What is Obama covering up?

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-17-2012
What is Obama covering up?
Sat, 11-03-2012 - 5:14pm

Exclusive: Security officials on the ground in Libya challenge CIA account

By Adam Housley

Published November 03, 2012


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.

The accounts, from foreign and American security officials in and around Benghazi at the time of the attack, indicate there was in fact a significant lag between when the threat started to show itself and help started to arrive.

According to the CIA, the first calls for assistance came at 9:40 p.m. local time from a senior State Department official at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, to the CIA annex about a mile away.

But according to multiple people on the ground that night, the Blue Mountain Security manager, who was in charge of the local force hired to guard the consulate perimeter, made calls on both two-way radios and cell phones to colleagues in Benghazi warning of problems at least an hour earlier. Those calls allegedly went to local security contractors who say that the CIA annex was also notified much earlier than 9:40 p.m. U.S. military intelligence also told Fox News that armed militia was gathering up to three hours before the attack began.

One source said the Blue Mountain Security chief seemed "distraught" and said "the situation here is very serious, we have a problem." He also said that even without these phone and radio calls, it was clear to everyone in the security community on the ground in Benghazi much earlier than 9:40 p.m. that fighters were gathering in preparation for an attack.

Many of these security contractors and intelligence sources on the ground in Benghazi met twice a week for informal meetings at the consulate with Blue Mountain and consulate staff, and at times other international officials. They were all very familiar with security at the consulate -- and said the staff seemed "complacent" and "didn't seem to follow the normal American way of securing a facility."

Both American and British sources say multiple roadblocks set up by fighters believed to be with Ansar al-Sharia were in place in Benghazi several hours before the 9:40 p.m. timeline and that communications also alluded to "heavily armed troops showing up with artillery." Fox News was told by both American and British contacts who were in Benghazi that night that the CIA timeline rolled out this past week is only "loosely based on the truth" and "doesn't quite add up."

Fox News was also told that the local guard force meant to protect the consulate perimeter "panicked" and didn't know what to do as the attackers took up positions. Sources say other guards simply "walked away".    

One former Special Op now employed by a private company in Benghazi said that even the safe room wasn't properly set up. He said "the safe room is one of the first measures you take" and that he is "not sure how you can set a safe room without fire suppression and ventilation in case of fire." He also said, "Ambassador Stevens would likely be alive today if this simple and normal procedure was put into place."

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.    

British intelligence sources said that unarmed drones routinely flew over Benghazi every night in flight patterns and that armed drones which fly over chemical sites, some a short flight from Benghazi, "were always said to be on call." American sources confirmed this and questioned "why was a drone armed only with a camera dispatched?"

Another source added, "Why would they put a ragtag team together in Tripoli as first responders? This is not even what they do for a living. We had a first responder air base in Italy almost the same distance away." Despite the team arriving from Tripoli that night, sources said sufficient American back-up never came.

British sources on the ground in Benghazi said they are extremely frustrated by the attack and are still wondering why they weren't called for help. “We have more people on the ground here than the Americans and I just don't know why we didn't get the call?" one said.

Both American and British sources said, at the very least, the security situation on the ground and the lack of proper response were the result of "complete incompetence." The covert team that came in from Tripoli was held up at the Benghazi airport for more than three hours by Libyan officials. Sources said the team notified officials in Washington that they were being delayed within 30 minutes of their arrival.

They also point out that these questions "don't even address the military capabilities of our United Nations ally Turkey, who (has) forces available a similarly short flight away." Fox News has learned that Turkey had a number of embassy staff in town the night of the attack and that the Turkish consul general met with Ambassador Stevens in Benghazi the night he and the three other Americans were killed.

One source asked, "Were the Turks not warned? What forces were available from our ally Turkey? Especially since they had officials there in Benghazi also and had to be concerned … and where was the U.N. in all of this?"

