"Unfortunately Ambassador Stevens was already gravely injured, and Foreign Service officer, Sean Smith, was dead. However, due to their quick action and suppressive fire, twenty administrative personnel in the embassy were able to escape to safety. Eventually, these two courageous men were overwhelmed by the sheer numbers brought against them, an enemy force numbering between 100 to 200 attackers which came in two waves. But the stunning part of the story is that Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty killed 60 of the attacking force. Once the compound was overrun, the attackers were incensed to discover that just two men had inflicted so much death and destruction."
ScottOnCapeCod, via Instapundit.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
164 comments:
When will the President tell us what happened? The longer he and the MSM hide from this story the bigger it gets. As i said before, the One has the paranoia of Nixon and the incompetence of Carter.
Nov. 6th
Wow. Those two men were the very definition of heroes. I wish 1)Obama had helped them 2) this wasn't now a huge political problem so they could get the recognition they deserve.
Whatever the politicians did or do really is secondary to the fact that those two men represented the best America has to offer.
Harvey Weinstein thought he was so fuckin' clever to add lots of Obama-making-the-gutsy-call scenes to Seal Team 6, but what are people going to be thinking now when they see that?
This story should have been told the moment it was safe to tell it. By the administration. It wasn't. Why not?
It's a stark contrast to W standing on top of the fire truck at Ground Zero isn't it?
They took out 60 of the orcs and saved the lives of 20 people, if that account is correct.
Obama is not only not fit for office, he's not fit to polish their boots.
I thought Woods and Doherty got killed by a mortar round that landed on the roof of the CIA safe house.
Overwhelmed buy hundreds and they still took out 60, that's how badass Seals are.
If these brave men had been supported the Benghazi tragedy would not have happened. And if Obama loses partly because these men were not supported, then their deaths will send a message. Even Democrats (who all seem to be yellow dogs these days) will think twice about leaving foreign service officers and soldiers to die if the Democrats have to think they might lose (gasp) an election.
According to Panetta, they never should have gone in, since the situation was so uncertain.
wildswan
It's telling that the loss of people seems to be of much less concern than the potential loss of an election.
It's hard to come to any other conclusion.
Panetta might feel differently if he were in the situation Ambassador Stevens was in.
The question today is why was General Ham relieved from command of AFRICOM? The story I've seen is that he disregarded his "stand down orders" and told the CIF team to go. A few minutes later, his deputy came in and told him he was relieved. The new AFRICOM commander was announced by Obama on 10/18.
Why was he relieved after 18 months? These appointments are usually for two years. There was another relief of the Marine deputy chief at about the same time. The admiral of the 5th fleet, which covers the Persian Gulf, was also relieved about the same period.
Note that Mr. Panetta gives no insight into General Ham's future. General Ham is not quite 61 years old and so has three years left before mandatory retirement age of 64. General Ham has been commissioned for 36 years but did serve as an enlisted man prior to gaining his commission, so he might have the mandatory retirement 40 years of service.
The New York Times ran an article by Elisabeth Bumiller titled "Panetta Says Risk Impeded Deployment to Benghazi." The article refers to the night of 11/12 September and includes the following: As a result, Mr. Panetta said, he and two top commanders "felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation." The commanders are Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Gen. Carter F. Ham of Africa Command, which oversees American military operations in Africa, including Libya. You probably have seen similar clips on TV. The impression being given by Mr. Panetta is that the three of them agreed upon the course of action.
This is really fishy.
Isn't it curious that this story of courage and sacrifice hasn't been told to the world. One would think the administration would be quick to honor those heroes as examples to be emulated. What a missed opportunity. One wonders why.
What changes elections?
Events.
1. First Debate
2. Benghazi
Even with this the weasels might still sneak back to the nest.
Our SEALS were warriors and soldiers, the attackers were merely fighters. But enough people armed only with rocks will eventually overwhelm a man (or two) with a machine gun.
Posthumous medals of honor?
This is pretty damning -- Tyrone Woods exposing himself to the jihadi mortars to paint their position with a laser designator...
Tyrone Woods was painting a target with a ground laser designator (GLD). Those are only used when the air asset is overhead, ready to fire. The jihadis can use cell phones with night-vision capabilities to see the laser beam, which then pinpoints the location of the person using the GLD. As a former Navy SEAL, Woods would’ve known that. He would only have exposed himself if he thought that the mortar squad was about to be taken out. The air asset didn’t fire, and Woods and Glen Doherty were killed by the mortar squad.
There was either a Spectre gunship or an armed Predator or Reaper drone overhead, and it was denied permission to fire. That’s the only explanation that fits. Woods would not have used his GLD for any other reason than to paint a target for an immediate air strike.
Nothing says "spontaneous" like pre-sighted, crew-served mortars.
How do you even begin to honor such men?
Wow.
Usually the NYT and WAPO were on top of enemy, I mean, Iraqi and Afghan casualties.
All these dead Libyans and no one had reported it for over a month?
Shame?
Note to jihadis. Do not f*ck with SEALs.
I do have to ask what the source is for the information. It's stunning if true, mainly because of their deeds but also because it is so at variance with what State and WH have been putting out.
Powerline also has a compelling post on this subject tonight.
Posthumous medals of honor?
Nope, they were ex-SEAL CIA contractors, not active duty military.
The type of guys about whom Markos Moulitsas would say "Screw them".
More "bumps in the road" for Barak. His administration is severly overdrawn at the credibility bank. You can bet the CIA is going to leak this till someone cries "uncle" over at teh white house. This couldn't happen at a worse time for them. No sacraficial lamb will resign in time to take off the heat and it just makes the administration look incompetant right before the election. What to do, what to do?
Presidential Medal of Freedom is in order.
A task best left to President Romney.
That's what 2 Seals can do with light arms. So how hard would it have been to make this attack an embarrassment for our enemies instead of our President? The security there was inexcusable. There should have been hundreds of dead terrorists that night. Of course if the security was at that level the attack never would have happened. They knew the Ambassador was a sitting duck, just like our leadership did.
Benghazi is an ocean front town.
"Benghazi" is like kryptonite for the WH and the press, esp. the NYT.
No one will care about Benghazi. Who cares? Forget you.
