Benghazi Slaughter – The Insufferable CIA Cover Equates To Pure Convenient Propaganda To Protect The Ineptitude….

A recent CIA “press briefing” has led to a new, but not unexpected, evolutionary narrative explaining the insufferable incompetence and obfuscation surrounding the Benghazi slaughter.

What better administrative “cover” for the falsehoods, lies and intentional administrative spin on the murders of four Americans than to hide behind the guise of the Central Intelligence Agency.   Vis-a-vi:  “we had to lie because it was all secret and stuff”… Seriously?   So this is the strategy now to hide the incompetence?

You have to be semi-close to this story to understand what is at play here, and how the administration is now playing it.   When we say “administration,” we mean all aspects of the 3-Dimensional administrative chess game of  Washington DC “responsibility avoidance”.

First, in an effort to distract attention away from the failure of U.S. government in general, and the Obama Administration specifically, they must find a way to excuse the inexcusable.  That is what is taking place.   That is ONLY what is taking place.

Now the reason for the lies surrounding the allowed murders of four Americans, and the story that falsely identified the motivation of the attackers, will be placed upon the administration being unable -because of the Benghazi mission objective- to be honest with the American people through the media.

In essence ‘they had to lie about the ridiculous Muhammed movie because the Benghazi operation was a CIA cover plot to recover surface to air missiles’.   That’s what they’re selling now.   We knew this was coming…. it was brutally obvious they would take this approach.

Anyone within reach of Google knew there was no actual physical “Official” U.S. Embassy “Consulate” in Benghazi, Libya.   It only takes a few clicks of a mouse to see the State Dept did not have such a listing.   It is irrelevant.   We knew from the outset the entirety of the operation in Benghazi was a CIA mission.   It is insufferable now to see them use this as the cover for their failures; AND it should not make a hoot’s worth of difference.

Here is the first excerpt of the Wall Street Journal story outlining the CIA angle – which is now becoming the “cover” for the White House failure to secure and protect Americans.

(Via WSJ) When the bodies of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans killed in Benghazi, Libya, arrived at Andrews Air Force Base after the Sept. 11 attack, they were greeted by the president, the vice president and the secretaries of state and defense. Conspicuously absent was CIA Director David Petraeus.

Officials close to Mr. Petraeus say he stayed away in an effort to conceal the agency’s role in collecting intelligence and providing security in Benghazi. Two of the four men who died that day, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, were former Navy SEAL commandos who were publicly identified as State Department… (more behind pay wall)

Patraeus was not “conspicuously absent.” It is silly to accept this aspect as some kind of conformational validity to this administrative story.   What people should be paying attention to is WHO WAS PRESENT:  as in General Colin Powell.  Why?  Why was he, the guy who just endorsed President Obama, there?   He’s retired, no?

You see, this CIA covert “black op’s” angle is their cover.  It’s the cover behind which they can excuse their insufferable incompetence and complacent allowance/acceptance of murder.

They could not tell the truth because it was all secret operations and they did not want to compromise our National Security.   So they could not be honest about the who’s, what’s, where’s, and so forth….. that’s what they are now selling.  Nothing more, and nothing less, it is merely an excuse.

An excuse the sheeple masses will willingly accept ad infinitum.

Beyond frustrating.

If our little blog could outline the surface to air missile issues in March 2011, the chemical Weapons issues in June 2011 and the Hillary Clinton, Samantha Power, Susan Rice, Barack Obama, United Nations arming of the al-Qaeda *cough* Benghazi “rebels” in September 2011, surely the average U.S. journalist could outline the same.  That is, if they wanted to.   They didn’t.

Why Colin Powell?   Because the machine, the entire Washington DC weaponized industrial complex/machine, is corrupt and complicit;  And yes, that includes Mitt Romney who is supportive of the insufferably flawed and short-sighted approach at supporting the Syrian “resistance”, now known to be al-Qaeda majority, with those missiles from U.N. mandated weapons cache’s including Gaddafi’s store houses.

Heck, we even sent “advisors” into Libya in July/Aug/Sept, 2011, to teach al-Qaeda how to target and shoot them.   This is not a secret.

