Part 1 of the interview with Charles Woods is above. Part 2 is at the bottom of this article.
Thursday on the Glenn Beck Program, Glenn interviewed Charles Woods whose son Tyrone Woods, a former Navy SEAL, was killed during the attacks on the Libyan embassy in Benghazi.
The interview is one of the first he had done since his son’s death. During his talk with Glenn, he revealed the shocking details of his meetings with President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. According to Woods, none of our country’s leaders were empathetic with his situation, nor were they honest about what really happened to his son. And it has only been through his personal faith that he has remained centered and calm through this tragedy.
When he joined the program, Woods explained that he had been a fan of Glenn’s radio show, but hadn’t listened for several months. The other day he happened to tune in and heard Glenn reviewing the available intelligence that the White House had access to in regards to the attack, as well as the evidence that the administration did not do all they could have done to rescue the four Americans killed. Woods decided he needed to speak up. He first called into Glenn’s program but could not get through, and so he tried Lars Larson where he first told his story.
In the interview with Glenn, Woods detailed his encounters with the top members of the Obama administration, including the President himself.
“I’m a retired attorney for six years I was an administrative law judge and in the several thousands cases I heard my job was to tell who was telling the truth and who wasn’t,” Woods explained. “There were four pods at Andrews Air Force Base and when he (Obama) came over to where we were I could tell he was very conflicted person who was not at peace with himself. Shaking hands with him quite frankly was like shaking hands with a dead fish. His face was pointed towards me but he would not look me in the eye. His eyes were over my shoulder and not in a forceful voice said ‘I’m really sorry Mr. Woods.’”
“And I could tell he was not sorry. He had no remorse,” Woods continued.
“The Vice President was also there,” Woods explained. “He said ‘I’m Joe Biden’. He said he had received one of these ‘damn phone calls’ when he had lost a family member. And then about a half hour later he approached me and said – and these are the exact words he said I don’t speak like this – quote and in an extremely loud and boisterous voice he said: ‘Did your sons always have balls the size of cueballs?’”
“I will ask you the question: Is that the voice of someone who is truly sorry?” Woods asked Glenn.
Glenn was most taken aback by the story of what Hillary Clinton told Woods. For over a week, the White House has been trying to push the narrative that President Obama said from the beginning that the attack on the embassy was a terrorist attack, not the a protest that got out of hand . But Clinton’s statements to Woods conflicted with that statement.
Woods explained, “I do appreciate her taking the time from her schedule to meet with the four families. While we were in the pod over there with our family she came over shook my hand and I reached out and hugged her shoulder. Her countenance was not good. And she made the statement to me that first of all she was sorry and then she said ‘We will make sure the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted.’ ”
“And when she said that I could tell that she was not telling me the truth. She’s more intelligent than I am, and she had to also know she was not telling me the truth.”
After describing his encounters with the members of the Obama administration, Woods expressed frustration with the lack of transparency on what really happened in Libya.
“I’m totally transparent in my life. I have nothing to hide. Why are they not transparent?” he said.
Originally, Woods and the rest of the families of those killed had decided they would not release a statement regarding the incident. However, after speaking with his wife Woods decided it would be best to put his feelings on paper and vocalize his thoughts.
Woods wrote:
I want to honor my son, Ty Woods, who responded to the cries for help and voluntarily sacrificed his life to protect the lives of other Americans. In the last few days it has become public knowledge that within minutes of the first bullet being fired the White House knew that these heroes would be slaughtered if immediate air support was denied. Apparently C-130s wer ready to repsond immediately. In less than an hour the perimeters could have been secured and American lives could have been saved.
After seven hours of fighting numerically superior forces, my son’s life was sacrificed because of the White House’s decision.
This has nothing to do with politics. This has to do with integrity and honor. My son was a true American hero. We need more heroes today. My son showed moral courage. This is an opportunity for the person or persons who made the decision to sacrifice my son’s life to stand up.
Woods told Glenn and TheBlaze audience that his sense of peace after the loss of his son was tied to his faith. It had only been through God, faith, and prayer that he had remained calm and centered through this tragedy.
“The only thing I want is to hug my son Ty in Heaven. At this point I know where he’s at, I just need to make sure I am there as well. And that means I have to extend total forgiveness to everyone,” Woods said.
Part 2 of the interview:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Nikita Khrushchev:"We will bury you"
"Your grandchildren will live under communism."
“You Americans are so gullible.
No, you won’t accept To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. ."
We’ll so weaken your To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. until you’ll To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. like overripe fruit into our hands."
Obama's pattern of lying has crossed a line. Not just little lies on the campaign trail, now it's in dangerous territory with Libya.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Nikita Khrushchev:"We will bury you"
"Your grandchildren will live under communism."
“You Americans are so gullible.
No, you won’t accept To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. ."
We’ll so weaken your To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. until you’ll To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. like overripe fruit into our hands."
Last night, it was revealed that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had ordered more security at the U.S. mission in Benghazi before it was attacked where four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens were murdered by Al-Qaeda but President Obama denied the request.
The news broke on TheBlazeTV’s “Wilkow!” hosted by Andrew Wilkow, by best-selling author, Ed Klein who said the legal counsel to Clinton had informed him of this information.
Klein also said that those same sources said that former President Bill Clinton has been “urging” his wife [Hillary] to release official State Department documents that prove she called for additional security at the compound in Libya, which would almost certainly result in President Obama losing the election.
Klein explained that everyone knew what was happening in Benghazi from the CIA to the National Security Agency and that there’s intelligence cables that have not been released.
Wilkow asked, “If everybody knew this including the White House, who would have given the order to go in and save the ambassador?”
Klein, “The President…he should have given the order to use the rapid reaction force…”
Wilkow, “Not Petraeus?”
Klein, “Well it has to come from the president.”
Wilkow also asked Klein about Valerie Jarrett who’s the Senior Advisor to Obama and Assistant to the President for Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs, and her role in this cover-up.
Klein said, “We don’t know but we can only assume that every action that the president takes, and he said so, he is on the record saying “I don’t take any actions without passing it by Valerie Jarrett”... so we have to assume that Valerie Jarrett whose also by the way, hooked into the Chicago campaign line…she has a direct line to David Axlerod, was a part of this whole cover-up in the White House.”
This latest news comes on the heels when the Paulding County Republican Examiner reported that former CIA officer, Clare Lopez was a guest on the Glenn Beck TV on Monday evening and told Beck, “They let our ambassador and others die. In real time, watching it happen, and they didn't do anything about it.”
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Re: Is Tunisia, Egypt, Morocco and Libya Facing Real Unrest or a Manufactured Crisis?
6 weeks and still no answers to deaths of 4 Americans in Benghazi
By K.T. McFarland
Published October 25, 2012
FoxNews.com
Damage at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi is seen during a protest by an armed group said to have been protesting a film being produced in the United States September 11, 2012. An American staff member of the U.S. consulate in the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi has died following fierce clashes at the compound, Libyan security sources said on Wednesday. Armed gunmen attacked the compound on Tuesday evening, clashing with Libyan security forces before the latter withdrew as they came under heavy fire. REUTERS/Esam Al-Fetori (LIBYA - Tags: POLITICS CIVIL UNREST)
Remember that picture of the White House Situation room two years ago, with President Obama and his top advisers transfixed by real-time video of the the Navy Seals attacking and killing Usama Bin Laden? We could almost feel the tension along with them – would the SEALs find bin Laden? Would they kill him? Would the SEALs make it out safely? Americans from coast to coast erupted in cheers when the president told us the Navy SEALs had found and killed bin Laden.