At the NYT and at the WH, there is only one interest: The 2nd term. Every-thing else can go to hell.
"Benghazi" is not even worth a spit at the WH and NYT. This is all collateral damage, a bump in the road, not optimal.
Who cares? Forget you.
The history of the last few centuries is replete with examples such as this.
If it weren't for the fact this would embarrass not only a Democrat President running for re-election, but the entire Leftist Establishment, these guys' story would be a major motion picture, as they say.
EMD said...
Posthumous medals of honor?
Just like Gordon and Shugart in Mogadishu.
Absolutely.
What is his source for this? There are things that I don't recall seeing in the news.
MB, you're joking.
According to latest research in neuroscience, american voters have the shortest short-term memory. Soon, after the election, no one will know what "Benghazi" means? What is that? Is that a food or a restaurant?
If most of the mainstream media won't report this, it is up to us, Emails, blogs, Facebook and family dinners.
We've got a cover up of the first order here. Obama knows it. The MSM know it and refuse to report on it because it would flip the election.
I saw Argo this week with my SO GF and her dad. At the end, when the American foreign service officers were on the plane with the CIA agent, there was a tremendous clapping and shouting.
I hope they all remember "Benghazi" when they go to vote.
" You keep lyin' when you oughta be truthin' "
(from Nancy Sinatra, These Boots Are Made for Walkin')
These are folks who served under me that I had sent to some very dangerous places. Nobody wants to find out more what happened than I do.
That's what Obama said the other day, but it's been over six weeks since the attack that claimed an Ambassador and three other brave Americans.
How complicated can it be to determine what happened and who gave what orders?
Are we still waiting for the FBI to go to the Benghazi "crime scene" which was already picked clean by terrorists and CNN reporters?
Who is in charge, if not Obama? If he doesn't know yet, when will anyone know?
This is entirely ridiculous and unacceptable.
This is Watergate with four dead bodies, but this time Woodward and Bernstein are helping the President with the cover-up.
"Benghazi" go f*** yourself.
(adapted from Argo)
" You keep lyin' when you oughta be truthin' "
(from Nancy Sinatra, These Boots Are Made for Walkin')
The stories are coming out and it is difficult to sort out what happened and when, but there were witnesses. And their stories need to be heard.
Whose blood is on the wall?
I wondered about the seeeming discrepancy of the mortar death story and the rescue story -- but Woods using the GLD to paint the mortar after the rescue would fit both descriptions.
Major point being that it would have cost the US nothing to take out that mortar position.
These men should not die in vain.
Obama and his crew were not worthy to be served of these men. These heroes served the United States of America.
Assuming the stories are reasonably accurate the reception of the coffins by Obama is disgusting.
And so legends are born...
Woods and Doherty were not alone. Woods had two others who accompanied him to the consulate to rescue those under attack. Doherty arrived much later with seven other US personnel from Tripoli - along with 16 Libyans.
All were heroic in motive and action - unlike their betters huddled in the Whitehouse.
If most of the mainstream media won't report this, it is up to us, Emails, blogs, Facebook and family dinners.
By all means.
That's how a high school classmate of mine changed her vote to Romney. A conservative friend pressed her with Benghazi, which she hadn't heard about, and that was the last straw.
Don't waste your time.
Just say: "Benghazi" go f*** yourself.
After all, this is what WH and NYT are saying.
The rumor about General Ham is so serious that it needs to be confirmed or officially denied. It's not something to take from rumor and run with.
The consulate at Benghazi is turning into the Alamo of our time.
Will the election be our San Jacinto?
If this is true, what a damming end to the failure that is our first black president. This all was recorded by the drones, so somebody has transcribed it, and hopefully leaks are springing out all over exposing the cover-up (this possibly being one of them). I cannot wait to vote in my swing state to fire this malfeasant fool.
There are a lot of things Ann could be posting, but it's clear this outrages her and she wants the truth to come out, regardless of her feeling for Barry.
Kiss your wife, Mr Meade. You've got a good lady there.
Fox News reported this evening that a Colonel with "inside information" has said that Obama was watching the live feed of the Bengazi attack in real time.
Further, that there was an AC130 gunship in the air 20 minutes from Bengazi and it was ordered not to fire.
If only....
The fight lasted over 7 hours and came in two waves.
On fox:
Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer said tonight that his sources tell him that Obama was one of the people in the room watching the Benghazi attack go down and both he and Col. David Hunt agree it would have taken an order by the president to intervene. Further, Col. Hunt said that we were only 20 min away by jet and a couple of hours away by AC-130 gunships and special forces, and the decision not to intervene had to be political.
How do you watch Americans at one of your Embassy's in a fire fight for their lives that lasts for hours and as a President, your first demand the second it starts to happen isn't
how "fast can we get them back up and what will it take"
Obama goes to sleep, and the next day flys to Vegas for a rally.
Not stay at the White House with his security team and find out what happened, who was responsible, how to explan it to the American people, do a press conference
....... It really is as if Obama just a figure head and all that important is winning re election, and for no other reason,
just to keep power in his and his friends hands.
Posthumous medals of honor?
10/27/12 10:06 PM
It won't happen if Obama is reelected.
Reason #1,682,953 why Obama should not be reelected.
Nothing to add to what people have already said - these two brave men were America at its' very best and greatest.
If he was watching it in real time, he could see that it was a coordinated attack, right? Not a spontaneous protest about some damn movie no one has seen.
A movie whose producer remains jailed in Los Angeles. Odd, that, given how LA and Hollywood are all in for freedom of artistic expression and all.
Nice to see Hillary Clinton stand up and do what's right.
Oh....wait.
Harro says there are substantive reasons why Barry should be re-elected.
Nobody in the White House .....
Was Valerie Jarrett over at the EOB?
Mogadishu-esque. God bless them.
... and where are all the photos or videos of these dead jihadists?
I can only imagine the gloating we would have heard coming out of the white house had the 2 fmr seals succeeded in fending off the attack, Killing I would hope even more of the attackers.
Unless of course the president wanted everybody there to die. Wait, that's just crazy talk....
Mary Beth said...
What is his source for this? There are things that I don't recall seeing in the news.
10/27/12 10:30 PM
Chip Ahoy said...
MB, you're joking.
