the president of the United States.
The first email comes at 4:05.
So the Secretary of Defense arrives at the White House to have a meeting with the president 55 minutes after the Situation Room and everybody else gets an email saying, ‘Libya, the safe house is under attack.”
Originally posted by Vitruvian
Originally posted by Stormdancer777
HUH> 57?
Weird
Yea - that's the source of Barack Hussein Obama's "slip of the tongue" stupid remark when he said that he had traveled to all 57 states in the United States..................He had the idea of 57 Islamic states in his secretly Muslim mind.edit on 26-10-2012 by Vitruvian because: txt
Originally posted by howmuch4another
The part that gets me the most is the mortar site was laser targeted with plenty of time for a gunship, fighter/bomber or drone to take it out.
That is blatantly inept and I do not buy any "fog of war" argument Panetta or anyone else wants to feed me.
Those that want to bury this or discredit intel that makes Obama look bad should be ashamed.
I will also say that this new report laying mistakes at the feet of the CIA makes me lose faith in Petreus too.
Originally posted by howmuch4another
The part that gets me the most is the mortar site was laser targeted with plenty of time for a gunship, fighter/bomber or drone to take it out.
That is blatantly inept and I do not buy any "fog of war" argument Panetta or anyone else wants to feed me.
Those that want to bury this or discredit intel that makes Obama look bad should be ashamed.
I will also say that this new report laying mistakes at the feet of the CIA makes me lose faith in Petreus too.
Originally posted by Stormdancer777
Originally posted by howmuch4another
The part that gets me the most is the mortar site was laser targeted with plenty of time for a gunship, fighter/bomber or drone to take it out.
That is blatantly inept and I do not buy any "fog of war" argument Panetta or anyone else wants to feed me.
Those that want to bury this or discredit intel that makes Obama look bad should be ashamed.
I will also say that this new report laying mistakes at the feet of the CIA makes me lose faith in Petreus too.
The part that gets me is how and when did our government get overthrown and by who?
If, in fact, those people in the White House were as courageous, and had the moral strength that my son Ty had, immediately, within minutes of when they found there was the first attack, they would have stepped--they would have given permission, not denied permission, for those C-130s to have gone up there. And this is exact--I don't know much about weapons, but it's coming out right now that they actually had laser targets focused on the mortars being sent to kill my son and they refused to pull the trigger. They refused to send those C-130s.
Obama On Libya: "We Don't Play Politics When It Comes To American National Security"
In an interview on the Philadelphia radio talk show host Michael Smerconish, President Obama said his administration is not playing politics with Libya.
"What's true is that the intelligence was coming in and evolving as more information came up," Obama said when Smerconish asked if his statements were based on the facts at the time.
The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Specter gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights. The fighting at the CIA annex went on for more than four hours — enough time for any planes based in Sigonella Air base, just 480 miles away, to arrive. Fox News has also learned that two separate Tier One Special operations forces were told to wait, among them Delta Force operators.
Originally posted by sad_eyed_lady
I stand with the Father of the Navy Seal who wants to know: :"Who made the decision not a save my son?
edit on 10/26/2012 by sad_eyed_lady because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by sad_eyed_lady
That just crosses into willful omission of action leading directly to their deaths.
There may be REAL REAL good reasons Hillary is rumored to be retaining legal counsel. If this all proves out to be as it's being reported, I just cannot imagine how this ends well for those who were in the chain of command to this event. Wow...
On station?! I want to hear from the air crew. Pics or it didn't happen...I mean the accusation and what this means is THAT earth shattering in my opinion. Watergate was a minor petty theft by comparison. Men didn't die there.
Having spent a good bit of time nursing a GLD (ground Laser Designator) in several garden spots around the world, something from the report jumped out at me. One of the former SEALs was actively painting the target. That means that Specter WAS ON STATION! Probably an AC130U. A ground laser designator is not a briefing pointer laser. You do not “paint” a target until the weapons system/designator is synched; which means that the AC130 was on station. Only two places could have called off the attack at that point; the WH situation command (based on POTUS direction) or AFRICOM commander based on information directly from the target area. If the AC130 never left Sigonella (as Penetta [sic] says) that means that the Predator that was filming the whole thing was armed. If that SEAL was actively “painting” a target; something was on station to engage! And the decision to stand down goes directly to POTUS!