Turns out there was another real-time video, on September 11, that was captured by a surveillance drone and fed to classified computer screens of senior officials at State, Defense, the CIA and the White House, maybe even to President Obama himself. This video wasn’t of Navy SEALs attacking a terrorist compound and killing Al Qaeda, it was of Al Qaeda terrorists attacking two US compounds and killing former Navy SEALs.
After the bin Laden killing the highest administration officials told the American people in vivid detail how they tracked and killed the terror mastermind. But the Benghazi video? No heroic Oval Office speech. No self-congratulatory press conferences. No photos of a brave president making a gutsy decision to bring terrorists to justice, come what may.
In the end, maybe the entire Benghazi affair boils down to one thing – don’t do anything to jeopardize the president’s chances for reelection.
-
This time? From the White House? Lies…. Obfuscation… Indecision….Confusion…. Cover-up. And from the mainstream media? Hear no evil….See no evil…..Speak no evil….Silence.
It’s now six weeks and counting and we STILL have no answers to why and how four Americans were killed in Benghazi. We have yet to get a straight story about who killed them. No officials have explained why repeated requests for security were denied before September 11. The secretary of state and the president have said they were responsible, but neither have explained why, once Americans were under attack, they did not send forces to rescue them. Even now, there have been no efforts to punish those who killed them.
We are told to wait, there is an investigation underway that will sort through the emails and clear the fog of war and we will know the truth – after the election. In the end, maybe the entire Benghazi affair boils down to one thing – don’t do anything to jeopardize the president’s chances for reelection. Have we really descended to the point where in nothing matters – not protecting US diplomats abroad, not rescuing them when they’re attacked, not seeking out their killers – as much as getting reelected. Is that the new standard of “leadership” in Washington?
No matter what happens on Election Day, the questions remain -- what did the president know and when did he know it?
Kathleen Troia "K.T." McFarland is a Fox News National Security Analyst and host of FoxNews.com's "DefCon 3." She is a Distinguished Adviser to the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and served in national security posts in the Nixon, Ford and Reagan administrations. She wrote Secretary of Defense Weinberger’s November 1984 "Principles of War Speech" which laid out the Weinberger Doctrine. Be sure to watch "K.T." every Wednesday at 2 p.m. ET on FoxNews.com's "DefCon3"-- already one of the Web's most watched national security programs.
October 25, 2012 8:21 pm Benghazi attack suspect killed in Egypt
By Borzou Daragahi in Cairo
A man suspected of involvement in a deadly attack on the US consulate in eastern Libya was killed following a ferocious gun battle in a Cairo suburb, security officials told state and independent media.
The man, described as a Libyan citizen with ties to militant Islamist groups, died after police attempted to raid his apartment on Wednesday morning in the western Cairo suburb of Nasr City, local media reported, showing pictures of the fire-scarred battle scene.
“The gunman who was killed when police raided an apartment in Nasr City . . . is suspected of having connections with the group that carried out the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi,” an Egyptian police official told Agence France-Presse.
US ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed when suspected Islamic militants stormed the US diplomatic mission in Benghazi. US officials have vowed to avenge the attack.
High-level officials including Leon Panetta, US defence secretary, have pressed nascent governments in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia to crack down on militants responsible for the attack and a series of others in the region.
The attacks on diplomatic missions have become tangled in the US presidential election, prompting Governor Mitt Romney’s camp to question President Barack Obama’s national security and foreign policy credentials.
It appears that Washington demands to crack down on those responsible have borne fruit. Tunisian authorities recently extradited a Tunisian man on terrorism charges amid allegations that he was linked to the Benghazi attack, his attorney disclosed on Thursday. The man, Ali Hamzi, was reportedly arrested in Turkey and deported to Tunisia on October 11.
Separately, a Tunisian court sentenced Islamic militant cleric Abu Ayoub to a year in prison for his role in a September 14 attack on the US embassy in Tunis which led to four deaths. The US ambassador had demanded those responsible for the attack be brought to justice.
The shoot-out in Cairo was a rare outbreak of armed confrontation in Egypt, where political disputes are often settled with fists, clubs and tear gas. Witnesses described heavy gunfire and explosions as police attempted to arrest the suspected militant following a tip-off, local media reported.
Police told local media they were attacked by the suspect or suspects inside the building after they surrounded it. The confrontation lasted 90 minutes before a fire broke out. Police discovered one heavily charred body, believed to be that of the assailant. Investigators found a cache of explosives, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, ammunition and firearms in the apartment, newspapers reported.
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Is the man the Obama administration appointed on October 4 as key investigator for the terror attacks in Benghazi an Islamist-sympathizer? According to recently published reports, the new chairman of a State Department’s “Accountability Review Board,” which is heading the federal investigation into the Benghazi terror attacks, has been accused of being an “apologist for Islamic terrorism who has a cozy relationship with Iran.”
What’s more, the man in question — former Ambassador Thomas R. Pickering — has documented ties with the controversial group, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). CAIR, of course, is a documented Muslim Brotherhood affiliate and was named unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation trial — the largest terror-funding trial in U.S. history.
To make matters worse, Pickering is also co-chairman of the board of George Soros’ International Crisis Group who has ties to other Islamic organizations as well, including the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), which has been described as pro-Iran “front group.”
NIAC lost what Matthew Vadum at FrontPageMag describes as ”an important defamation case in federal court last month in which it unsuccessfully argued the group was not a tool of the Islamic Republic of Iran.”
Pickering, who is a member of NIAC’s advisory board, formerly served as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs (1997 to 2000). He was featured in a report “Rise of the Iran Lobby,” by former CIA officer Clare M. Lopez, who was recently featured on the Glenn Beck Program to discuss the motivations behind the terror-attacks on the U.S. diplomatic outpost in Benghazi.
Pickering’s Islamic-connections came to light after a report by the Investigative Project on Terrorism was published, exposing what it called the “scores” of established, radical Islamists who met with senior administration officials over the course of hundreds of White House visits.
“Ambassador Pickering’s positions on Iran include calls for bilateral talks without preconditions and a plan for a multinational uranium enrichment consortium in Iran,” Lopez wrote.
As noted by Vadum, Pickering was, as of Tuesday evening, poised to participate in a panel discussion at the National Cathedral in Washington, D.C., on “what role the faith community can play in fighting Islamophobia.” Along with Pickering, the discussion featured Arab American Institute president James J. Zogby, American Association for Muslim Advancement executive director Daisy Khan, and her husband, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, who serves as chairman of the Cordoba Initiative. Vadum characterized Khan and Rauf as “prime movers behind the proposal to build a mosque near Ground Zero in lower Manhattan.” Further, he notes:
Khan is known for her over-the-top attacks on those who question the wisdom of building a Muslim holy site so close to the place where nearly 3,000 Americans were killed in an Islamist attack on the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.
Asked in 2010 if America was “Islamophobic,” Khan replied that “It’s not even Islamophobia, it’s beyond Islamophobia — it’s hate of Muslims,” she said.
Meanwhile Soros-funded organizations including the International Crisis Group are tirelessly working to champion the defeat of America’s alleged xenophobic bent and rampant Islamophobia. Perhaps there are no coincidences.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Nikita Khrushchev:"We will bury you"
"Your grandchildren will live under communism."
“You Americans are so gullible.
No, you won’t accept To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. ."
We’ll so weaken your To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. until you’ll To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. like overripe fruit into our hands."