We then shifted, and facilitated the shifting, of those same surface-to-air missiles into the hands of operatives to use throughout the region;   AND, as we have meticulously outlined as an unintended consequence, into Afghanistan where they have been used by the Taliban to shoot down our own helicopters.

It was those very U.N./Gadaffi missiles that shot down the choppers transporting the majority of the SEAL team that killed Osama Bin Laden.   Ironic, no?

It is those same missiles that have now caused a change in operational standard in Afghanistan eliminating the use of “close air support” to protect our troops.   Irony or just brutal stupidity? – We vote the latter.

Our national approach toward Syria now in 2012 is as similarly short-minded as our approach to Iran in 2009, Iraq in 2010, or  Egypt in 2011.

There was a time when Syria was actually rising up in demand of “Freedom,”  true democratic western style freedom.   But that time has passed.  Just like the time passed for the “Green Party Movement” in Iran, and the “Facebook uprising of moderates” in Egypt.

There are small windows of opportunity for actions that can support “true freedom seekers” like the ones who eventually tore down the Berlin Wall, and you have to know when to demand it being “torn.”   These clowns don’t.

If you want to know how specifically disheartening the current U.S. foreign policy is, we will share with you the voice of one true Libyan freedom fighter, an average person of no significance other than they yearn for freedom.   Read the words of this person and see how frustrated they are now, given the reality of what has taken over their once just and righteous fight:  (their name has been removed to protect them)

I just want to say that I was with the Syrian revolution at one time, but not anymore. It is quickly changing into sectarian violence and I fear that when it’s all over genocides or wide-scale oppression will occur against the Shiite Christian and Druzi populations of Syria.

Because a lot of the freedom fighters are extremists. We have sort of the same problem here in Libya after the attacks we’ve seen in the past few weeks against the Sufi graves.   I’m not really an optimist now. We didn’t begin this revolution for this.   This is not what all our martyrs sacrificed their lives for.

It’s really depressing to come to know that after 42 years of oppression I have to witness even more of it. We love our country to bits and we don’t want it to go down the bitter road of fundamental extremism.


Our U.S. Policy is not, I repeat NOT, supporting the thirst for freedom.  They are short-sighted and working from the outside in, instead of from the inside OUT.    Our approach to Syria’s Assad is symptomatic of this flawed policy.   Gaddafi before him, and Mubarak before him still.   But, I digress….   The topic was the CIA and avoiding responsibility…

But, you have to understand the bigger picture and the larger dynamic.

The CIA angle is just that, an angle.   A convenient angle to avoid responsibility for:

  1. Ignoring the repeated warnings of danger within Benghazi.
  2. Failure to provide adequate security or comprehend the risk on the ground.
  3. And finally, worse yet, standing by and turning our back, while the administration left those very people who had cried out for help being butchered, sodomized, burned, and slaughtered.   AS IT WAS HAPPENING.

By the administration now re-positioning the cover story narrative as a CIA operation it allows them to: a) explain their lies and obfuscations, b) insure the truth never reaches sunlight, c) insure you will never hear the radio transmissions of calls for help, and d) hide the video of the compound assault behind “National Security” vis-a-vi “Classified Intel.”

Regardless of whether they were CIA, or NSA, or State Dept, or Military, it just doesn’t matter.   THEY WERE AMERICANS.   And they were doing a job the administration sent them to do.   And while they were doing that job they were attacked, they cried for help and they were IGNORED.

That is the brutal truth of it.

Whether the star is on the wall at Langley or the Pentagon really doesn’t matter does it?

But the administration wants to convince you it does.

So this is how it will play:

Q:  Mr. President, why was there such a confused message about the impetus of the attack?

A:  It is important to understand this was a covert operation with considerable assets on the ground before, during, and even post attack.   Any public airing of the event details would have potentially been risky to those individuals, including our allied Libyans’ still remaining.   Prudence and an abundance of caution dictated a measured public face.

Q:  But Mr. President we have reports of numerous requests to the State Department concerning fears of pending attacks and the inability of our people to defend themselves?