I asked the same question, Chip. The author knows lots of people in the Seal community, so that may be the source, but he does not say what his source is, nor have I seen this story anywhere else.
I am interested in knowing the source.
Based on the information leaked so far, and the stonewalling of the WH, this story seems very feasible. However, like David said, we need to know the source, otherwise it is just a story--heroic, but unsubstantiated.
If journalists were doing their jobs, we would have that substantiation by now. I can only hope that enough people start asking questions that the President is forced to give us answers before the American public unwittingly reelects a coward and a knave as their Commander in Chief.
So you have Obama, Biden, Panetta, and Clinton in the Situation Room and between the 4 of them there isn't enough testosterone make a decision?
I'd say that's a pretty typical bunch of Democrats in the year 2012.
--... and where are all the photos or videos of these dead jihadists?--
At the LA Times w/Barry's other video?
Let's see if Congress can get it from them.
Saw on another website (maybe someone here also posted similar thoughts) that this is why Biden told the father his son had big balls. I.e. Biden saw/heard about the entire firefight from the situation room and knew what these two guys did.
Now Biden's remark, albeit stupid and insensitive, starts to make sense.
Kristol, William. "Ten Questions for the White House" The Weekly Standard, 2:35 PM, Oct 27, 2012
What is his source for this? There are things that I don't recall seeing in the news.
I hear you...
I didn't know about the intensity of the fight... I had heard that they put up a fight and were killed but I didn't know that they had taken out up to 60 fighters.
Now Biden's remark, albeit stupid and insensitive, starts to make sense.
What doesn't make sense is why you would be silent about it! You'd think these guys would be getting the Congressional Medal of Honor. Or the civilian equivalent.
Instead you hush it up?
How is it that Biden knows about this heroism, and yet our country does not know? Appalling.
The President went to a fundraiser. The Secretary of State met with an activist and fawned all over her. The Secretary of Defense felt that the situation was too uncertain to send in reinforcements (which begs the question, at what point in the common fog of war would the situation ever *not* be too uncertain?)
My dad, an Air Force officer and rescue helicopter pilot, had the misfortune to be peripherally involved with the disastrous attempt to rescue the Iranian hostages, way back when. I don't know (because he's an honorable man and never talked sensitive information with us, ever, and continues not to do so) what he felt went so terribly wrong with that mission, but whatever it was, he never once said or implied that a rescue shouldn't have been attempted. Nor did he ever shine it on, or any other mission with which he was involved. Do these people, and their supporters, sincerely believe that it's credible to undertake this transparent effort to stall all questions with the "under investigation" excuse until after that critical Tuesday? Is there no response they feel they could provide that at least gives the impression that they give a damn?
Since we aren't getting the story from the WH, we are having to fill in the blanks. The MSM is filling it in with nothing.
Lyle wonders where the pictures are as if Muslims routinely leave bodies lying around.
Greta Van Susteren just sent out a tweet that apparently the US posesses security camera footage from the Benghazi Consulate that shows our ambassador Stevens calmly saying goodbye to the Turkish Ambassador that night right before the attacks. No crowds or protestors in sight.
Maybe tomorrow Obama will tell us they were all still home at their PC's still watching that You Tube video.
Here's more on Woods and Doherty, from a Fox News report of Oct. 26.
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.
So they were not part of consulate security at all. They were on a separate mission and ran to the fight. According to one report they ran to the fight without weapons, and picked them up on the ground during the battle. But what was their command chain? Who would tell them to stand down? Did they in fact "disobey" an order not to intervene? How would they have had devices to "paint" the terrorist mortar if they were not military and not on a security mission? There are a lot of unanswered questions here, but an FBI investigation is not needed to answer many of them.
Obama has plenty to answer for here, but the role played by Woods and Doherty (other than their obvious heroism) is far from clear.
Of course the administration could clarify it.
Even though most of this is being ignored as much as possible by most news sources, some of it is still being reported. When I tried finding second sources for the new information here, everything led back to that post. It sounds believable to me and I can understand why sources would not want to be identified, but a little information just makes me want more.
Any story that might make this administration look bad will not be covered by the MSM. That's just the way it is, and unfortunately, we'll never know what the real series of events entailed.
The president dishonors these heroes and their sacrifice by not disclosing the entire truth.
But instead, it was important to let Americans die and make sure the fundraiser in Vegas went off as scheduled.
I thought Obama narcissistic, but not pathological.
Now I do.
By refusing to take responsibility for this decision, Obama is putting a tremendous strain on the relation b/w the CiC and the military, which must be absolutely livid.
His recklessness appears unbounded.
What's the sourcing for this? Is this part of the standard account?
Not that I trust the standard account at this point, I'm just wondering where this is coming from.
There's a lot of disinformation about this out there, partly because the situation is confusing, some of it because the Administration is not putting forth information, and a lot of it because the Administration is lying through their teeth about it.
I just want to know the sourcing in an effort to figure out how reliable THIS story is. There's a lot of crap out there now, and more will surely follow.
Saint Croix said...
Now Biden's remark, albeit stupid and insensitive, starts to make sense.
What doesn't make sense is why you would be silent about it! You'd think these guys would be getting the Congressional Medal of Honor. Or the civilian equivalent.
Instead you hush it up?
How is it that Biden knows about this heroism, and yet our country does not know? Appalling.
Biden's remark still is insensible, but at least we have some context. I think there are two reasons why they would not have publicized this (if true). First, it makes their own excuses for inaction seem lame. Second, there could be stuff even more terrible that they are covering.
Could it be the General Ham rumor? Frankly, the idea that Ham would be relieved for trying to launch a rescue makes no sense. If they are trying to cover this, the best way to do it is to keep Ham on his post. It seems to me that if this story is true, friends of Ham (or enemies of Obama) in the military will find a way to get it out with more verification.
What is clear to me is that there are a number of individuals in the military and civilian government who now have the power to scuttle Obama with just a few words. That starts with two people named Clinton and goes out from there.
Will someone drop the dime (to use an archaic concept)?
So this FU has pissed off the military, spooks, State & potential ambassadors.
R.I.P. Rosemary Woods, your 18 minutes means nothing, we have hours of tape being hidden, erased, altered, who knows.
Obama has to be close to panic right now. How will he perform in the next week?
