Damning evidence surfaces about Libyan attacks


by Oltz
Tags: attacks, damning, evidence, libyan, surfaces
Oltz
Oltz is offline
#1
Oct26-12, 01:46 PM
P: 12
So apparently the 2 prior Navy Seals who died broke order to go and save unarmed personnel at the scene of the attacks and then were killed 7 hours later by a mortar round.

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.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...k-sources-say/

I am sorry but as a vet I do not understand how anyone can support an administration who left those men to die when support was available. A live feed from drones was available in the situation room and no action was taken.

This story really has 3 parts the fact that it happened the fact that its taken so long to come out and the fact that ABC NBC and CBS are not all over this.

This is one of the largest single stories in foreign affairs in a decade and they are not covering it.

I will add a link to the emails talking about it being a terror attack 2 hours into it as well.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/inte...intcmp=related
Thoughts?
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
Internet co-creator Cerf debunks 'myth' that US runs it
Astronomical forensics uncover planetary disks in Hubble archive
Solar-powered two-seat Sunseeker airplane has progress report
Evo
Evo is offline
#2
Oct26-12, 02:04 PM
Mentor
Evo's Avatar
P: 25,967
I think there's more to the story. The communication was going on locally between operatives in Benghazi, you act like Obama was on the phone calling the shots, get real.

The men were contractors, they used to be Navy Seals, they were not active Military.

"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.
And CNN's report.

"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.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/21/world/...ack/index.html
Oltz
Oltz is offline
#3
Oct26-12, 02:15 PM
P: 12
Quote Quote by Evo View Post
I think there's more to the story. The communication was going on locally between operatives in Benghazi, you act like Obama was on the phone calling the shots, get real.



And CNN's report.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/21/world/...ack/index.html
At least when I was in the military if an attack was believed to be over you either pulled the men out or reinforced them you didn't just leave them there alone and assume everything was fine now troops are deployed to support action under way all the time especially when you are not sure what is going on. Plus with drones in the air they had a better idea what was happening then the troops on the ground. That is CYA by Penetta and anybody who has been in combat will tell you that.

I am sorry Obama takes full credit for every action of the seals when they were on live in the situation room going after Osama so at least somebody had to have mentioned to him that this was going on.

They had painted the mortar team with a laser for missile guidance misses that are on the drones if the order had been given to fire those men would be alive.

Oltz
Oltz is offline
#4
Oct26-12, 02:19 PM
P: 12

Damning evidence surfaces about Libyan attacks


Evo they were CIA of one form or another hence:

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.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...#ixzz2AQzU7ky2
Evo
Evo is offline
#5
Oct26-12, 02:19 PM
Mentor
Evo's Avatar
P: 25,967
Quote Quote by Oltz View Post
At least when I was in the military if an attack was believed to be over you either pulled the men out or reinforced them you didn't just leave them there alone and assume everything was fine
The attack on the location where Stevens was killed WAS evacuated. The SECOND attack was on a SECOND location hours later.

I am sorry Obama takes full credit for every action of the seals when they were on live in the situation room going after Osama so at least somebody had to have mentioned to him that this was going on.
Osama was a planned attack by US.
edward
edward is offline
#6
Oct26-12, 04:59 PM
PF Gold
edward's Avatar
P: 861
The best read that I have found on the action in Benghazi.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...-libya/263597/

This is another:

http://www.france24.com/en/20120917-...FUfNOgodoTgAmw

No point in making small cut and pastes on this very complicated situation.

The big thing is that Libyan officials did not want foreign boots on the ground for security. Americans were supposed to be protected by the Libyan 17th of September Militia. They were not up to the task.
mheslep
mheslep is online now
#7
Oct26-12, 07:17 PM
PF Gold
P: 3,021
Quote Quote by edward View Post
....

FOX news is using 20/20 hind site to make up "what if" scenarios.

....
Can you demonstrate where this is the case in the OP's linked story?
edward
edward is offline
#8
Oct26-12, 09:16 PM
PF Gold
edward's Avatar
P: 861
Quote Quote by mheslep View Post
Can you demonstrate where this is the case in the OP's linked story?
Rather than getting into this any further I deleted that sentence.
russ_watters
russ_watters is online now
#9
Oct26-12, 09:37 PM
Mentor
P: 22,010
While I'm perfectly fine with the CIA having a little private army in Benghazi (Clear And Present Danger, anyone? Once again, life imitates Clancy), it certainly created a sticky situation for them to be so close to the poorly protected ambassador! They aren't supposed to be there and it would be a little ugly if we had a major ground and air battle by troops who aren't supposed to exist. So I do understand why they were told to stand down, but it really was a bad catch-22.