The situation quickly got heated on the set of “Fox & Friends” this morning when Geraldo Rivera clashed with the show’s hosts over details surrounding the Benghazi terror attack. At the center of the debate was Rivera’s contention that the government was not watching the attack on the U.S. consulate in real time.
Rivera argued that drones didn’t arrive at the scene until two and a half hours after the attack commenced, and suggested that the attack couldn’t have been viewed in real-time. (The attack, though, was seven hours long, potentially giving plenty of time for the drones to catch the attack).
“This is preposterous — this notion that the Pentagon was monitoring this in real time,” Rivera said, with “Fox & Friends” host Steve Doocy countering that the State Department was, indeed, monitoring as the situation unfolded.
FOX News host Geraldo Rivera (Photo Credit: FILE)
“People, stop. Stop this right now with this whole notion of live TV, and why didn’t we respond. It is not what happened,” Rivera continued.
The investigative reporter went on to say that the tragic situation is being needlessly politicized, calling for an end to the issue’s alleged exploitation.
“I think we have to stop this politicizing,” he said. “We’re getting away from the real issue. Why wasn’t there security before this happened?”
The television personality argued that there is no definitive evidence for the “reckless allegations” that drones observed violence occurring as it unfolded. He also said that there are other more pertinent issues to explore, including whether, prior to the attack, Congress was willing to give funds to bolster security in Libya.
“We should know that drones weren’t overheard in watching this in real time,” Rivera again proclaimed later on in the discussion.
Watch the clash, below:
While the reporter dismissed the notion that the battle was being viewed live by officials as it progressed, an October 20 report from CBS News claims that a portion of it was, indeed, seen by officials. In fact, according to the network, “hours after the attack began, an unmanned Predator drone was sent over the U.S. mission in Benghazi, and that the drone and other reconnaissance aircraft apparently observed the final hours of the protracted battle.”
Rivera’s contention that the attack wasn’t viewed live, at least when juxtaposed against CBS’s claims, is questionable. That said, both Rivera and CBS seem to corroborate the notion that drones didn’t arrive until hours after the militant attack began. Another report from the outlet published on Thursday provided additional details on the drone operations over Benghazi on September 11:
Two and a half hours after the attack began, an unarmed predator drone was diverted from a surveillance mission over another part of Libya to the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.
That, plus a second unarmed drone dispatched four hours and 15 minutes later, were the only U.S. military forces sent to the scene of the attack. Commandos were dispatched from Europe to an air field in Sigonella, Sicily, but by the time they got there the attack in Benghazi was over.
While some, like Rivera, view the continued focus on drones and other related issues as merely political, others — particularly Republican lawmakers — believe it is essential that all of the details surrounding the attack are explored.
In terms of the military response, there are many questions still worth asking. In the October 20 report, CBS continued, providing more on the military response:
The State Department, White House and Pentagon declined to say what military options were available. A White House official told CBS News that, at the start of the attack, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Martin Dempsey and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta “looked at available options, and the ones we exercised had our military forces arrive in less than 24 hours, well ahead of timelines laid out in established policies.”
But it was too late to help the Americans in Benghazi. The ambassador and three others were dead.
A White House official told CBS News that a “small group of reinforcements” was sent from Tripoli to Benghazi, but declined to say how many or what time they arrived.
As for Rivera’s view, not everyone agrees. Retired CIA officer Gary Berntsen said that he believes help could have arrived sooner — and he also accused the government of needlessly standing by and watching the atrocities unfold.
“You find a way to make this happen. There isn’t a plan for every single engagement.
Sometimes you have to be able to make adjustments,” he said. “They made zero adjustments in this. They stood and they watched and our people died.”
Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, though, has defended the military and claimed that taking direct ground action would have been too confusing at the time. Because of the convoluted nature of the situation on the ground, he said that deploying troops there without having real-time information would have been too hazardous.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Nikita Khrushchev:"We will bury you"
"Your grandchildren will live under communism."
“You Americans are so gullible.
No, you won’t accept To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. ."
We’ll so weaken your To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. until you’ll To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. like overripe fruit into our hands."
Explosive new allegations surrounding the Benghazi attack emerged this morning, with FOX News’ Jennifer Griffin reporting that sources have confirmed that three urgent requests for military assistance sent from the CIA annex were all denied; CIA operators were apparently told to “stand down” rather than respond when shots were heard around 9:40 p.m. on September 11. Following the alleged developments, Charles Woods, father of ex-Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods who was killed in the attack, passionately responded to this new information on Glenn Beck’s radio program (see his comments at the end of the article).
Let’s begin by examining the new-found allegations: Glen Doherty and Woods, the two former Navy SEALS who were among the four Americans inevitably murdered, allegedly disobeyed orders from superiors to “stand down” in the wake of the attack. Despite being told by higher-ups not to respond, they purportedly decided to go to the main consulate building to help U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and others who were under siege.
While it was previously known that these men arrived on the scene to provide assistance, the alleged “stand down” orders and the repeatedly-denied requests for military assistance are new developments to a story that seems to be continuously unraveling.
When the attack first took form, Doherty and Woods were at a secure CIA annex only one mile away from the chaos unfolding at the compound. After the men heard shots fired, they promptly let the chain of command know about the situation on the ground. However, FOX’s sources claim that they were told to refrain from action. This same mandate was given to the men when they called a second time just one hour later to report that the dangerous situation was still unfolding at the consulate.
After being told twice to refrain from involvement, Woods, Doherty and two others ignored orders and made their way to the main compound, where violence was raging. At this point, the building was on fire and shots were exchanged, however they took action.
Woods, Doherty and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the Consulate which at that point was on fire….The quick reaction force from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the Consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight.
At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. 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.
Earlier today, TheBlaze reported about the questions surrounding the lack of a military response to the situation on the ground. Sources appear to claim that there were potential options that could have been pursued, although these avenues were reportedly not taken during the September 11 attack. While the forces available at Sigonella could have been flown into Benghazi in less than two hours, they, too, were also allegedly told to “stand down.”
Around 3 a.m. that evening, a pro-U.S. Libyan militia finally showed up at the CIA annex. And an American Quick Reaction Force that was sent from Tripoli arrived at the Benghazi airport at 2 a.m., but was delayed for 45 minutes over transportation confusion. In both instances, though, the arrivals were hours after the initial attack took place.
FOX News has more regarding how Woods and Doherty were killed hours after the initial attack on the consulate commenced. Rather than perishing at the main compound, the ex-Navy SEALS were back at the CIA annex when the attach took place:
Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, were part of a Global Response Staff or GRS that provides security to CIA case officers and provides countersurveillance and surveillance protection. They were killed by a mortar shell at 4 a.m. Libyan time, nearly seven hours after the attack on the Consulate began — a window that represented more than enough time for the U.S. military to send back-up from nearby bases in Europe, according to sources familiar with Special Operations. Four mortars were fired at the annex. The first one struck outside the annex. Three more hit the annex.
Here’s additional information about the deadly attack that took Woods and Doherty’s lives, as reported by CNN back in September:
After arriving back at the annex, the incident was far from over for the security team, which included Woods and Doherty. An attack was launched on the annex — this one more intense than the initial assault on the main building.
Military officials in Benghazi told CNN that rocket-propelled grenades were among the heavy firepower used by the attackers at the annex, with one official saying mortars were also fired.
“It was during that (second attack) that two additional U.S. personnel were killed and two others were wounded,” a senior administration official said last week in providing details of the attack. Those two victims were later confirmed to be Doherty and Woods.