A:  While hindsight is 20/20, it is important to note the State Dept. was not in any official capacity for the ongoing covert operation.   In matters of ongoing “intelligence operations” we rely on the trained and experienced operatives to measure and judge their risk.  Covert operations by their very nature are sensitive, dangerous, and quite challenging to communicate effectively.  Have mistakes been made?  Obviously yes, and as distance provides breathing room we can now assess what measures we might have taken given the sensitivity and security of the operation only partially under the auspices of the State Dept.

Q:   So this was not an official State Department venture?

A:   I’m sure you will understand that much about our intelligence apparatus must remain undiscussed.    That said, we are essentially able to answer all substantive *sensitive*, and potentially classified questions in that regard, just not in the public forum.   I’m sure you can understand.

Q:  Will we ever be able to hear the full account of what took place on the night of September 11th?  

A:   To the extent that any divulgences do not compromise our national security, or the friendly national assets still on the ground, we are confident the majority of the operational exposure and explanation will be afforded to intelligence qualified congressional inquiry.  It may not however, for the sake of National Security, be fully discussed outside of a classified closed door session.

Q:  What about the families of the Americans who died.  Will they ever know the exact circumstance?

A:   The families of our finest patriots will be the first to understand the sensitive nature of the work their Husbands, Sons, Fathers and Brothers were engaged in.    They will always have the full measure of our nations appreciation for the bravery and devotion of those who are lost.   They will always have the heartfelt thanks of a grateful nation, and our leadership will continue working diligently to be deserving of their sacrifice.

Q:  So we’ll never know?

A:  Never is a long time – and, as with all aspects of national security the circumstances may change.   We cannot predict the future, but we can assure you and all Americans that we will continue to put the safety of our nation as the first principle of all action as we move forward.

Q:  So, I guess that is it then?

A:   Indeed it is.   Thank you. 

This entry was posted in Benghazi-Gate, Clinton(s), Egypt & Libya Part 2, Election 2012, Islam, media bias, Obama re-election, Obama Research/Discovery, Russia, Syria, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

35 Responses to Benghazi Slaughter – The Insufferable CIA Cover Equates To Pure Convenient Propaganda To Protect The Ineptitude….

  1. lovemygirl says:

    The butcher of Benghazi. While Samantha is a minor player in the Benghazi fiasco, she is a major player in what led up to it.


  2. BertDilbert says:

    You can’t call the missile purchase program top secret. The money was authorized by congress AND one of the seals disclosed to the press prior to going to Benghazi that he was going there to buy back missiles. You can’t claim secret when it is public knowledge. If there is anything top secret about Benghazi, it was not the purchase of missiles.

    Lies on top of lies. .


    • Sam says:

      If they claim it’s secret and classified, they don’t have to talk about it. Except to Congressional oversight committees in closed session and I don’t expect that to happen before Tuesday if ever.


  3. myopiafree says:

    Typical – One lie fails? Tell a second lie to cover the first lie/


  4. Sharon says:

    Despite a carefully narrated version of events rolled out late this week by the CIA claiming agents jumped into action as soon as they were notified of calls for help in Benghazi, security officials on the ground say calls for help went out considerably earlier — and signs of an attack were mounting even before that.

    …..As details emerge of serious security issues before the attack on Sept. 11, Fox News is also beginning to hear more frustration from sources both on the ground in Benghazi and in the U.S. Multiple British and American sources insist there were other capabilities in the region and are mystified why none were used. Fox News was told there were not only armed drones that monitor Libyan chemical weapon sites in the area, but also F-18’s, AC-130 aircraft and even helicopters that could have been dispatched in a timely fashion.


  5. Sharon says:

    Isn’t it sort of built into the whole possible horror that this was not, in fact, ineptitude on Teh Won’s part…I thought we smelled a week ago that the refusal to provide assistance was deliberate? Why would it now be ineptitude? In fact, the ineptitude accusation might becoming from his partners, the Islamists on the ground.

    Is it possible then that part of the plan, (since the Islamists had high powered weapons on the grounds there for all those hours)…that they were expecting to see C-130’s, etc. overhead and were prepared to take them out with RPGs and SAMs as they arrived? Like the terrorist attacks in Israel that are double-whammy: #1 goes off, emergency responders show up, #2 goes off to kill all the responders.