If something like what we are contemplating happened... how come nobody is resigning?
I mean... Its like we are missing a big piece of this puzzle... otherwise we have people covering for Obamas incompetence.
Obama by himself could have fucked up badly... that is entirely in the realm of possibility... but Obama by himself cannot cover up the mess... for that he needs people to go along.
If nobody is resigning it either means nothing happened or the people not coming forward have no sense of duty and honor... and are choosing instead to go along with a farce.
But I repeat myself.
If this is true, who will trust Dems with security going forward?
This proves what US history has shown, they cannot be trusted on defense.
Especially now.
Where are the John Deans of this White House?
The press should be all over Joe Biden now. The press rarely covers all his foolish comments. But this foolish comment suggests he has knowledge about what happened.
Vice President Biden, as he has become known to do, reportedly made a wildly inappropriate comment to the father who had just lost his hero son. Woods said Biden came over to his family and asked in a “loud and boisterous” voice, “Did your son always have balls the size of cue balls?”
What do you mean? They were brave? What happened that night? Do you know what happened? When did you find out? Tell us what happened! Why aren't they getting medals? Why are you being secretive?
They need to grill Joe Biden without mercy. That is a gaffe that is actually explosive.
Wait a minute... not so fast.
Former White House counsel John W. Dean III was charged with obstruction of justice and spent four months in prison for his role in the Watergate cover-up.
Never mind...
I watched "all the presidents men" last week on TCM, and all I could think about was epic movie that could be made of this administration if only the MSM would go after a Democrat like they do Republicans.
I was just reading Administration defends attack response amid new claim about aid to embattled mission in Libya which says, "Fox also reported that U.S. officials refused when the security team asked for U.S. warplanes to bomb their attackers, which would have meant violating Libyan airspace."
Weren't the drones already violating Libyan airspace? I do not know the protocol for this type of thing, does the aircraft have to be manned to count? Personally, I would feel pretty violated by a drone doing video surveillance.
If nobody is resigning it either means nothing happened or the people not coming forward have no sense of duty and honor... and are choosing instead to go along with a farce.
There must be one HELL of a lot of money changing hands. Unless Leon Panetta has pictures of EVERYONE money is the only sensible explanation.
So follow it.
That is a gaffe that is actually explosive.
Excellent point, but presumably Axelrod teaches him the Obama Filibuster: Evade answering by giving a 5-minute statement of assorted talking points, always remembering to finish with Lilly Ledbetter.
I suppose there's a good chance Joe can't pull this gambit off, tho. In which case there'll be no press access to him.
The way the press played up Dean leading up to Clinton's impeachment I thought this was this guy was the essence of impeccable character.
Google was not around in those days... thats why I didnt know.
Medal of Honor for Woods and Doherty.
Impeachment for Obama and Biden. They're not only not fit to POLISH those heroes' boots, they're not fit to lick them.
This information apparently was first posted by a former Navy chaplin and pastor from Ripon, California named Chuck Roots. He posted on October 3, and its just coming to light via twitter and the Cape Cod blog.
http://www.chuckroots.com
The comments on his blog contain a question about his source. He has not responded to this question.
My sense is that this guy, in good faith, heard a story and published it. I really doubt that the story is true in its particulars. Indeed it seems to misallocate Woods and Doherty at the time of the event.
I do not see how these facts could have been not identified by someone else during all the inquiry in the past few weeks. My conclusion is that it did not happen this way.
Obama has plenty to answer for in his conduct here without having to cite mistaken or made up facts.
Obama has to be close to panic right now. How will he perform in the next week?
10/27/12 11:38 PM
Well, let's see: first the Obama camp released Lena Dunham's ad, aimed at teenyboppers voting for the first time.
Then they came out with an ad apparently designed to win the 10 year old vote. They can't regress any further, because I'm pretty sure the fetus vote would heavily favor Romney.
So perhaps the next ad will feature a real back alley abortion, complete with screams and a bloody coat hanger - "Women, this is your future under Romney."
"misallocate" = "mislocate" Spell check did me in.
I know what happened.
If you remember the emails that were sent from Libya... the White House servers were down for a routine back that day and Obamas blackberry was also getting backed up, so he didn't have it on him the entire day.
You know how many emails Obama gets daily?
So now that he learned his lesson, Obama is going to be switching to iPhone.. So it wont "happen" again.
re: deceits (and worse)
Don't get mad, get even. Vote. Vote like your life depended on it. If it turns out that it doesn't, it will to someone close to you.
Remember that a Senate without a near supermajority will extort the executive just like they did GWB - forcing him to choose between our security and standing on principle.
I just got that idea seeing my computer warn me about a backup coming.
Resignations are usually the result of pressure... the MSM is not covering it... so, I'm not holding my breath.
God bless those two heroic men. I want to believe this story but I can't until I know more about Dr. Charles R. Roots Senior Pastor Former Staff Sergeant, USMC Captain, U. S. Navy Chaplain Corps (Ret). This story, if it were true, would be huge. There is no way it could be covered up.
I hope I'm wrong.
I would have hoped that with the deficit being what it is that at least the white house could have scored some MacBooks.
"There is no way it could be covered up."
Well, that's the point. What are you going to believe? A guy in California who has several facts obviously wrong when he posts this on October 3? Or Fox, which has looked hard into the facts and found nothing like this.
There are a whole bunch of people who survived the attack and some of them are talking. Nothing like this has come out.
Sorry. It's just not true.
I posted at Scott on Cape Cod's blog a brief argument that the story is not correct.
My comment is "still awaiting moderation" while subsequent comments buying into the story have been posted.
What have he here?
The idea is to find the truth, not to use dubious accounts to make Obama look as bad as possible.
Oh my, where do we find such men?
Shorter David, "move along, nothing to see here"
SteveR, I don't think that's what David's saying.
If this story turns out to be bogus, it does these men a disservice by seeming to imply that what they actually did somehow needed embellishment to make the point that they deserved backup.
The plain facts will suffice. And we're pretty sure who has them.
This is the calm before the storm and I'm not talking about Sandy. There are a whole lot of people preparing strategies for the coming week. That's why we're not hearing anything today.
The Benghazi story is now one of the most viewed on the Christian Science Monitor. The MSM will have to cover this, one way or another.