Earlier today, TheBlaze covered debate surrounding drones and whether or not U.S. officials had the ability to watch a portion of the Libyan attack in real time. Considering these latest allegations, this question seems increasingly important.
Some, like reporter Geraldo Rivera, have dismissed the notion that the battle was being viewed live by officials as it progressed. But an October 20 report from CBS News claims that a portion of the attack was potentially seen by officials. In fact, according to the network, “hours after the attack began, an unmanned Predator drone was sent over the U.S. mission in Benghazi, and that the drone and other reconnaissance aircraft apparently observed the final hours of the protracted battle.”
FOX, too, reported today that there were two military surveillance drones that were sent to Benghazi after the attack on the U.S. consulate began. Both of these drones had the capability to send images back to government officials (including the White House situation room), although it’s not immediately clear how, if at all, these images were used.
On Thursday, TheBlaze’s Madeleine Morgenstern covered Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s response to questions surrounding military reaction. He said that forces did not intervene because officials did not have enough “real-time information” about what was happening on the ground.
“The basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on, without having some real-time information about what’s taking place,” Panetta said. “And as a result of not having that kind of information…[we] felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.”
On Friday morning, radio host Glenn Beck interviewed Charles Woods, father of ex-Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods. He reacted to the explosive, new allegations, deriding the “stand down” orders and calling for “moral strength.” Here is his complete on-air reaction:
“That is cowardice by the people that issued that order. And our country is not a country of cowards. Our country is the greatest nation on Earth. And what we need to do is we need to raise up a generation of American heroes just like Ty who is an American hero. But in order to do that, we need to raise up a generation that has not just physical strength but moral strength. We do not need another generation of liars who lack moral strength.”
Here’s the clip:
These revelations come one day after TheBlaze reported that President Barack Obama first alluded to his belief that the Benghazi assault was pre-planned just hours after the assault unfolded. He made these claims in an obscure CBS News clip that was part of a larger interview (this portion of his September 12 “60 Minutes” appearance was not originally aired) which came to light over the past few days.
In the days following Obama’s interview, the administration’s claims about the Libya attack changed drastically, as officials reported that it was the result of an anti-Islam film called “Innocence of Muslims.” Considering Obama’s original views on the matter, the timeline of the administration’s rhetoric has come under scrutiny.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Nikita Khrushchev:"We will bury you"
"Your grandchildren will live under communism."
“You Americans are so gullible.
No, you won’t accept To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. ."
We’ll so weaken your To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. until you’ll To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. like overripe fruit into our hands."
Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. consulate and subsequent attack several hours later was denied by U.S. officials -- who also told the CIA operators twice to "stand down" rather than help the ambassador's team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.
Former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods was part of a small team who was at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When he and others heard the shots fired, they informed their higher-ups at the annex to tell them what they were hearing and requested permission to go to the consulate and help out. They were told to "stand down," according to sources familiar with the exchange. Soon after, they were again told to "stand down."
Woods and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the consulate which at that point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The rescue team from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight.
At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Spectre 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.
Watch "Special Report Investigates: Death and Deceit in Benghazi" on Fox News at 1 p.m. ET on Saturday, 3 p.m. on Sunday and 10 p.m. on Sunday.
A Special Operations team, or CIF which stands for Commanders in Extremis Force, operating in Central Europe had been moved to Sigonella, Italy, but they were never told to deploy. In fact, a Pentagon official says there were never any requests to deploy assets from outside the country. A second force that specializes in counterterrorism rescues was on hand at Sigonella, according to senior military and intelligence sources.
According to those sources, they could have flown to Benghazi in less than two hours.
They were the same distance to Benghazi as those that were sent from Tripoli. Spectre gunships are commonly used by the Special Operations community to provide close air support.
According to sources on the ground during the attack, the special operator on the roof of the CIA annex had visual contact and a laser pointing at the Libyan mortar team that was targeting the CIA annex. The operators were calling in coordinates of where the Libyan forces were firing from.
"There's a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking going on here," Panetta said Thursday. "But the basic principle here ... is that you don't deploy forces into harm's way without knowing what's going on."
U.S. officials argue that there was a period of several hours when the fighting stopped before the mortars were fired at the annex, leading officials to believe the attack was over.
Fox News has learned that there were two military surveillance drones redirected to Benghazi shortly after the attack on the consulate began. They were already in the vicinity. The second surveillance craft was sent to relieve the first drone, perhaps due to fuel issues. Both were capable of sending real time visuals back to U.S. officials in Washington, D.C. Any U.S. official or agency with the proper clearance, including the White House Situation Room, State Department, CIA, Pentagon and others, could call up that video in real time on their computers.
Tyrone Woods was later joined at the scene by fellow former Navy SEAL Glen Doherty, who was sent in from Tripoli as part of a Global Response Staff or GRS that provides security to CIA case officers and provides countersurveillance and surveillance protection. They were killed by a mortar shell at 4 a.m. Libyan time, nearly seven hours after the attack on the consulate began -- a window that represented more than enough time for the U.S. military to send back-up from nearby bases in Europe, according to sources familiar with Special Operations. Four mortars were fired at the annex. The first one struck outside the annex. Three more hit the annex.
A motorcade of dozens of Libyan vehicles, some mounted with 50 caliber machine guns, belonging to the February 17th Brigades, a Libyan militia which is friendly to the U.S., finally showed up at the CIA annex at approximately 3 a.m. An American Quick Reaction Force sent from Tripoli had arrived at the Benghazi airport at 2 a.m. (four hours after the initial attack on the consulate) and was delayed for 45 minutes at the airport because they could not at first get transportation, allegedly due to confusion among Libyan militias who were supposed to escort them to the annex, according to Benghazi sources.
The American special operators, Woods, Doherty and at least two others were part of the Global Response Staff, a CIA element, based at the CIA annex and were protecting CIA operators who were part of a mission to track and repurchase arms in Benghazi that had proliferated in the wake of Muammar Qaddafi's fall. Part of their mission was to find the more than 20,000 missing MANPADS, or shoulder-held missiles capable of bringing down a commercial aircraft. According to a source on the ground at the time of the attack, the team inside the CIA annex had captured three Libyan attackers and was forced to hand them over to the Libyans. U.S. officials do not know what happened to those three attackers and whether they were released by the Libyan forces.
Fox News has also learned that Stevens was in Benghazi that day to be present at the opening of an English-language school being started by the Libyan farmer who helped save an American pilot who had been shot down by pro-Qaddafi forces during the initial war to overthrow the regime. That farmer saved the life of the American pilot and the ambassador wanted to be present to launch the Libyan rescuer's new school.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Nikita Khrushchev:"We will bury you"
"Your grandchildren will live under communism."
“You Americans are so gullible.
No, you won’t accept To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. ."
We’ll so weaken your To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. until you’ll To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. like overripe fruit into our hands."
Re: Is Tunisia, Egypt, Morocco and Libya Facing Real Unrest or a Manufactured Crisis?
Jennifer Korn: Where Does “the Buck Really Stop” in the Benghazi Attack?
By Jennifer Sevilla Korn
Published October 25, 2012
Fox News Latino
“Spoiler alert: we got bin Laden.”
This statement from the Commander-in-Chief was part of a light moment as President Obama and Governor Romney poked fun at themselves and each other during the traditional Alfred E. Smith dinner. But, it was also a glimpse into what has become this Administration’s key talking point describing what they consider a successful national security and foreign policy. This was evident in Monday night’s presidential debate.