    Why not. I’ll believe anything at this point about the depths of evil and murderous deception coming of Teh Won’s Loins (isn’t that what we always wanted–a POTUS who speaks from his loins–I guess that’s what Clinton did.)

    Read Lame Cherry today if you don’t care how you feel for the next couple of hours.


    • Sam says:

      I agree. All we should have to do to determine where we stand is to examine the facts on the ground. Was it incompetence or was it a deliberate action in pursuit of a goal the White House is unwilling to talk about, aside from re-election? To attribute the lack of response to incompetence might be plausible IF there were not other facts available over the last 4 years. An isolated incident might be explained away as over-cautiousness leading to incompetence by a President and Secretary of Defense who have no military experience. A series of similar incidents is a pattern. Patterns betray habits of thought and show motivation. So, is Barack Hussein Obama merely incompetent or is he deliberately harming the US and our allies? I vote for the latter.


      • howie says:

        Obama was watching live. But he thought it was a new video game. “The Fog of War.”


      • Sharon says:

        I definitely “vote for the latter” as well, and am wondering how to identify that reality in the entrails of this particular iteration of his Terribly Dangerous Nonsense. I don’t even have much trouble following the trail of the weapons being steered to Islamic groups–and what else is here? I can’t even formulate the questions, but as I stare at the disconnecteds, I’m getting the real creepy-crawlies.

        Even if the weapons trafficking is accepted as a given, there’s stuff here that doesn’t make sense to me yet. I am quite aware that I’m in completely over my head on lots of this stuff,, but sometimes I go ahead and toss my thoughts out anyway–in case someone else can make more sense of it; in case there are others here who have the sense of being lost but still have some personal sense of dignity about not displaying their ignorance (I’m past that–forced past it by reality! 🙂 )

        ADD: Oh–must clarify: the use of the word “ignorant” is not negative. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with being ignorant. It just means we don’t know something. There’s nothing wrong with that.


  6. BertDilbert says:

    Well who do we have at the top? We have terrorist Tuesday Obama carrying out assassinations and Hillary “we came, we saw, he died” followed by her laughter. These two characters place little value on human life.

    The amount of negligence the more we learn seems to go beyond happenstance both pre, during and post event. It does not add up to being normal behavior. I am almost leaning more toward this being an intentional act that was allowed to happen.

    Did we need an “event” as an excuse to change our Mideast policy with certain players? An event to appease someone like Saudi Arabia? Remember also that Saudi also came out strongly against the film. I just can’t seem to make all these pieces fit together..


  7. czarowniczy says:

    First off, you know it’s a BS photo-op when the DCI stands in front of the memorial wall as it’s in the old building that serves more as a backdrop for press coverage – from the wall to the familiar logo on the floor, it’s the standard Company backdrop for press dog-and-pony shows. The DCI is appointed by the Prez but as far as controlling the Company goes, it’s more like herding really sneaky cats. The last professional spook to serve as DCI was Bill Casey, a pro and not a political whore – then again I’m prejudiced. I’m betting that Panetta’s blurb was as much the Company distancing itself from the screwups of State and the Administration as it was trying to make this go away for the POtuS. The Administration just has to juggle the balls until the polls close on Tuesday, after that it’s all gravy, they’ll have the gun barrels the power will flow from. Remember, our ch’inaehanŭn jidoja has called for his flying monkey minions to vote in a spirit of revenge, so God only knows what he and his have planned starting Wednesday morning; Benghazi and the government-wide he-said-she-said coverup may well be the least of our problems.


  8. Knucklrdraggingwino says:

    I was initially skeptical of your claim that MADPADS from Libya had been used to shoot down the helicopter that was carrying the SEAL team that killed Bin Laden. A quick check of dates confirms that it is quite plausible. The official story that they were shot down with RPGs is not plausible.


    • boricuafudd says:

      Did you know that the findings from the investigation on the incident are classified. One of the fathers of one of the Seals that died in the crash has been trying to find out what happened for months, the media just ignores him.


    • One other confirmation if you so diligently want to chase down the MANPAD issue. Look at the timeline of Chad’s president telling what he was witnessing vis-a-vi truckloads of al-qaeda AQIM fighters with Libyan missiles headed South from Libya into N- Africa. Then look at the the water space between Yemen and Africa. Then using the dates you already know the missiles were looted, look up any boat sinking accidental or otherwise via google. that was headed to yemen.