It is tough to cut through the fog of war, but knowing the ambassador was missing and their cover was almost certainly blown (though it did take a while for that to be made clear), I would have preferred a much stronger response. Once you're in it, you might as well go for broke.
Quote Quote by Evo
The men were contractors...
I don't think that's true: it sounds to me like they were CIA employees. Though I don't really think it matters.
...they used to be Navy Seals, they were not active Military.
No irony intended, but:
The Clandestine Service is looking for U.S. citizen candidates to fill Paramilitary Operations Officer and Specialized Skills Officer positions....

Minimum requirements for Paramilitary Operations Officers include a bachelor's degree, military special operations or combat arms experience (ground, air or maritime), as well as combat leadership experience.
https://www.cia.gov/careers/opportun...s-officer.html

Quote Quote by Wiki
A paramilitary is a military-esque force whose function and organization are similar to those of a professional military, but which is not considered part of a state's formal armed forces.[1] Under the Law of Armed Conflict, a state may incorporate a paramilitary organization or armed agency charged with police functions into its armed forces. The other parties to a conflict have to be notified thereof.[2]
The term paramilitary is subjective, depending on what is considered similar to a military force, and what status a force is considered to have. The nature of paramilitary forces therefore varies greatly according to the speaker and the context.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramilitary
nsaspook
nsaspook is offline
#10
Nov2-12, 07:12 AM
P: 502
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/02/wo...attack.html?hp

The account given by the senior officials, who did not want to be identified, provided the most detailed description to date of the C.I.A.’s role in Benghazi, a covert presence that appears to have been much more significant than publicly disclosed.
....
The senior officials also shed new light on the C.I.A.’s role in Libya.

Within months of the start of the Libyan revolution in February 2011, the agency began building a meaningful but covert presence in Benghazi, a locus of the rebel efforts to oust the government of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi.

The C.I.A.’s surveillance targets in Benghazi and eastern Libya included Ansar al-Shariah, a militia that some have blamed for the attack on the mission, as well as suspected members of Al Qaeda’s affiliate in North Africa, known as Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb.

American intelligence operatives also helped State Department contractors and Libyan officials in tracking shoulder-fired missiles taken from the former Libyan Army arsenals, American officials said.
“There were no orders to anybody to stand down in providing support,” the official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of continuing investigations by the State Department and the F.B.I.
CBS seems to refute this.

Absent coordination from Counterterrorism Security Group, a senior US counterterrorism official says the response to the crisis became more confused. The official says the FBI received a call during the attack representing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and requesting agents be deployed. But he and his colleagues agreed the agents "would not make any difference without security and other enablers to get them in the country and synch their efforts with military and diplomatic efforts to maximize their success."

Another senior counter terrorism official says a hostage rescue team was alternately asked to get ready and then stand down throughout the night, as officials seemed unable to make up their minds.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-...ack/?tag=socsh
edward
edward is offline
#11
Nov2-12, 09:43 PM
PF Gold
edward's Avatar
P: 861
Quote Quote by nsaspook View Post

Another senior counter terrorism official says a hostage rescue team was alternately asked to get ready and then stand down throughout the night, as officials seemed unable to make up their minds.


One thing that may be considered is that there were no hostages taken.
nsaspook
nsaspook is offline
#12
Nov2-12, 11:18 PM
P: 502
Quote Quote by edward View Post
One thing that may be considered is that there were no hostages taken.
So what, maybe there were none because good men died stopping it from happening. The teams "Delta/HRT" train to handle all contingencies including (as in this case Counter-terrorism) attempts to kill US personnel, calling them a "hostage rescue team" is just PC.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...y.html?hpid=z5

Following a single background briefing, the State Department has mostly refused to respond to inquiries about Benghazi, citing an ongoing investigation by a review board. But considerable evidence has emerged that Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, who died in the attack, and his security staff were deeply concerned about what they considered to be inadequate security. Fox Newsreported this week that a secret cable described an Aug. 15 “emergency meeting” at the consulate, at which the State Department’s regional security officer “expressed concerns with the ability to defend Post in the event of a coordinated attack due to limited manpower, security measures, weapons capabilities, host nation support and the overall size of the compound.”