Of course, Americans are grateful that Osama bin Laden is no longer able to plan additional acts of terrorism against us. It is a tremendous victory for our military and our nation. But the vast majority of Americans are sophisticated enough to understand the world is complicated, dangerous and in constant flux. And they know that America’s national security policy must reflect and be responsive to this ever-changing reality.
Consider the danger of a nuclear Iran, the resurgence of al Qaeda in Africa and parts of the Middle East, threats from Russia and China, and growing extremism around the world as evidence of just a few national security challenges. The President - our head of state, Commander-in-Chief, and leader of the executive branch - must be able to address a myriad of security challenges; and he must be willing to speak truthfully to the American public. Winning one battle - in this case killing bin Laden - does not mean we have won the war on terror. The death of bin Laden is not the death of al Qaeda.
Case in point is the failure to protect our Ambassador and other Americans serving our country in Libya.
Six weeks after extremists murdered four American diplomats in Benghazi, Libya, the President’s stump speech continues to highlight the death of bin Laden and the withdrawal of troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. Yet, he and his team have not told the American people what really happened in Benghazi.
The debate over whether or not the President labeled the Benghazi attack what it is - terrorism - the day after, is semantics. The fact remains that Ambassador Rice and other high-ranking officials in the Obama administration went out of their way to point out that the tragic events in Libya were in response to a now infamous YouTube video offensive to Muslims. For two weeks - two weeks - they placed blame for the attack on a “widespread” protest of the anti-Muslim video. The problem is that this rhetoric doesn’t equate with reality.
There were warnings from our own diplomats. Newly released documents written by our Ambassador detailed the deteriorating security situation and underscored just how dangerous Libya had become. There were also repeated requests for increased security on the ground - with one document stating: "What we have seen are not random crimes of opportunity, but rather targeted and discriminate attacks."
And let us not forget the events leading up to the deadly attack. The American Consulate had been previously attacked twice. The British consulate in Benghazi was closed after the British ambassador was attacked, and the Red Cross was closed due to deteriorating security.
Then came September 11, 2012 - on the 11th anniversary of that terrible attack on U.S. soil. The assault lasted seven hours, with no land troops or other military reinforcements available. Witnesses called the storming of the compound a “strong, multi-pronged and organized” effort, with perpetrators wielding various weapons, including machine guns and RPGs.
Media reports now state that the CIA chief in Libya informed Washington within 24 hours that the attack was carried out by militants. Libya’s President said that there is “no doubt” that this was terrorism.
Every day it is increasingly clear that, tragically, the deaths of four Americans in Libya were the result of a failure by our government. But who does “the buck really stop” with? The handling of the attack at best shows this Administration's incompetence in managing the basic responsibilities of protecting those on the front lines of our national security. At worse, it demonstrates a lackadaisical foreign policy approach. Those serving our country and representing America are deserving of much more.
Perhaps I am more sensitive to this outrage because I lived this reality. As a military wife, whose husband has selflessly sworn to defend America with his life, I dare not even imagine how his safety may not be as serious a consideration as it should be for his Commander-in-Chief.
I know my concern is shared by Pat Smith, whose son Sean was killed in Benghazi. My heart broke when I saw her being interviewed on television pleading with the President and his team saying, “Just tell me the truth... I look at TV and I see bloody hand prints on walls, thinking, my god, is that my son's? I don't know if he was shot. I don't know.” She and the other families deserve to know.
The campaign speeches will continue for the next two weeks, and chances are that the Benghazi story will continue to shift. As Americans follow this story, they must remember more than just one talking point about one battle that was won - important as it may be - for our national security. They need to remember that any President must be nimble enough to ensure the safety of those serving us while serving as head of state and the leader of our country. If one applies that test to President Obama, the results may be the real spoiler alert for him on Election Day.
Jennifer S. Korn, a Marine Corps spouse, is Executive Director of the Hispanic Leadership Network (HLN). Previously, she served in President George W. Bush’s White House as Director of Hispanic and Women’s Affairs.
Re: Is Tunisia, Egypt, Morocco and Libya Facing Real Unrest or a Manufactured Crisis?
Father of ex-SEAL: Those who denied request for help at consulate 'murderers of my son'
Published October 26, 2012
FoxNews.com
SEAL father: Who denied military aid during Benghazi...
When will we know the truth about Benghazi attack?
McCain: Clinton 'harming her reputation'
The father of a former Navy SEAL killed in the Libya terror attack last month said Friday that U.S. officials who denied a request for help while the diplomatic compound in Benghazi was under attack "are murderers of my son."
Charles Woods was reacting to accounts by Fox News sources that a request from the CIA annex for backup was denied by U.S. officials. His son, Tyrone Woods, was killed in the Sept. 11 assault.
"They refused to pull the trigger," Woods said. "Those people who made the decision and who knew about the decision and lied about it are murderers of my son."
Woods said he forgives whoever denied the apparent request, but he urged them to "stand up."
Sources also said Tyrone Woods and others, who were at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. consulate, ignored orders by their superiors to stand down and not go to the consulate to help. Woods went to the consulate, and hours later he was killed back at the annex.
Charles Woods said his son's action "does not surprise me."
"I wish that the leadership in the White House had the same level of moral courage and heroism that my son displayed," he said.
Woods, in interviews earlier this week, also described a series of conversations he had with administration officials at the memorial service held Sept. 14. He said that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton -- despite signs early on that militants were behind the attack -- pledged to him at that event that she would pursue the maker of an anti-Islam film that had been linked to other protests.
"Her countenance was not good and she made this statement to me ... she said we will make sure that the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted," he said on radio host Glenn Beck's online show, adding that she also apologized.
Woods said he "could tell that she was not telling me the truth."
The account shows an apparent disconnect between evidence that extremists were involved in the attack -- including a newly released State Department email on the day of the attack saying the militant Ansar al-Sharia had claimed responsibility -- and the desire by some to focus strictly on the film as the cause.
The State Department on Friday reiterated that the administration is committed to seeking justice for those responsible.
"Since the moment they were first given the terrible news of their loss, through that very difficult day when they witnessed the return of the remains of their loved ones, and every day since, the families of those killed have been a top priority of the department," State Department spokesman Mark Toner said Friday. "And everything is being done to bring to justice those responsible for their deaths."
Clinton and the rest of the administration made repeated reference to the video in their public comments in the days after the attack. U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice said on Sept 16 the attack was a "spontaneous" reaction to demonstrations over the video. The administration even funded an ad in Pakistan condemning the video.
Intelligence officials have since given a mixture picture, saying the strike was a coordinated terror attack -- but also leaving open the door to the possibility that militants reacted opportunistically to the protests in Egypt at the time over the film.
Woods also described encounters on Sept. 14 with Vice President Biden and President Obama.
He claimed that at one point, Biden came over to him and said, "in an extremely loud and boisterous voice, 'did your son always have balls the size of cue balls?'"
Woods said in the Beck interview: "I will ask you the question, is that the voice of someone who is truly sorry?"
In a separate interview with radio host Lars Larson, Woods said shaking Obama's hand was "like shaking hands with a dead fish."
Woods said: "He kind of just mumbled, you know, 'I'm sorry.' His face was looking at me, but his eyes were looking over my shoulder like he could not look me in the eye. And it was not a sincere, 'I'm really sorry, you know, that you're son died,' but it was totally insincere."
Op-ed writer Ross Douthat is a rare truth teller among the NewYork Times’s writers’ stable. Columnist Paul Krugman spouts daily left-wing fact-uninformed economics.