      Why’d they sink? Funny how they all sunkin in the same window. None before, and none after…. hmmmmmm?

      You think those ships actually sunk all on their own? Headed from N Africa to Yemen.

      Lastly look up the timing of the explosion of Yemeni weapons caches against the backdrop of the same timeline. Say a week or so after the MANPADS went missing.

      It is all connected.

      We tried in 2011. No-one cared.


      • Knuckledraggingwino says:

        I was always skeptical of the scenario of the Taliban shooting the SEAL’s helicopter down with RPGs. It is questionable that the impact fuse on an RPG will trigger on impact with a soft skinned helicopter. The prospect of hitting a helicopter beyond a few tens of meters is negligible. The Islamicists did manage this trick in Mogodishu by rigging a fuse on their RPGs to detonate them a set time and distance after launch. The effect was similar to a proximity fuse. However; the range is limited to less than 100 meters. It will work in an urban environment where the LZ is predictable and the RPG crews have lots of cover and concealment. The Navy SEALs were shot down in mountainous wilderness at an LZ kilometers remote from the forces they were relieving. Unless the Taliban had about 400 RPG teams per square mile with modified RPGs, the probability of the SEALs being engaged was negligible.

        The SEALs were shot down with MANPADs. It is also possible that they were shot down not with Russian missiles captured in Libya but by US built Stingers supplied by the US to Al Quidai in Libya.


        • apachetears says:

          RPG’s have a self detonation fuse when the warhead hits 900 meters.
          The stadia lines on the launch tube are set for width and length of vehicle being shot as a range finder. This will work for any vehicle and for Helicopters since the dimensions are similar both Tank and Helo the Stadia can give a rough range finding ability.
          Yes, You can shoot down a helicopter with an RPG or LAAWS and AT -4 it just takes training and skill.
          No doubt though a MANPAD is more lethal at ranges higher than that 900 meters or some 3000 feet.


        • czarowniczy says:

          Fusing on MANPADS differs per generation – first generation were revenge weapons and later allow attacks from multiple angles. As for shooting down helicopters with RPGs – go back and look at your Vietnam history – the NVA spent time working out anti-helicopter tactics with RPGs. We lost some 5000 choppers in Vietnam and RPGs accounted for a good number of the. The NVA has not been shy about sharing their tactics over the years . It’s arguable that the Russians and Chinese have perfected the techniques and tactics and passed them on along with the RPGs they sell just as we taught Muj anti-helicopter techniques using an interesting variety of tools when they were fighting the Russians. Groups like AQ working in small units have an advantage of carrying RPGs which can be used to engage multiple targets vice MANPADS which are too valuable and limited in use to carry unless they have a specific target in mind. The RPGs also have a bewildering variety of warheads available from multiple manufacturers, not just the standard HE round of photo-op fame. There are verified US chopper shoot-downs in Iraq from SA-7s, -14s and -16s , and reliable reports of Iraqi insurgents using SA-16/18s, so it’s not as if the Libyan MANPADS are new and exciting, I think that it’s more like they’ve added to the quantity on hand, Libyan older MANPADS are nice but what about the more advanced Russian ones Syria has been supplying out of their supplies.


  9. Mikado Cat says:

    Is that a translation of the video clip in English?


  10. Mikado Cat says:

    Is there a translation of the video clip in English. (bleary eyed posting, sorry)


  11. stringplayer55 says:

    OK, the person posing as SDC has presented a very likely scenario for how the Obama administration will try to play their hand. And if security of state secrets is at stake, then who is to argue?

    Well, there are two simple responses to the administration trying to play their hand as “it was imperative to security of state secrets that we presented the Muhammad video misdirection ploy.” If security of state secrets was the concern, then:

    1) Why did the administration not provide adequate security in the first place. When the “embassy” compound was breached in June and when the ambassador pleaded for more security all through the year, why didn’t the administration provide more than nominal security?

    2) Why did the administration not immediately secure the compound so that state secrets not already in the wrong hands would be immediately sealed. The administration did not send anyone into the Benghazi consulate for weeks. That immediately voids the argument that security of vital secret information was the reasons that the administration trotted out that dog and pony show about the Muhammad video.