....
From these, and a report Friday by the Wall Street Journal, it emerges that the CIA mission in Benghazi was considerably larger than the consulate and may have been partly responsible for its defense. According to the CIA account, on the night of Sept. 11 a six-member paramilitary force set out to rescue consulate personnel, arriving some 50 minutes after the attack began. Surviving Americans were evacuated to the CIA station, which itself came under attack hours later.

The Pentagon and CIA accounts describe a reaction to the attack that, while inadequate, was the best that could be mustered. Even if so, that leaves the question of why the various agencies were not better prepared for such an emergency, given the clear warnings. Did the Obama administration’s political preoccupation with maintaining a light footprint in Libya lead to an ill-considered reliance on local militias, rather than on U.S. forces? Given the region’s instability, why were no military rapid-reaction assets — such as Special Forces or armed drones — within reach of Northern Africa?
nsaspook
nsaspook is offline
#13
Nov16-12, 11:20 AM
P: 502
CNN reports that former Central Intelligence Agency director David H. Petraeus wants to tell Congress that he knew “almost immediately” that the attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi was perpetrated by terrorists.

According to the source, reports attributing the attack to protests surrounding an anti-Islam video and protests in Cairo were not disproven until after Petraeus made his initial report to Congress.

Despite that, according to CNN, Petraeus had separate talking points from Rice’s and that her talking points came from somewhere else in the administration.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/15/politi...ngs/index.html

Legislators saw a "real-time film (showing) exactly what happened" on September 11 in Benghazi, starting before the attack began up "through the incident and the exodus," said Feinstein. A source familiar with the House committee hearing said the video included shots of Stevens being dragged out of the building. Sen. Dan Coats, an Indiana Republican, described the footage as "a combination of video from a surveillance camera and a drone."

"It gave us a good picture, from the surveillance standpoint, what was happening," Coats said.
mkarger
mkarger is offline
#14
Nov26-12, 09:15 PM
P: 64
Quote Quote by Oltz View Post
At least when I was in the military if an attack was believed to be over you either pulled the men out or reinforced them you didn't just leave them there alone and assume everything was fine now troops are deployed to support action under way all the time especially when you are not sure what is going on. Plus with drones in the air they had a better idea what was happening then the troops on the ground. That is CYA by Penetta and anybody who has been in combat will tell you that.

I am sorry Obama takes full credit for every action of the seals when they were on live in the situation room going after Osama so at least somebody had to have mentioned to him that this was going on.

They had painted the mortar team with a laser for missile guidance misses that are on the drones if the order had been given to fire those men would be alive.
Just as an FYI, Libya was and is a sovereign nation with all the rights and privileges afford by international law. That includes protection from external military action.

Consulates and embassies can be protected internally by the outside nations forces often because it is considered the occupying nations territory. They cannot, however, install troops outside of the premises without permission. And most nations do not want foreign troops occupying their sovereign territory.

It was Libya's job to protect all of the area surrounding the consulate. And it was their job to react in the event of an attack. The United States cannot simply invade another country without proper cause and the Libyan government resisted US efforts to send in troops.

I cannot find the source where I heard that last statement so I am striking it from my argument.
Angry Citizen
Angry Citizen is offline
#15
Nov26-12, 09:59 PM
P: 867
The United States cannot simply invade another country without proper cause and the Libyan government resisted US efforts to send in troops.
Source for this?
mkarger
mkarger is offline
#16
Nov26-12, 10:33 PM
P: 64
Quote Quote by Angry Citizen View Post
Source for this?
Searching for where I read that and can't find it. It was well over a month ago either way so I might have misread or claims may have been redacted.
Angry Citizen
Angry Citizen is offline
#17
Nov26-12, 10:34 PM
P: 867
Quote Quote by mkarger View Post
Searching for where I read that and can't find it. It was well over a month ago either way so I might have misread or claims may have been redacted.
Guess I'll have to subpoena you for creating a "confusing narrative" O_o
mkarger
mkarger is offline
#18
Nov26-12, 10:40 PM
P: 64
Quote Quote by Angry Citizen View Post
Guess I'll have to subpoena you for creating a "confusing narrative" O_o
I can only handle one subpoena a month and the MCSO has already taken that spot.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Damning article on college athletics General Discussion 16
Libyan forces have captured Muammar Gaddafi Current Events 80
Libyan tweets saying Gaddafi is out! Current Events 15
Russia had evidence that Saddam planned terrorist attacks against U.S. Current Events 17