We will hear about this tomorrow on the Sunday shows, but it will only be a prelude. This won't play out before the election, though the stench will likely contribute to Obama's defeat.
Something is terribly wrong. Four honorable Americans are dead and those who lead the most powerful nation in history did absolutely nothing to help them over a seven-hour period. These same leaders have provided no satisfying account of these events.
Obama claims that he doesn't know, though it is seven weeks later, and he is the President of the United States. How can that be possible?
No, we don't have the smoking gun yet, but we know something is being covered up, even if we don't know exactly what it is.
Like some others I'm wondering about the source for this. But still, it seems clear from Panetta's own account that rescue was considered, was easily available, but was denied. Panetta's excuse seems implausible to me. Regardless of the reason help was denied the thought that such people are in charge of protecting us is dismaying.
So far the suppression of the Benghazi story is working. Despite FoxNews, despite rightwing blogs and talk radio, the sad fact is that if the MSM doesn't believe it's news it's not news. The MSM is easily capable of sowing confusion, falsehoods, cover stories and excuses for Obama throughout whatever small amount of coverage the MSM gives to Benghazi. If Obama wins Benghazi will be stuffed down the memory hole in favor of stories about how the Right is peevish and vengeful because Obama beat them in the election.
Benghazi also explains all the silly, softball media venues Obama has been choosing since 9-11.
I believe even Obama knows these TV talk/radio shows damage his credibility while running for reelection.
But he can't take the chance of hard questions on Benghazi, and now that he's gotten the first few, he's stonewalling.
SteveR,
Somebody was bound to have taken photos of the aftermath.
Somebody took photos of Ambassador Stevens afterwards.
If this was a staged kidnapping of our Ambassador, to set up for a prisoner exchange, and it went horribly awry, with Pannetta not wanting to go in because it wasn't in the plan - there's a whole lot to be answered for. Right now it's all swirling rumors, but certain things seem to 'fit' - and none of the explanations coming out of the WH do. The above scenario explains the not going in and explains Obama's lack of concern. As far as he was concerned, all was going as planned.
Obama didn't abandon only 2 US citizens as first reported, Obama abandoned 22 US citizens. If true this is astonishingly vile.
How much blood-lust has Obama's failure to secure his employee, who worked underneath Obama, created?
American SEAL blood must be tasty if that is your goal, American SEAL blood.
Who can we blame?
Ambassador Stevens wasn't a muslim.
The WH, DOD State etc. are waiting for Sandy to bail them out.
Everyone on the East Coast will be so wiped by trhe storm that there will be no time to explore Benghazi. ("What? Benghazi? We have people losing their houses and lives in Pennsylvnia and you want to talk about that??")
It's like basketball.
Stall and run the clock out.
Obama didn't abandon only 2 US citizens as first reported, Obama abandoned 22 US citizens. If true this is astonishingly vile.
I'm reminded of another Bible story.. the story of how Abraham pleaded for Sodom.
26 The Lord said, “If I find fifty righteous people in the city of Sodom, I will spare the whole place for their sake.”
27 Then Abraham spoke up again: “Now that I have been so bold as to speak to the Lord, though I am nothing but dust and ashes, 28 what if the number of the righteous is five less than fifty? Will you destroy the whole city for lack of five people?”
“If I find forty-five there,” he said, “I will not destroy it.”
29 Once again he spoke to him, “What if only forty are found there?”
He said, “For the sake of forty, I will not do it.”
30 Then he said, “May the Lord not be angry, but let me speak. What if only thirty can be found there?”
He answered, “I will not do it if I find thirty there.”
31 Abraham said, “Now that I have been so bold as to speak to the Lord, what if only twenty can be found there?”
He said, “For the sake of twenty, I will not destroy it.”
32 Then he said, “May the Lord not be angry, but let me speak just once more. What if only ten can be found there?”
He answered, “For the sake of ten, I will not destroy it.”
Did anybody plead to Obama on behalf of these people?
As for the disasterous Tehran 'rescue'mentioned above -- as a result a special cooperative military group was formed of the different services (cannot remember the name -- info came from family member who is a pilot -- but I am sure someone on the list knows what it is called) so that certain extremeley stupid things did not happen again -- including one service branch being given aircraft from another branch to fly) and coordinating fro situations, (surprise?) like this.
I do not believe they were trying to avoid another Carter Fail.
I do believe the response was driven by national politics. Foul, very foul.
When your kid is out late and you haven't heard from him you don't go to bed, or run off for a spa day the next morning.
To abuse the video guy the way he has been is also a political crime. (Where are the lefties on that one??)
The media has blood on it's hands. Even a bad leader or a coward will do the right thing if he thinks he will be held accountable. This administration assumes it will never be held accountable for anything, which is an invitation to do terrible things with power. The result has been a lot of new lows for the Presidency, and we may have just seen how low it can go.
The lameness of our press is the absolute worst failure of this Presidency and it's not even Obama's fault. Regardless, a Republican President is the cure.
No doubt in Berkeley they're debating whether these 2 SEALs are mass murderers of poor Islamic peace-loving militants.
Obama's job approval dropping like a rock
Yet another "outlier the norm" no doubt.
My sense is that this guy, in good faith, heard a story and published it. I really doubt that the story is true in its particulars. Indeed it seems to misallocate Woods and Doherty at the time of the event.
Wouldn't surprise me if it exaggerated the number of people they killed.
But I think it has been confirmed that the two of them were not attached to any security detail at the embassy.
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 Biden's comment both confirms the heroic nature of what the two did, and also implicates a White House that is covering it up for some reason.
Perhaps there is a much bigger story here. Since both the MSM and Romney campaign don't want to talk about Benghazi, there might be something amiss that is too big to discuss until it is fixed/ found.
WMD? Large numbers of those MANPADs? Was Arab Spring cause or effect?
There are two many CIA references in the whole story to make me think we'll know much for a long time.
Mary Beth said--"I would feel pretty violated by a drone doing video surveillance."
Welcome to the monkey house MB. I assume you live in America, where the LEO's have been given permission to use drones to surveil innocent people.
Mike Tanis said--"So you have Obama, Biden, Panetta, and Clinton in the Situation Room and between the 4 of them there isn't enough testosterone make a decision?"