    One more point may be appropriate. It appears that whatever secrets were being hidden in Benghazi were not really so secret anyway. Apparently, this nations enemies knew enough about our state secrets that they were motivated to assault the compound in order to obtain what they wanted. So, for the administration to pretend to the American people that they are hiding secrets and that publication of those secrets would be detrimental to our countries security, that this is the reason they are not publishing details of what occurred in Benghazi is really ludicrous.

    I submit that by this line of reasoning, the administration is really just continuing to dig their hole deeper and deeper. And I further submit that the real SDC would recognize and welcome the administration continuing their folly. While the presentation of how the administration will attempt to continue their deception before the American public has all of the hallmarks of the sagacity of SDC, the conclusion which abdicates further inquiry is completely unlike SDC.

    So, Treepers, I submit that we have more here to investigate than just the administrations corruption. To whit, how did an otherwise great post attributed to SDC get hijacked at the end. It could not have been SDC who conceded that “we will never know.” SDC would continue an inquest into the folly of the administration not securing our nations secrets and not allow this argument to go unchallenged. Treepers, we must notify SDC that an imposter is rampant. And, in the end, I am sure that we will find SDC continuing as a burr under the present administrations saddle!


    • The Q & A conclusion segment is merely an excercise to show how the DC Administration will use the cover of a CIA story to hide details and facts. Just an exercise.

      Regarding your questions allow me to play Devils Advocate, and again highlight how the administration will slip your attempt at cornering them:

      1) Why didn’t the administration provide adequate security? The “administration” is not in the role of directing ongoing “intelligence operations”. The placement of the operatives under the auspices of the State Dept. was merely a cover, there was no actual connection or coordination, or direction of operational objectives stemming from the State Dept.

      There is a degree of seperation between the White House, and, as you say “administration”. Again, it is not the role of the White House to approve or deny ongoing classified intelligence operations. That is the role of the CIA and such operations are secret for a valid reason, not the least of which is national security.

      2) See #1. “Plausible Deniability”.

      You see stringplayer55, under the cover of CIA covert operations there is a distinct seperation between Washington DC and Langley VA. The White House can deflect all day long in that regard. It is all secret, and they had nothing to do with it. The mission objective was honorable – it just came under attack. Not their issue. So long as the CIA folks keep their lips sealed, the administration can deflect to them all day long – and the public will have to accept the ludicrous whether they want to or not. It’s just that simple.


      • unami22 says:

        Thought you might want to see this. The guy who posted it said there is more. Evacuation from compound filmed and photographed. Found them on Twitter links.

        VIDEO of Benghazi attack compound evacuation -US staff. US Armored SUV.

        And photos here: First photos of Americans abandoning Benghazi Consulate emerge

        There is also an Al Jeezera Media video that is VERY interesting. Even shows safe room interior and safe room gate, window etc.

        Locals said guards complicit VIDEO: #Libyan guard opened rear gate. Let 4 cars attackers in.


        • Thanks for those links…. but the person connecting these dots is being led a-stray….

          The last video is footage from a camera operated by a U.S. military, or security officer of some sort. When you watch the footage use your pause button to freeze frame it… click, by click, slowly… do this several times…. note at the 6 second mark the back lit shadow of the photographer/videographer is shadowed against the white shirt of the person walking in front of the camera.

          In this freeze framed shot (:06) you can clearly see the backlit shadow of a US military issued kevlar helmet, chin strap dangling and resting on the top of the preferred weapon of close combat operatives. (you might have to run the video several times to catch just the right moment). In essence this video is footage from US hardware mounted on a US operative (military, security or intelligence). It is not media shot footage fyi.


          • unami22 says:

            So why do you think they would film it? And then it turns up on YouTube? There is also a man walking in front of the black SUV and he looks like an American with a satchel/briefcase. It all just looks too organised. No panic etc.