Token conservative, David Brooks, pens trivia about the latest book he read. Maureen Dowd jokes about women’s issues. Only Douthat questions the Times’ ueber-liberal party line and tells the truth.
In his Sunday October 14 Mystery of Benghazi, Douthat dissects why “White House officials continued to stress the importance of the ‘hateful’ and ‘disgusting’ video, and its supposed role as a catalyst for what Susan Rice, the ambassador to the United Nations, insisted was a spontaneous attack” even as “it became clearer that the Benghazi violence was an al Qaeda operation” — a narrative “pushed on Sunday morning programs, on late-night talk shows and at news conferences, by everyone from Rice to Hillary Clinton to the president himself.” Per Douthat: “When Obama spoke at the United Nations shortly after the attacks, the video was referenced six times in the text; Al Qaeda was referenced only once.”
Douthat, for the first time on the pages of the venerable Times, clearly lays out the time line of what he terms the administration’s “strange denial” that the Benghazi consulate attack was a planned terrorist action.
Douthat rejects two common explanations for Obama’s “self defeating strategy,” before coming up with his own.
Romney’s charge that “this White House can’t resist the urge to appease our enemies when America comes under attack” does not hold water, reasons Douthat. After all, Obama had no trouble “wrapping himself in the mantle of the war on terror” at the Charlotte convention. Obama could have used this tragedy to be presidential and rally the American people. (Question: Why didn’t he?)
Douthat also doubts the more plausible explanation that “this White House… is loath to acknowledge the possibility that it doesn’t have Al Qaeda completely on the run.” Reasons Douthat: If al Qaeda is still with us, “why wouldn’t Americans want to keep the president who gave the Abbottabad order so he could finish the job?”
In rejecting this protect the “al Qaeda on the run” explanation, Douthat may give the President more credit than due for his analytical capabilities.
Douthat’s own explanation for Obama’s Benghazi blunder: “Obama could not afford the narrative about how a president elected to extract us from a war in one Arab country got Americans killed in another… In this context, it’s easy to see why the administration would hope that the Benghazi attack was just spontaneous mob violence rather than a sign of Al Qaeda’s growing presence in post-intervention Libya as well.”
We may disagree with Douthat’s analysis of the Obama ‘Benghazi Blunder’, but his bottom line is clear. Obama sought to conceal the truth of the Libya tragedy for personal political advantage.
The American people will re-elect a President who tells them the truth, no matter how hard. They will not re-elect a President who distorts the truth for political advantage.
Kudos to columnist Douthat. Let’s hope he can hold on as the Times’ sole truth teller. His latest sin: Admitting that Obama is losing in his Aura of Defeat article of October 24.
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Clinton asked for more security in Benghazi, Obama said no
Credits:
(Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Last night, it was revealed that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had ordered more security at the U.S. mission in Benghazi before it was attacked where four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens were murdered by Al-Qaeda but President Obama denied the request.
The news broke on TheBlazeTV’s “Wilkow!” hosted by Andrew Wilkow, by best-selling author, Ed Klein who said the legal counsel to Clinton had informed him of this information.
Klein also said that those same sources said that former President Bill Clinton has been “urging” his wife [Hillary] to release official State Department documents that prove she called for additional security at the compound in Libya, which would almost certainly result in President Obama losing the election.
Klein explained that everyone knew what was happening in Benghazi from the CIA to the National Security Agency and that there’s intelligence cables that have not been released.
Wilkow asked, “If everybody knew this including the White House, who would have given the order to go in and save the ambassador?”
Klein, “The President…he should have given the order to use the rapid reaction force…”
Wilkow, “Not Petraeus?”
Klein, “Well it has to come from the president.”
Wilkow also asked Klein about Valerie Jarrett who’s the Senior Advisor to Obama and Assistant to the President for Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs, and her role in this cover-up.
Klein said, “We don’t know but we can only assume that every action that the president takes, and he said so, he is on the record saying “I don’t take any actions without passing it by Valerie Jarrett”... so we have to assume that Valerie Jarrett whose also by the way, hooked into the Chicago campaign line…she has a direct line to David Axlerod, was a part of this whole cover-up in the White House.”
This latest news comes on the heels when the Paulding County Republican Examiner reported that former CIA officer, Clare Lopez was a guest on the Glenn Beck TV on Monday evening and told Beck, “They let our ambassador and others die. In real time, watching it happen, and they didn't do anything about it.”
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Re: Is Tunisia, Egypt, Morocco and Libya Facing Real Unrest or a Manufactured Crisis?
BENGHAZI-GATE
Obama in cahoots with known terrorists
Diana West on Libya: 'Uncle Sam, more or less, crossed to the other side'
byDiana WestEmail | Archive Diana West is the author of "The Death of the Grown-up: How America's Arrested Development Is Bringing Down Western Civilization," and blogs at dianawest.net.More ↓
A couple of weeks ago, I wrote a column addressing the national scandal that investigation into the security failures and lies surrounding Benghazi-gate must also expose.
This even larger scandal concerns the fact that throughout the revolutionary cycle known as Arab Spring, the Obama administration threw in Uncle Sam’s lot with the bad guys – the “rebels,” the “martyrs,” the Muslim Brothers, the whole jihad-happy and Shariah-ruling crew in Libya and the wider Middle East. In so doing, Uncle Sam, more or less, crossed to the “other side.”
We are continuing this same treacherous policy in Syria, something I hope Mitt Romney (as president, I also hope) comes to understand quickly. In Libya, Obama’s Arab Spring policy – supported by U.N.-niks, Republicans and media alike – meant making common cause with al-Qaida forces and other jihadists, including Libyan veterans of Afghanistan and Iraq who fought and killed Americans. It was if the whole world had gone mad.
Take the Libya Shield Brigade, an eastern Libyan militia aligned with the Libyan government. Libya Shield members met the eight U.S. Marines who arrived in Benghazi from Tripoli in the wee hours of Sept. 12, 2012. Libya Shield escorted our Marines to the secret annex – relying on GPS coordinates the Marines brought with them – where the survivors of the consulate attack had successfully taken cover. This annex did not come under mortar attack until soon after Libya Shield and the Marines arrived.
Coincidence? It was in this barrage, by the way, that ex-SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were killed.
John Rosenthal has reported at WND.com that the Libya Shield Brigade fought in the anti-Gadhafi revolution – which Uncle Sam, of course, supported – under the black flag of al-Qaida. Rosenthal further notes that in October 2011, Libya Shield’s leader, Wissam Bin Hamid, issued a statement to Arabic jihadist websites stating: “The Islamic Shariah is a red line, we will not cede one rule of it, and Islam is the only law-giver and not (merely) the foundation (of the law).”
Bin Hamid, not at all incidentally, is also described on an online jihadist forum as a veteran of jihad in both Iraq and Afghanistan. This is what I mean by Libyan “allies” who have fought and killed Americans from the other side. Now, they’re escorting Marines to secret American annexes, and doing so as a matter of Obama administration policy.
This is a crucial piece of the Benghazi story. The U.S. wasn’t relying on Libya Shield and, as I’ve written before, the February 17 Martyrs Brigade in some ad hoc security arrangement. This is all part of continuing Arab Spring policy.
A U.S. embassy cable made public by congressional investigators makes this patently clear. While requesting more security on March 28, 2012, Eric Nordstrom, then U.S. regional security officer in Libya, notes that “rebuilding and expanding” the “local” guard force is one of his “core objectives.” This objective directly relates to what he describes as the State Department’s recommendation for “developing plans to transition our security staffing … to (a model) that incorporates more locally based and nonemergency assets.”