Only one has the power to make the call. Oddly enough, I think Panetta, while I don't like his politics, is an honest man based on the reports that HE was the one that got Bin Laden, not Zero. He unfortunately works for a shithead.
Regardless, all this would be moot if the MSM hadn't been so stridently cheerleading for one side over the decades. They foreswore all semblance of impartiality for Zero, and hence no credibility left for anything they say. Boy who cried wolf, met MSM. MSM, meet boy.
Ps.
Any video and audio tape is now in the possession of Weinstein. I wouldn't trust anything that comes from this administration now. If Zero told me the sky was blue I would have to look to see, and the same for his parrots of the MSM.
I didn't want it this way. They wanted it this way. Now they gets it.(apologies to the Warden)
Pps.
I just saw that Inga insisted that Benghazi was a made up place. It never existed. If you say it did, prove it. Otherwise, your just a racist.(maybe she's right. Who would name their town Benghazi. It doesn't even sound like a real place. Pfft.)
Where is Cedarford with his derisive remarks about "heroes"? I guess Fudd has a couple of grains of sand where his cue balls should be.
Bagoh:
"How do you even begin to honor such men?"
According to the current administration, you make a smutty remark to the family at the funeral.
Someone in the house or senate should put forward a resolution to have these men honored. If they don't qualify for the MOH because they weren't active military, then make it the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
Or put it up for a vote to make exceptions for these two for the MOH.
It's not much, but it's the least we can do. It's nauseating to think of how they could have been saved with a few bursts from a mini gun on a loitering AC130, and we (or at least the leaders we elected) did nothing.
Reading through the thread I realize the top story is still a question mark so I'm removing the quote.
Nonetheless, we know these men performed heroically and that their feckless leadership let them die.
When are the regular media going to stop covering for Obama and really look into this? November 7th, maybe.
If this was a staged kidnapping of our Ambassador, to set up for a prisoner exchange, and it went horribly awry, with Pannetta not wanting to go in because it wasn't in the plan
This is the conspiracy theory I heard a week or so ago...I am not by nature a conspiracy theorist, but when I saw the ads for Argo I kept wondering why that movie was coming out now...in the middle of Carter2.0's election year. If this was meant to be a hostage situation and it just went bad it explains a lot of the facts. I don't want to believe it but it's stuck in my head and I can't get it out. I don't know how else to explain the lack of security, lack of help when things went bad and the enormous coverup.
And the sad fact is for people on the left, committed progressives, will go to THEIR graves wondering why we're making such a big deal out of this.
joe was right. They had a lot of balls. They had a lot more than that,Joe. A lot more of what guys like you will never have.
This story looks suspicious. What are it's sources?
Be careful before running with this unverified story. something doesn't look right.
Eventually, all of the facts will be revealed. Once the investigation is concluded, you still won't know jack shit. Whoever was responsible for all of the aspects of this tragedy, no names will be revealed. Instead there will be generalizations of the people involved, such as: security professionals, CIA operatives (which, of course, cannot be named), etc.
What's presently happening is a big cover your ass. Helping the CYA will be the MSM. They will not hold this administration of Obama, Hillary or any of the other players responsible.
http://scottoncapecod.wordpress.com/2012/10/25/navy-seals-always/...
Regarding Leon Panetta's uncertain situation excuse; In the military when it is certain that friendly forces are under attack, any support within reach rushes in to help, much like an "Officer Down" call to the police. Clarity is a term that only exists, if then, in hindsight. In Viet Nam the ground units had forces ready to react on a moments notice. A general radio call would divert any air mission within range from jets to helos. Just another dozen Seals sent ASAP would have at least distracted the Benghazi attackers and split their forces, buying time for additional support to show up.
Regardless of the foggy details of the defenders combat, the political and moral cowardice of their superiors is clear. Likewise the corruption of our sycophantic mainstream media. As my grandma would say, "Fie on you!"
I cannot believe you give legs to such a flimsy, unsourced story.
There is a reason MSM isn't going with this. Any poking into the details makes it fall like a house of cards.
Ann, in the last six months or so, you have sold the last of your public credibility for your hit counter. Notoriety is not always a good thing.
It seems by now to be pretty well-settled that there actually was an historical Jesus of Nazareth.
[T]he Obama Filibuster: Evade answering by giving a 5-minute statement of assorted talking points, always remembering to finish with Lilly Ledbetter.
Lilly Ledbetter is this year's Dingell-Norwood.
EMD said...
Posthumous medals of honor?
===========
Nope. Not eligible.
THey were former military serving as civilian contractors to the CIA - "paras" in the parlance. Maybe we should revisit how we honor brave fighters serving America to include what the liberals and progressive Jews of the left spit are "mercenaries!!". As well as foreign nationals that risk their lives in common cause with us and not just for the money.
BTW - to another poster, there is no such thing as "The Congressional Medal of Honor".
The problem with Gary Rosen, is like so many of his ilk that never serve - he cannot conceptualize that most current or former military, cops, firefighters reject the idea of "blanket herohood by job title."
To be significant, "hero" should affix to someone doing something of extraordinary value or courage.
A Spec 3 dental tech is not a hero. A firefighter doing routine jobs in routine duty is not an automatic hero.
But IMO, the Ambassador, Woods, and Doherty all meet the true hero test - extraordinary courage and/or feats.
Weinstein and those of his ilk, thinking Obama is the Hero that Killed bin Laden? Obama himself....
epic fails as heroes and hero-promoters. I wouldn't even call each and every SEAL, even SEALs on the bin Laden raid heroes simply for that raid alone. It was lower risk "triggerpuller job" than other missions the same SEAL team 6 or similar Army Ranger, Marine Recon, reg Marines, reg Army, and some AF elements have done.
To abuse the video guy the way he has been is also a political crime. (Where are the lefties on that one?
You heard Inga, it was all his fault.
Loose lips sink ships and all that!
Chip S. said...
. . . .
The plain facts will suffice. And we're pretty sure who has them.
Thank you Chip. That sentence makes the point better than I did.
To those of you concerned about the sourcing on this story: What part of it might be fabricated, or the result of speculation, that might make a difference should the actual details vary from this account?