Fox News' Jennifer Griffin contributed to this report.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/03/exclusive-security-officials-on-ground-in-libya-challenge-cia-account/?test=latestnews#ixzz2BCEwGbIY

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-17-2012
Sun, 11-04-2012 - 4:30pm

Read up...lots of credible sources on the net.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-17-2012
Sun, 11-04-2012 - 4:32pm

Read up...lots of credible sources on the net.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-17-2012
Sun, 11-04-2012 - 5:10pm

When Obama takes his victory laps for blowing up suspected terrorists in Pakistan, do you imagine that he accomplished this great feat by blowing up and entire Pakistani neighborhood?  It may be new to Obama fans, but things have advanced a bit since WWll, we have these new-fangled things called precision-guided munitions...that's assuming we would have chosed to use munitions in stead of some other kind of deterrent.  Simply having an F-18 buzz the crowd might have broken up the attack...it's worked in the past...and certainly having well armed, well trained military forces on the ground would have put an end to it.  But it is telling that you'd rather sacrifice dozens of American lives rather than risk a bad photo-op.  Obama supporter, right?

As to your other errors...oops, my bad..."points"...Obama said he ordered his security team to do "everything"...they claim that forces were moved from Germany to Sigonella and that warships were moved off libya...all of which would have included informing Gen. Ham.

And in case you didn't know, the US Ambassador to Libya, the Embassy in Tripoli and the consulate in Benghazi are under the auspices of the State Department, not he CIA.

As for FOX, your bias aside, study after study has found them to be the most impartial news source.  But after watching so many other news sources obfuscate and carry water for Obama, I can see why you might find it disconcerting when a news organization actually reports news and facts, and asks questions harder than "what's your favorite color" after a terrorist attack that the President watched in real time.

And yes, it occurred to me that Obama refusing security to a consulate that had been attacked TWICE in previoius months, and actually DECREASING security for our Ambassador might have been designed to fool our enemies into attacking the undefended consulate and killing our Ambassador and the meager US security force.  Wow, Obama's really, really smart!  He's so smart, that he probably reduced the security to SAVE American lives in the attack he knew was coming.

Romney/Ryan 2012.

Avatar for xxxs
Community Leader
Registered: 01-25-2010
Sun, 11-04-2012 - 11:25pm

  More conjecture.  No facts.  Another conspiracy theory.  It is now in the past.  Precision munitions?  Those need guidance and need to be programmed or have laser guidance.  All of which take time.  If one had a couple of days perhaps that might be possible but would not be done.  F 18's are not tailored to that mission.  Nor are those weapons designed to work in close as they are explosive.  Night pictures are not accurate enough to tell which people are which there fore such a mission is impossible.  people do not have IFF gear on them.

   Recall that there were others in the compound.  Those who pulled the ambassador and got him to the hospital.  No it would need a trained force on the ground.  Even then how would they tell who was a bystander,a rescue worker,a terrorist apart?  Do you think that they all wear uniforms or signs? 

  This is nothing more than political pandering.  


iVillage Member
Registered: 10-17-2012
Mon, 11-05-2012 - 2:14am

Not conjecture at all.  It may upset your spoon-fed fictional version of reality, but I've simply stated the known facts...most of which have been confirmed by the Obama administration itself, from one department or another.

And no, despite your desire to have the deaths of brave Americans swept under the rug, it's not in the past...the truth is only beginning to emerge and there will be hell to pay on the part of the Obama administration, which, come next Tuesday, will, God willing, be a thing of the past.

And regarding the precision munitions...despite your obvious expertise on the subject, these munitions don't take time to "program."  They're actually used on the battlefield to fight on-going battles in real time and can be guided by a host of methods, one being laser guidance.  Coincidentally enough, it's been reported, and confirmed by the CIA, that the SEALS, fighting from the Annex did, in fact, paint terrorist targets with lasers.  Unfortunately, they were abandoned by their Coward-in-Chief and they died, still slumped over their machine guns.

Still, with your belief that our military can't identify targets on the ground or strike small targets with minimal collateral damage, it's difficult to fathom why you, and so many other liberals, support Obama using exactly those same weapons to kill suspected terrorists.  Do you image those suspected terrorists have IFF gear on them or have chosen to live in tents conveniently placed well outside populated areas?  Or is it that innocent Pakistani lives have as little apparent value as Americans heroically fighting terrorists?

And yes, a trained force on the ground would have been nice.  They could have been there within 2 hours.  The attack lasted 7.  They were prepared and ready...but they were not sent.  According to the Pentagon and General Ham, no orders were given to deploy.  Why?