            • SOP. They film everything and transmit live feeds now. Who parsed that segment, why, and for what value, I don’t know…. maybe a leak. Maybe an intended leak to create a wild goose chase… (that’d be my guess = shiney thing)

              Occam’s Razor. You would think if someone wanted to leak the video to expose a TRUTH of sorts they would *leak* a better segment. Dunno. but the sniff of that one looks like a false flag of sorts. A distractive “shiney thing”…

              Definately a military/transmission equip video though. That much is certain. Some have helmet mounts, some have shoulder mounts, some have chest mounts, depends on weapon carried and defined purpose. (that one looks shoulder mounted)


              • unami22 says:

                I agree. The whole thing sounds suspicious. No bullet holes on exterior compound walls and no large holes from RPGs. Just looting and fire.

                Safe Room has soot but no fire damage that I can see.

                Locals on Twitter said FBI was there 18th Sept. FBI say 5th Oct and now suddenly documents turn up???

                New PM sent out twitter message saying that no Libyan guards were killed. Later pulled it and said some were killed. Locals said they helped and or ran away.

                It is all just suspicious to me


                • The entire thing don’t make sense. Never has. Might have been a simple robbery under the auspices of something bigger – Safe never recovered.

                  Odd how the media has never interviewed a single solitary survivor. supposedly 30 of them somewhere right? FUBAR


              • Add: Whatever was going on in that video none of the parties thought themselves in danger. A US trained operative would never remove his helmet if combat situation was even remotely possible. Those guys are just chilling and talking, no rush, no panic, no stress or threat level noted…. The kid in truck passenger seat is not American – maybe an interpreter.


          • waltherppk says:

            Here’s another link for you


      • stringplayer55 says:

        But CIA and the administration must divulge information to the House Intelligence Committee when requested, right? Of course, they will stonewall even the House Intelligence Committee as much as possible because that is what this administration has shown as their modus operandi. But, ultimately, they cannot dodge these questions forever.

        In addition, it would appear that there is some leak from within the CIA or from within the administration itself. If the source of these leaks is able to stay in place, we will keep this drip, drip, drip that is driving everyone on both sides of the Benghazi affair nuts. The administration must be going nuts wondering where the leaks are coming from and wondering how long they will be able to hold out against this relentless drip. On the other hand, it is torture on the good guys having to wait for the leaks to force the administration to come clean.

        I would definitely concede that the administration can and will argue that it was Langley that was operating out of Benghazi and that they have no direct control over intelligence operations. But that will only go so far. With a consulate in Benghazi and with the CIA operating alongside of, if not out of, the consulate, then the administration must also have known something of the CIA mission in Benghazi. The administration may not know all of the details about the CIA operation, but ultimately the administration gave either tacit or de facto approval for the CIA operation in Benghazi. And do you not think that the Director of the CIA, David Petraeus, as an appointee of the President, was not briefing the White House on their involvement in Libya? I think the House Intelligence Committee would like to see e-mails between the CIA and the White House as well as minutes of meetings between Obama and Petraeus.

        In addition, given all of the requests from Ambassador Stevens in the months before 9/11, the administration cannot claim to be unaware of the need for more security. This is especially true after the walls of the consulate were breached in June. At that time, the administration should have sent in a significant security detail and should have prepared a plan for extracting U.S. personnel if the consulate office was AGAIN attacked. Washington certainly was alerted to the growing Al Qaeda presence in the area both by Ambassador Stevens as well as by the British and media sources operating in Libya. (See: ) Given that Britain and the Red Cross were pulling out of Benghazi and that U.S. personnel had to respond when the British Ambassador’s convoy was attacked, there can be no reason for the administration to pretend that they were not aware of the danger in the Benghazi theater. Thus, the administrations failure to protect U.S. personnel in Benghazi cannot be pawned off to the CIA. But perhaps the President can get Hillary to perform Hari Kari and accept complete responsibility for ignoring the pleas for additional security and also accept complete responsibility for keeping a U.S. presence in Benghazi. This should get interesting.

        No, I still say that the administration continues to dig their hole deeper and deeper. The walls are not being reinforced as they dig. Eventually, the hole is going to collapse on them. They will be buried in their own lies.


  12. BertDilbert says:

    Wasn’t the story that 20 to 30 people were rescued from the consulate? Looking at that compound that looks like a considerable number. Even 10 seems to be a high number of total staff considering operations..


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s