Naturally, these “plans” weren’t working. Hence, Nordstrom’s request for more American security. And hence the denial from State for reasons, Nordstrom told Congress this month, that came down to the fact “there was going to be too much political cost.” It is these “politics” – this Obama policy of outreach to jihadists – that must be exposed and stopped.
The final diplomatic cable to go out under the late Ambassador Christopher Stevens’ name is dated Sept. 11, 2012. It recounts events of the previous week in Benghazi, including a Sept. 9 meeting between an unnamed U.S. diplomat and, whaddya know, Wissam Bin Hamid, commander of Libya Shield. A second Libya Shield commander, Muhammad al-Gharabi, was also present. During a fractious-sounding meeting, the Libyans declared their support for the Muslim Brotherhood candidate then running to become Libyan prime minister and threatened to withdraw security from the U.S. in Benghazi if another candidate won in upcoming elections.
It makes for surreal reading. Here we see a Muslim Brotherhood supporter, jihadist veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan, and fighter for Shariah under the al-Qaida flag threatening American officials, and it’s just another bulleted point in a routine cable home to the State Department. Little wonder, of course, that two days later, Bin Hamid’s militia and others like it in eastern Libya were unable to forestall disaster. What a dastardly joke: They were all too likely involved in it.
It gets worse. As Rosenthal notes in his WND article, “The jihadist inclinations of Bin Hamid and his Libya Shield forces are not unknown to the U.S. government. Indeed, a recent study prepared by the research division of the Library of Congress links the Libya Shield Brigade to al-Qaida and even cites speculation that Bin Hamid may be the leader of the al-Qaida network in Libya.”
We must find out how we got to this perilous place and why. But first we have another question to answer: Do we really want four more years of the same?
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
A mysterious Libyan ship -- reportedly carrying weapons and bound for Syrian rebels -- may have some link to the Sept. 11 terror attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Fox News has learned.
Through shipping records, Fox News has confirmed that the Libyan-flagged vessel Al Entisar, which means "The Victory," was received in the Turkish port of Iskenderun -- 35 miles from the Syrian border -- on Sept. 6, just five days before Ambassador Chris Stevens, information management officer Sean Smith and former Navy Seals Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were killed during an extended assault by more than 100 Islamist militants.
On the night of Sept. 11, in what would become his last known public meeting, Stevens met with the Turkish Consul General Ali Sait Akin, and escorted him out of the consulate front gate one hour before the assault began at approximately 9:35 p.m. local time.
Although what was discussed at the meeting is not public, a source told Fox News that Stevens was in Benghazi to negotiate a weapons transfer, an effort to get SA-7 missiles out of the hands of Libya-based extremists. And although the negotiation said to have taken place may have had nothing to do with the attack on the consulate later that night or the Libyan mystery ship, it could explain why Stevens was travelling in such a volatile region on the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.
When asked to comment, a State Department spokeswoman dismissed the idea, saying Stevens was there for diplomatic meetings, and to attend the opening of a cultural center.
A congressional source also cautioned against drawing premature conclusions about the consulate attack and the movement of weapons from Libya to Syria via Turkey -- noting they may in fact be two separate and distinct events. But the source acknowledged the timing and the meeting between the Turkish diplomat and Stevens was "unusual."
According to an initial Sept. 14 report by the Times of London, Al Entisar was carrying 400 tons of cargo. Some of it was humanitarian, but also reportedly weapons, described by the report as the largest consignment of weapons headed for Syria's rebels on the frontlines.
"This is the Libyan ship ... which is basically carrying weapons that are found in Libya," said Walid Phares, a Fox News Middle East and terrorism analyst. "So the ship came all the way up to Iskenderun in Turkey. Now from the information that is available, there was aid material, but there were also weapons, a lot of weapons."
The cargo reportedly included surface-to-air anti-aircraft missiles, RPG's and Russian-designed shoulder-launched missiles known as MANPADS.
The ship's Libyan captain told the Times of London that "I can only talk about the medicine and humanitarian aid" for the Syrian rebels. It was reported there was a fight about the weapons and who got what "between the free Syrian Army and the Muslim Brotherhood."
"The point is that both of these weapons systems are extremely accurate and very simple to use," Fox News military analyst Col. David Hunt explained. He said the passage of weapons from Libya to Syria would escalate the conflict. "With a short amount of instruction, you've got somebody capable of taking down any, any aircraft. Anywhere in the world."
The Foundation for Human Rights, and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief (IHH) -- the group accused of moving the weapons -- disputed the claims and in published Turkish reports said it "will take legal action against this article which was written without concrete evidence. It is defamatory, includes false and unfair accusations and violates publishing ethics."
Information uncovered in a Fox News investigation raises questions about whether weapons used to arm the Libyan rebels are now surfacing in Syria.
In March 2011, the Reuters news service first reported that President Obama had authorized a "secret order ... (allowing) covert U.S. government support for rebel forces" to push the Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi from office.
At a hearing on March 31, before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, several lawmakers raised concerns about the finding reported by the Reuters news service and whether the Obama administration knew who constituted the rebel forces and whether Islamists were among their ranks.
"What assurances do we have that they will not pose a threat to the United States if they succeed in toppling Qaddafi?" Republican Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., asked. "There are reports that some opposition figures have links to Al Qaeda and extremist groups that have fought against our forces in Iraq."
While the source of the weapons used to attack the consulate is part of an ongoing investigation, former CIA Director Porter Goss told Fox News there was no question some of the weapons that flooded Libya during the uprising are making their way to Syria -- adding that the U.S. intelligence community must be aware, given their presence in Benghazi.
"Absolutely. I think there's no question that there's a lot of networking going on. And ... of course we know it."
A month after the October 2011 death of Qaddafi, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced in Tripoli that the U.S. was committing $40 million to help Libya "secure and recover its weapons stockpiles." Earlier this year, Assistant Secretary of State for Political and Military Affairs Andrew Shapiro expressed concerns that the situation on the ground was far from under control.
Speaking to the Stimson Center in Washington D.C., on Feb. 2, Shapiro said: "This raises the question -- how many are still missing? The frank answer is we don't know and probably never will."
Re: Is Tunisia, Egypt, Morocco and Libya Facing Real Unrest or a Manufactured Crisis?
WashPost Buries Benghazi Emails Story on A9, Plastered Front Page with Puffy Piece on Obama Counterrorism Advisor
By Ken Shepherd | October 25, 2012 | 15:31
This morning the Washington Post website announced that the paper had decided to endorse President Barack Obama for reelection. That endorsement should hit the print edition tomorrow. But make no mistake, endorsing the president is not the only cover the paper is granting the president. Witness the Post's treatment of the latest, damning development in the Benghazi fiasco.
Post editors buried a news story on the Benghazi State Department emails on page A9, assigning it a rather boring headline -- "E-mails show State named militant group on night of Libya attack" -- and a staff writer, Anne Gearan, who previously wrote a piece consumed with concern about Hillary Clinton's tarnished legacy post-Benghazi. By contrast, Post editors placed on the front page a 74-paragraph profile of Obama's counterterrorism advisor John Brennan, headlined "Brennan reshaped anti-terror strategy: CIA veteran emerges at core of effort to cement process for lethal action."