And finally, the bystanders...looters, actually...by the time they arrived, the security force had already left the consulate and taken refuge at the Annex, which was almost immediately under siege.  This means...1) that there was no reason to drop bombs on "bystanders" in an abandoned consulate...and 2) that the terrorists could be easily identified because they were the ones OUTSIDE the Annex lobbing mortars INTO the Annex.  Also bearing in mind that we had trained forces in the Annex, in real time communication, who were actually painting terrorist targets with lasers and who were more than capable of guiding aircraft or drone munitions onto enemy targets.  It happens all the time in battle.

You can cling to your wishful revisionist history, but the fact is that Obama watched while Americans were killed and did nothing.  We want to know why.

Avatar for xxxs
Community Leader
Registered: 01-25-2010
Mon, 11-05-2012 - 5:57pm

  ROFL  guided munitions are not used in crowds.  Explosives are very indiscriminate.  As there were none terrorist people there too.  Plus most aircraft are not sitting on the tarmac loaded.  They have to be loaded then the mission has to be planned.  No not an option.

     Painting individual terrorists are not a target for aircraft.  That requires snipers.  Again Ham would not be informed as no military ground units were required.  The people (civilians) were inside the compound otherwise how would the ambassador been taken to the hospital?  That fact overrides the claim that only the terrorists were inside.  Not only that but in the Middle East terrorist use crowds to hide in that is a very common tactic. 




Avatar for xxxs
Community Leader
Registered: 01-25-2010
Tue, 11-06-2012 - 12:15am

  Lets use some facts

1.The distance from Benghazi to Aviano is 1680 km or 1044 miles.

U.S. Africa Command, which oversees military options in North Africa, had no access to AC-130 gunships or to armed drones, such as the Predator, that could have killed the attackers from the air.

3.F-16 fighters at Aviano. By this time, the initial one-hour assault, most likely by the terrorist group Ansar al-Shariah, on the consulate had ended




iVillage Member
Registered: 10-17-2012
Tue, 11-06-2012 - 2:15am

ROFL the only “crowd” at the Annex were the terrorists who were attacking our security forces, so there wouldn’t be much of a problem identifying them or killing them.

And no, explosives aren’t “very indiscriminate”…unless you believe that Obama is “indiscriminately” blowing up entire neighborhoods every time he takes a victory lap for having a drone drop a bomb on a suspected terrorist.  That’s what you believe, isn’t it?  That Obama kills  hundreds of innocent men, women and children every time he "takes out" an alleged terrorist?

And the tactic suggested that was for the F-18 to buzz the Annex with full afterburners to scatter the crowd…not to nuke them.


And I’m afraid you’re mistaken again.  Painting enemies with a laser is precisely how ground forces identify targets for aircraft, laser guided missiles or precision munitions.  It has already been confirmed by the CIA that the security forces in the Annex were “laser painting” the attacking terrorists.  It has also been reported by people "on the ground" that the security forces in the Annex requested air support.

And surprise, surprise, you’re mistaken yet again…General Ham, as head of AFRICOM, had direct military oversight in the region and would have been notified immediately…especially since he was overseeing operations in the Pentagon at the time of the attack.  Both Ham, and General Dempsey, have stated that there were forces available, but that the order to deploy was never issued.

And finally, wrong…again…the looters entered the consulate an hour or two after it had been abandoned by both US security forces and the terrorists so there would have been no one there to paint anything with a laser or any terrorists to target.  The attack had long moved to the Annex.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-17-2012
Tue, 11-06-2012 - 3:52am

ALL estimates are that an F-16 could have been over Benghazi between 30-60 minutes.  None were deployed.

Beyond the F-16s, we don’t know…surprise, surprise…what air assets were available.  We do know that there were ground forces available at Sigonella that weren’t deployed.

It’s also been reported that armed drones patrol chemical weapons depots in Libya which were not redirected to the area.

As for people who say “help couldn’t have arrived in time”…well, first of all, there was ample warning that an attack was imminent.  Estimates are that at least 3 hours before the actual attack, the consulate was under surveillance and roadblocks were being established in the surrounding area.  Big clue.  Nothing was done.

When the attack commenced, no one knew how long it was going to last.  No support forces were deployed.

After the team had evacuated it was attacked all along the route and the assault continued for hours after.  The security forces continually called for help.  It was pretty obvious that the attack was ongoing with no signs of ending.  One could excuse help for not arriving in time, but it’s difficult to explain that no help was ever deployed.  Even more difficult with the Obama administration lying and covering the incident up.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-30-2007
Tue, 11-06-2012 - 8:07am

Gotta love these "Keyboard Commando's".