Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
#1 Very likely another F&F cock-up. We failed to deal affirmatively with the first F&F, and we now have another? DoD and the SOF community watching, reading the traffic, and shaking their heads. A West Point general with his head in his hands at McLean asking, why did I take this phueching job.
Just hours before he died, a State Department cable showed, Stevens met with members of the Benghazi local council, who insisted security in the city was "improving" and the U.S. government should "pressure" American companies to invest.
Later that day, it said, Stevens was scheduled to launch a project called "American Space Benghazi," a public outreach center containing a "small library, computer lab and open space for programming."
With the security situation as bad as it was, I never bought the "American Space Benghazi" library story.
...should "pressure" American companies to invest
I believe we now know what the "investment" entailed.
Posted by Besoeker 2012-10-24 02:40||
#2 Finally a story that actually 'makes sense' - fits the known facts and explains behaviors.
Explains why Romney did not get aggressive on the topic in the debates - he probably knows the real story and understands that if he wins HE will have to deal with underlying national security issues (whether the actions that created the mess were good judgement or not.)
Posted by Glenmore 2012-10-24 08:49||
#3 Fox News is all over it, waving the e-mails, etc. Liz Cheney is on in a few minutes to talk about it. Champs story is falling apart. I suspect someone whispered in Willard's ear prior to the debate: Hey governor, this one is going Chernobyl and we're not sure how many will survive.
Posted by Besoeker 2012-10-24 09:05||
#4 The gun-walking story makes sense and accounts for what Amb. Stevens was doing. But we are still left with the question of why nothing was done about the attack. Events were monitored in real time. The 'spontaneous demonstration' story has been shredded like dog-eaten homework. Wretchard's theory of a kidnapping gone awry still holds up.
Posted by SteveS 2012-10-24 10:48||
#5 Romney knew this story had legs in the press and there was no need to bring it up in the debate--someone else would carry the water and he wouldn't look like a tattle-tale smuck leaker for political purpose. Obama tried to sting him about the night of 911 (or 912) for bringing up the attack. Moreover, if elected, he would have to clean up this mess. He has enough class not to blame his predecessor. Now, if the election just works out in Romney's favor. IMO "O" doesn't know what the hell he is doing in the Mideast--likely has been arming people not friendly to us and it backfired.
Posted by JohnQC 2012-10-24 11:04||
#6 Not discounting it entirely, but the kidnap theory seems doubtful. I am putting my money on an F&F initiative with the MB backed gov't of Turkey, gone terribly wrong. Not something that the administration would wish to try to explain or justify just prior to an election, hence the video cover story.
Operators positioned on the roof of a consulate building or Safe House points to a likely observation post and good firing position. Also an ideal location for communications and signaling position for incoming rescue aircraft, which sadly, never arrived.
The SOF community and personnel on NEO/in extremis stand-by know the answers, as likely do the British Blue Mountain Security folks who got out a week or so earlier earlier. All in all, a giant shi* sandwich.
Posted by Besoeker 2012-10-24 11:09||
#7 I believe we now know what the "investment" entailed.
Um...a solar panel factory? /s
Posted by Secret Asian Man 2012-10-24 11:56||
#8 Supposedly, there was a drone that was tasked to overfly and monitor the Benghazi consulate at the time of the attack. Who would give approval to task a drone? For what reason would such a decision-maker task a drone other than protection (if armed) or observation? It seems like this would be a decision coming from a high level.
Posted by JohnQC 2012-10-24 13:28||
#9 It all is starting to come together. Why the SOF troops never went in to get them always bothered me. Now it looks like with the 20 or so that attacked his house, was the blocking team to take the warehouse full of weapons. What was the size of the force that took the warehouse down??? Would sending in a small SF team to a site that has SA7s turn it into another Somalia? This story is only partially exposed. Bring popcorn!
Posted by 49 Pan 2012-10-24 13:30||
#10 Drones or UAV's have capabilities beyond that of "observation" (persistent surveillance), or kinetic action (bombing). Tasking and dynamic re-tasking authorization for surveillance and collection would likely come from the AFRICOM or US Intelligence. In this particulr case, authorization for kinetic attack would likely be elevated to the White House.
Posted by Besoeker 2012-10-24 13:37||
#11 Apparently Hillary's advisor MB Abedi was among those receiving the State Dept memo that AQ took responsibility from the Gitgo, too. Very interesting from the WT's comments:
Glenn Beck did an hour show yesterday on this . He named the Turkish point man who worked alongside Stevens to funnel the weapons to the jihadis . Glenn went much deeper on the rest of it. The first phone call Obama made as president was to the Turkish president and has now called him 13 times .The Turkish president hates Assad in Syria . These weapons were being funneled into Turkey to be distributed to jihadis to take out Assad in Syria.Why would the United States president help Turkey take out Syria ?? Was Stevens security weakened to take him out as a potential witness to Obamas gun walking?? Not to far to reach , when we know Obama uses people then throws them under the bus and it would explain why the White House watched from a drone on September 11 as Stevens and others were murdered.For eight hours this attack went on , forces could have been brought in from Tripoli , they weren't . A plane could have been sent in within an hour , YET NOTHING was done to help Americans as they were attacked! The kicker to this whole story is Obamas new "trusted friends " , the Muslim Brotherhood is the one who advised Obama as to who to funnel these weapons to . Turkey and Russia are aligning with Iran and our president is arming our enemies . Lovely !
Posted by Voldemort Tingle2660 2012-10-24 14:36||
#12 As to why the US would want to take down Assad, it might have something to do with his close alliance with Iran, something Bush started to weaken and Obama arrogantly thought he could charm away.
As to not intervening during the Benghazi attack, the administration is deeply invested in the (false) narrative that Libya is now governed by a democratic government after we helped overthrow Ghadaffi. Having committed to that stand, they needed Libyan govt approval to fly in. And that govt, remember, refused even FBI access to evidence afterwards for over a week.
Posted by lotp 2012-10-24 18:24||
#13 As their contents were raided in the course of the attack, we may never know for sure whether they housed -- and were known by the local jihadis to house -- arms, perhaps administered by the two former Navy SEALs killed along with -- Stevens.
Think of this as the worst possible scenario in a hostage negotiation. It's when a shaky deal (With no Plan B.) is struck and before it's too late it completely unravels. The bad guys then kill the cops; take their weapons, then for good measures kill the hostage. And to make matters worse they also make off with the ransom.
(BTW, whatcha spose a buncha Libyian MANPADS goes for these days?)
Posted by DepotGuy 2012-10-24 20:17||