Story Continues Below Ad ↓
In other words, the Post devoted a positive story about an Obama advisor's efforts to kill terrorists on the front page, but shuffled a story damaging to the Obama administration deeper within the paper. For a taste of the pro-Brennan puffery, here are some excerpts to give you a flavor (emphasis mine):
In his windowless White House office, presidential counterterrorism adviser John O. Brennan is compiling the rules for a war the Obama administration believes will far outlast its own time in office, whether that is just a few more months or four more years.
The “playbook,” as Brennan calls it, will lay out the administration’s evolving procedures for the targeted killings that have come to define its fight against al-Qaeda and its affiliates. It will cover the selection and approval of targets from the “disposition matrix,” the designation of who should pull the trigger when a killing is warranted, and the legal authorities the administration thinks sanction its actions in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and beyond.
“What we’re trying to do right now is to have a set of standards, a set of criteria, and have a decision-making process that will govern our counterterrorism actions — we’re talking about direct action, lethal action — so that irrespective of the venue where they’re taking place, we have a high confidence that they’re being done for the right reasons in the right way,” Brennan said in a lengthy interview at the end of August.
A burly 25-year CIA veteran with a stern public demeanor, Brennan is the principal architect of a policy that has transformed counterterrorism from a conventional fight centered in Afghanistan to a high-tech global effort to track down and eliminate perceived enemies one by one.
[...]
When operations are proposed in Yemen, Somalia or elsewhere, it is Brennan alone who takes the recommendations to Obama for a final sign-off.
As the war against al-Qaeda and related groups moves to new locations and new threats, Brennan and other senior officials describe the playbook as an effort to constrain the deployment of drones by future administrations as much as it provides a framework for their expanded use in what has become the United States’ permanent war.
“This needs to be sustainable,” one senior administration official said, “and we need to think of it in ways that contemplate other people sitting in all the chairs around the table.”
The message of the story is clear: Brennan is one tough hombre doing the yeoman work to help President Obama and future administrations kill terrorists and keep Americans safe.
It isn't until the page on which the story ultimately concludes, A9, that the reader might stumble across the story on the State Department emails. But have no fear, Obama backers, Anne Gearan is on the job, and she was determined to keep the damage minimal.
Gearan failed to directly quote any critics of the Obama/Clinton State Department in her 24 paragraph story, although she was certain to quote Secretary of State Clinton twice, once in the middle of the story and once again to close out the story (emphasis mine):
About a half-hour after militants overran the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, last month, the State Department notified officials at the White House and elsewhere that the compound was “under attack” by about 20 armed assailants, e-mails obtained by The Washington Post on Wednesday show.
Two hours later, the State Department reported that the Libyan militia group Ansar al-Sharia had asserted responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and had also called for an attack on the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli.
[...]
“Posting something on Facebook is not in and of itself evidence” of terrorist involvement, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said when asked about the e-mails Wednesday. “I think it just underscores how fluid the reporting was at the time and continued for some time to be.”
[...]
Stevens apparently died of smoke inhalation inside the villa. Information officer Sean Smith also died in the villa. Two security employees died when a second U.S. government compound was attacked a short distance away.
Clinton suggested Wednesday that the e-mails do not tell the whole story. An independent investigation “is already hard at work looking at everything — not cherry-picking one story here or one document there,” she said.
About the Author
Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters. Click here to follow Ken Shepherd on Twitter.
Re: Is Tunisia, Egypt, Morocco and Libya Facing Real Unrest or a Manufactured Crisis?
Obama denies misleading on Benghazi, vows to capture plotters
By Olivier Knox, Yahoo! News | The Ticket – 14 mins ago
President Barack Obama speaks during a campaign rally in Richmond, Virginia. (Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)President Barack Obama on Friday forcefully denied deliberately misleading Americans about the deadly attack in Benghazi, Libya, telling radio host Michael Smerconish "I've always been straight with the American people." Speaking to Smerconish during a 15-minute Oval Office interview, Obama also declared he was "absolutely" prepared to kill those behind the assault but would prefer to capture them and "bring them to justice."
Asked whether the Administration's shifting explanation for the September 11th strike reflected the intelligence he was receiving, Obama replied: "What's true is that the intelligence was coming in and evolving as more information came up."
"And what is true -- this is something that the American people can take to the bank -- is that my administration plays this stuff straight. We don't play politics when it comes to American national security," the president said. "As information came in we gave it to the American people. And as we got new information, we gave that to the American people."
Smerconish asked Obama, when and if the location of those behind the attack is known, "will you take that person out without regard for the election timetable?"
"Absolutely," Obama replied. "But I think our goal would be to bring them to justice."
The embattled incumbent has taken fire over the attack, which raised questions about his handling of the "Arab Spring" countries across the broader Middle East. State Department officials have acknowledged turning down requests for more security in Libya. And Republicans have called into question the president's truthfulness after the administration spent days pinning blame for the assault on Muslim anger at an Internet film that ridicules Islam. Yahoo News reported in late September that American officials had concluded on "Day One" that terrorists were behind the siege. But The Wall Street Journal reported Monday that Obama's "presidential daily brief" from the CIA tied the assault to on a spontaneous protest linked to the video — despite intelligence contradicting that scenario.
Asked whether he knew that Americans in Libya had asked for more security, Obama replied: "I was not personally aware of any request. Obviously we have an infrastructure that's set up to manage requests like that." (The State Department handles those requests).
"But we're going to find out exactly what happens," he said. "Ultimately, though, any time there is a death of an American overseas, I want I want to find out what happened because my most important job as president is keeping the American people safe."
"And we will get to the bottom of what happened and we're going to make sure most importantly that those who carried it out, that they are captured," Obama said.
Obama said he takes "full responsibility" for the tragedy, in which heavily armed extremists stormed a U.S. compound in the eastern Libyan city in an attack that claimed the lives of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans. The authors of the attack have not been publicly or conclusively identified.
"My biggest priority right now is bringing those folks to justice. And I think the American people have seen that's a commitment I always keep," the president said in an apparent reference to the bin Laden raid.
Obama harshly criticized Romney for his early response to the crisis. The former Massachusetts governor, in his first statement, implied that the Administration had sided with the attackers. Smerconish asked whether Romney's criticisms of the changing explanation for the attack were "disingenuous" given that he himself started getting intelligence briefings (though they only began roughly one week later on September 17).
"He certainly understood that when our diplomats are still under fire — not just in Benghazi but around the world, in Cairo, in Pakistan, etc — that if you aspire to be commander in chief you don't release a political press release.," Obama said. "You don't have a political press conference that tries to take advantage of that opportunity that is so reckless that even members of your own party criticize you for it."
The president said a top priority was making sure that Americans are kept informed on matters of national security "within the constraints of classified information that would endanger folks in the field, so that people can have confidence that their president and everybody involved in national security is working for them.
Asked whether Romney had turned down his sharp criticisms on Libya because of what he learned in intelligence briefings, Obama said he doubted his rival was "constrained by facts." "I just don't think that that was getting a lot of political traction for them," he said.
Obama was not asked about, and did not bring up, a stunning report by Fox News Channel that said American officials repeatedly asked for military help during the assault but were rebuffed by CIA higher-ups. A spokesman for the president's National Security Council did not acknowledge a request for comment on that report. But Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, complained Thursday about "Monday morning quarterbacking" and said that there was not a clear enough picture of events on the ground to order troops to Benghazi.
Libertatem Prius!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Re: Is Tunisia, Egypt, Morocco and Libya Facing Real Unrest or a Manufactured Crisis?
Reply With Quote
by 
Bookmarks