Would it much matter, for example, if there were only thirty dead enemy combatants, instead of sixty?
There's no debate over the fact that this firefight lasted for over six hours. There's little doubt that the administration knew about the attack almost as soon as it began; and if they didn't, then there's a scandal of incompetence in intelligence and communication.
It's clear that we had assets close enough to help, and we did nothing. And there is no one claiming that Obama didn't go to Vegas for a fundraiser before these men's bodies were cold.
Those are all the facts we need to know.
Reading through the thread I realize the top story is still a question mark so I'm removing the quote.
Nonetheless, we know these men performed heroically and that their feckless leadership let them die.
Precisely the point. Whether Woods and Doherty killed 60 or 6 or 0 attackers is irrelevant to the larger story. They rushed into a situation where the only certainty for them* was that they were rushing into certain danger to help fellow Americans. That is a testament to their training and honor. They died heroically.
Why were they denied assistance? Especially over a period of roughly seven hours?
It seems to be a well-sourced and established fact at this point that assistance was requested and did not arrive. It seems to be about as well-sourced that the situation took place over roughly seven hours. In the chains of command, who gave which orders? Were any countermanded?
At least two high-ranking officials have recently been dismissed from commands that involve that theatre of operations. (Does anyone know roughly where the Stennis is located? If it is in the Persian Gulf that commander likely had nothing to do with Libya. If the Stennis is underway somewhere near Sicily the Stennis was an asset that could have been used.)
I'm discounting conspiracy theories surrounding a pretend kidnapping for a prisoner swap later. Nothing this Administration has done would indicate that the ultimate authority has anywhere near the personal follow-through to even get something like that past the planning stage.
Let's figure out what happened about the command decisions. As heroic as Woods and Doherty were, the scandal here is what did that higher ups do, and when did they do it.
* We can't at this point know what they knew, so maybe they knew more than I suppose.
Guys, adding to AllenS
These stories are frankly too unf'ing-believable to accept on the basis of what we've heard. Maybe they are true, maybe not.
If they are true, there are too many folks who know, and have traffic logs and orders logs to cover it up, even if all parties wanted to.
If it were true, ultimately it doesn't matter if Obama survives his relection, he wil be impeached. Not because of the Benghazi decisions (POTUS is supposed to make tough decisions, and half of them I'm not going to like.) (Example: Kennedy sending the Cubans to attack at Bay of Pigs, (act of war), but not allowing the Navy to provide support, because that would be an act of war), but because of the cover-up. If there was a cover-up, it will be torches and pitchforks time...
Issues that seem incontrovertible.
1. Tripoli sent a scratch team to Benghazi by plane to provide support. they landed and after a bit, got to the CIA compound. How does this square with Panetta's denial of support because of the fog of war? Same air miles. Better troops in Sicily, trained for this exact mission. If tripoli spt could land, why not send the Sicily team in behind them...
2. Air support. Why no low, mach 1 pass at night by an F/A-18? Put the fear of God into the Jihadi's? Note, I'm not talking here about GLDs and Spectres. It would be a clear command decision to use a Spectre or SDB's inside Benghazi. Most everybody here would have done it, but though we disagree, it was the commander's call (whoever that a$$hole was). What I am asking, is why no 'show of force' jet pass???
The simple facts are these: 4 Americans died in Libya. Does the MSM care about those 4 Americans? No, no they don't.
I do not know about this story, but that in itself is significant. It is now 7 weeks later, and we do not know. why?
Furthermore, and in the end perhaps more important, it now seems clear that General Ham and the admiral commanding the task force off shore, and maybe another general or two, were relieved of their commands shortly afterward, and we do not know why.
I do not see how the White House and the MSM can possibly keep the lid on all this until after the election. It is hard to believe that they could be so stupid as to think they could.
Ask people around you what they know about Benghazi. Most don't know much and many just "Duh?". The administration and MSM have done a good job of obfuscation for over six weeks. One more week and it's mission accomplished.
Hagar said...
I do not know about this story, but that in itself is significant. It is now 7 weeks later, and we do not know. why?
Furthermore, and in the end perhaps more important, it now seems clear that General Ham and the admiral commanding the task force off shore, and maybe another general or two, were relieved of their commands shortly afterward, and we do not know why.
Hagar,
I'll take a few issues:
1. The public notice is that Ham is going to be replaced, perhaps early. 'relief' has a particular punitive meaning.
2. AFRICOM web site still has Ham performing duties.
3. The new guy is a month or 3 away from arriving. e.g. Senate confirmation.
If Ham had been fired, or even relacing early for the Benghazi thing, too many folks at AFRICOM know the dirt.
i don't believe this rumor
Occam's Razor - unlikely that this is a conspiracy. Most likely that it is a combination of extreme incompetence and lack of understanding the situation. We have seen that combination time and again with this administration.
@DrillSgt,
My central question still stands: "What the heck just happened here?"
If nothing, or very little happened, why does not the administration lay it out for all of us to see?
Jamie said "My dad, an Air Force officer and rescue helicopter pilot, had the misfortune to be peripherally involved with the disastrous attempt to rescue the Iranian hostages, way back when. I don't know (because he's an honorable man and never talked sensitive information with us, ever, and continues not to do so) ".
Jamie, I was in a sensitive position in the Army. There are things I have not talked about to any of my 3 wives or my children. I have a couple of dear friends who had clearances similar to mine, but different codewords attached. With them, we only hint at certain things. It's called "need to know". The people who are entrusted with this kind of information tend to take duty pretty seriously.
Go tell the Spartans, thou who passest by,
That here, obedient to their laws, we lie.
Woods and Doherty deserve such an epitaph. I hope that, even with the media blackout, we eventually get to know the unvarnished, un-politicized truth.
Hagar said...
I do not know about this story, but that in itself is significant. It is now 7 weeks later, and we do not know. why?
Furthermore, and in the end perhaps more important, it now seems clear that General Ham and the admiral commanding the task force off shore, and maybe another general or two, were relieved of their commands shortly afterward, and we do not know why.
Hagar,
I'll take a few issues:
1. The public notice is that Ham is going to be replaced, perhaps early. 'relief' has a particular punitive meaning.
2. AFRICOM web site still has Ham performing duties.
3. The new guy is a month or 3 away from arriving. e.g. Senate confirmation.
If Ham had been fired, or even relacing early for the Benghazi thing, too many folks at AFRICOM know the dirt.
i don't believe this rumor
10/28/12 9:42 AM
Blogger exhelodrvr1 said...
"Occam's Razor - unlikely that this is a conspiracy. Most likely that it is a combination of extreme incompetence and lack of understanding the situation. We have seen that combination time and again with this administration."
Occam may explain the highers conduct during the attack. But the cover up and misdirection since is the textbook definition of conspiracy.
I don't know how the Hagar post got included in mine. I only meant the bottom comment.
I'd like to know the whole story. Compelling book/movie for a good journalist.
Somewhat related, my nephew has a new job and turned in his pistol, kevlar, and helmet. No idea what he did, or what he'll do, but given the current occupants of the WH, I'm glad he's apparently less likely to be in harm's way (except on his bike commute to work in DC)
wildswan wrote:
If these brave men had been supported the Benghazi tragedy would not have happened.
that's not necessarily true. HOwever, and this is a big HOWEVER, there is no record that anyone bothered to provide any support whatsoever, and those on standby told to stand down by someone, which is unconscionable. We may not know what would have happened had support been provided, but we do know support wasn't provided.So its not even important to provide alternative scenarios.
All this talk about Obama making the gutsy calls when taking out Osama. Was that really a gutsy call? What president wouldnt' make it?
THIS shouldn't even have been a gutsy call. Suppose we started targeting people attacking hte embassy but despite our best efforts we STILL lost the ambassador. Does anyone really think that people would hold it agianst Obama more than if he or his administration told everyone to do nothing at all?
Tyrone Woods was painting a target with a ground laser designator (GLD). Those are only used when the air asset is overhead, ready to fire. The jihadis can use cell phones with night-vision capabilities to see the laser beam, which then pinpoints the location of the person using the GLD. As a former Navy SEAL, Woods would’ve known that. He would only have exposed himself if he thought that the mortar squad was about to be taken out. The air asset didn’t fire, and Woods and Glen Doherty were killed by the mortar squad.
It's possible that the air asset wasnt' over head like Woods thought. But why not? It's really remarkable how these two soldiers did so much damage single handedly in their effort to protect the ambassador and the embasy, but their heroism only points out the utter lack of heroism from those who SHOULD have been their to support them so they didn't have to make this crazy last stand against overwhelming forces.
Whoever didn't make the gutsy call and let these guys die so they didn't have to should not only be fired, they should be jailed.
And Obama can't say that he'll get to the bottom of it. Even if its Leon Panetta who made the call to not send in the rescue team, Obama can over ride him since he is the COMMANDER IN CHIEF! And yet he's on television arguing that we'll get to the bottom of who didn't give the order. He doesn't know that? He needs an investigation to get to the bottom of who didn't give the order? IT's like 4 people, and he could have over ruled any of them.
Maguro wrote:
Nope, they were ex-SEAL CIA contractors, not active duty military.
The type of guys about whom Markos Moulitsas would say "Screw them".
Exactly! The degree of cotempt I hold for him and lefties like him is almost incalculable.
I'd like to see him make the point today
An apology now from anyone in the administration in memoriam of these men would be a stain of horror coming from their mouths. To utter their names would be an offense. Calling these guys heroes doesn't do them justice and we know. WE KNOW that urkel and his crew are nothing but cowards and the people who defend him here are just as cowardly.
I don't at all doubt the courage and expertise of these two brave men. However, the account of their arrival at the fight mentions that they were unarmed until they picked up weapons discarded by the local security guards who had run away. That raises the question of where they found a ground laser designator, which isn't a very common item. Not to mention that to kill 60 jihadis would have taken more ammunition than found in the magazines of discarded weapons. So, what other weapons were available and for whom were they intended?
Cedarford is weaseling as usual. He has already made derisive remarks about "heroism" in reference to this action, now he's trying to claim otherwise.
And you never served either, Fudd. The only evidence we have is your own say-so and *every* time you come up with some narrative about your life it is proven a lie. Just two examples: 1) your claim in your profile to have two daughters. In another blog comment section you said you had a *son* to make some debating point. 2) Your age. You are always claiming to be a "Gen Xer" but interet evidense proves you're an old boomer. Not surprised that you lie about your age like a fading old tranny hooker.
Are you going to try to snow us again with the "three timelines" you ripped off without attribution from Fox correspondent James Rosen?
interet = internet
Here is that evidence for the record:
http://tinyurl.com/cl2t9t
http://tinyurl.com/yfkesax
The WH, DOD State etc. are waiting for Sandy to bail them out.
JAL, I thought at first you were referring to Sandy Berger, Clinton's Nat. Sec. Advisor who stuffed a bunch of classified documents about 9/11 in his pants and smuggled them out of the National Archives.
These are the people that Obama betrayed.
Woods and Dougherty showed integrity of a level that Obama can't even imagine much less aspire to.
Wait -- we inflicted massive casualties on the attacking force, held for two waves -- and STILL no one thought: "Hey. we should provide some support?"
I flat do not believe this story. C'mon...don't you all remember Jessica Lynch? "suffering knife and bullet wounds while fighting off attackers until running out of ammunition."
What is the source of this story? It would take a lot of effort(an ammunition) to kill 60 people. You have to get them to stand up and charge you. These guys were Libyan Irregulars not Japanese Imperial Marines cornered on an island.
Where are the bodies? The newspapers were all over the place. Don't you think there would be wounded? Wouldn't they go to the hospital?
Please use a little judgement.
FACT CHECK: Did the Navy Seals who died in the Benghazi attacks kill 60 jihadis? UNVERIFIED, FALSE until more information come out.
http://wecheck.org/wiki/Did_the_Navy_Seals_who_died_in_the_Benghazi_attacks_kill_60_jihadis
Mark Devlin:
Does it matter if they killed none? They wecheck isn't claiming the story in the main is wrong. Isn't the main point they saved twenty lives, and lost their own doing it?
Mark Devlin:
Does it matter if they killed none? They wecheck isn't claiming the story in the main is wrong. Isn't the main point they saved twenty lives, and lost their own doing it?
Post a Comment