CIA operatives in Libya told to stand down during attack

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
He was a potential security threat due to his risky behavior. Comprendo?
I had assumed that actually consulting a dictionary was probably not gonna happen - thanks for confirming the assumption.

My link is from Fox
Yeah ... exactly ... that certainly is problematic, in and of itself ... (particularly in light of Fox's reporting on Benghazi ... let alone anything else ...)
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Just as the truth about what happened in Iran when Carter blew that call, the truth about what Obama did, or not do, will never come to light. The result of the election insured that. The result would have been the same if Romney had one. He would have protected Obama just as Reagan protected Carter.
 

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
I had assumed that actually consulting a dictionary was probably not gonna happen - thanks for confirming the assumption.


Yeah ... exactly ... that certainly is problematic, in and of itself ... (particularly in light of Fox's reporting on Benghazi ... let alone anything else ...)

Now,now, picky,picky.
Fox News reporting has been excellent on this. I know it kind of sux for you to realize that. As for most of the other news organizations reporting on Benghazi, not much of a peep. Pretty telling huh?
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Now,now, picky,picky. Fox News reporting has been excellent on this.
Are you kidding ?

Scope out WaPo's Eric Wemple's multi-part series (think it's up to 11 now) on Fox News' "reporting" on Benghazi for starters ...

I know it kind of sux for you to realize that. As for most of the other news organizations reporting on Benghazi, not much of a peep. Pretty telling huh?
My advice to you would be to never confuse hysterical ranting (a good bit of which actually turns out to inaccurate or misleading) with actual news reporting ...

There's been plenty of reporting out there (including foreign sources) ... but not all of it is of hysterical rant variety.

Volume and partisan hysteria does not good news reporting make ... unless perhaps one lives in the Fox News "reality bubble" ...
 
Last edited:

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Are you kidding ?

Scope out WaPo's Eric Wemple's multi-part series (think it's up to 11 now) on Fox News' "reporting" on Benghazi for starters ...


My advice to you would be to never confuse hysterical ranting (a good bit of which actually turns out to inaccurate or misleading) with actual news reporting ...

There's been plenty of reporting out there (including foreign sources) ... but not all of it is of hysterical rant variety.

Volume and partisan hysteria does not good news reporting make ... unless perhaps one lives in the Fox News "reality bubble" ...

I'm referring to the reporting for the most part from Jennifer Griffen and Kathryn Herridge. I really don't see any ranting and hysteria from them, just sober reporting. For some to hear a rant on the opinion shows and therfore turn a blind eye to the excellent reporting from the news shows is silly.
There might have been coverage from foreign sources, which is making my point. The U.S. news organization's reporting has been scant.
As Big Three Nets' Evening News Shows Ignore Benghazi, Their Audience Decline Continues | NewsBusters.org
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
I'm not. I'm specifically talking about the reporting from Jennifer Griffen and Kathryn Herridge.
So am I - when I refer to inaccurate and misleading ... other folks take care the hysterical ranting with what JG and KH provide.
 

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
So am I - when I refer to inaccurate and misleading ... other folks take care the hysterical ranting with what JG and KH provide.

Inaccurate and misleading. No not really. We shall see though when all the information comes out and or extracted in congressional testimony. Provided there isn't any executive priveledges along the way and we have them show up to testify. Information seems to come out ever so slowly.
Oh... what do we have here. A Friday night document dump. You know why they put stuff out on a Friday night don't you? I know you do. :D
Pentagon releases Benghazi timeline: took 19 hours to respond « Hot Air
 
Last edited:

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Inaccurate and misleading. No not really.
Yes, really - examine Fox's coverage re: the rooftop defenders @ the annex in Benghazi "lasing" the attackers for starters ...

They ended up doing a "limited walkback"/"clarification" on that one ... ;)

The original amorphous reporting was then used to drive a lot of speculation (conspiracy theory) ... about various assets that might have been "in the area" and could have responded but were "ordered" to "stand down"

We shall see though when all the information comes out and or extracted in congressional testimony. Provided there isn't any executive priveledges along the way and we have them show up to testify. Information seems to come out ever so slowly.
LOL ... apparently, you have little experience in dealing with the bureaucracy ...

Oh... what do we have here. A Friday night document dump.
A Friday night document dump eh ?

You're not only learning to emulate Faux's misrepresentations ... but also their "drama" ... ROTFLMAO ...

What "documents" were "dumped" exactly ?

What time were these "documents" dumped ?

Now, after you have addressed that, explain for us all how what was released in the timeline differs materially from what was previously released from intel community's timeline ...

What's that ? ... oh, I see ... we now know with specificity that the diverted drone actually took exactly 78 minutes to arrive over Benghazi ... as opposed to the previous characterization of "over an hour" ...

Yes ... that's certainly a riveting fact ... and very helpful ...

I read the essentially the same story a week (?) ago ... when the intel community released their timeline ... on a Thursday IIRC ...

You know why they put stuff out on a Friday night don't you? I know you do.
Well, interestingly enough, although the AP story (that HotAir's story is largely based) shows a current time stamp of 5:26 PM, if you check their Twitter account, you'll find that AP tweeted the timeline had been released by the five-sided windbox ... at 1:22 PM in the afternoon ...

https://twitter.com/AP/status/267014416594243584

... Friday "night" eh ?

Where ?

BTW - you can personally tell Ed Morrissey - the author of the HotAir article - the next time ya talk to him that I said he's complete retard ... for omitting the correct times - thereby creating a misleading impression ...
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Regarding the FBI investigation of Petraues, it apparently concluded this Tuesday,election day. How convenient. Just another coincidence I'm sure.
Be sure to check under your bed for the bogey-man before you go nite-nite ... I think Ed just reported he saw him there ...
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Probably the most detailed report (in terms of precise times) that I've seen thus far, courtesy of AFPS:

DOD Releases Detailed Timeline for Benghazi Response

By Karen Parrish
American Forces Press Service


WASHINGTON, Nov. 10, 2012 – The Defense Department released a detailed timeline yesterday of the Pentagon’s response to the September attack in Benghazi, Libya, that left four Americans dead, including U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens.

A senior defense official, speaking on background with Pentagon reporters, emphasized the rapid consultation, planning and troop pre-deployment actions defense leaders undertook in the first hours following the attack.


“With naval, Marine, special operations and air forces either employed or en route to Libya during the attacks, we responded,” the official said. “We mourn the loss of four American heroes in Benghazi.”


The military’s initial response began within minutes of the first incident in Benghazi, the official said: the attack on the U.S. consulate began at 3:42 p.m. EDT [9:42 p.m. Benghazi time], and by 5:10 EDT an unarmed surveillance aircraft was on station over the Benghazi compound.


By 5:30 p.m., all surviving Americans had left the consulate, the official noted, adding that defense officials didn’t have that information until later.


The senior official noted that for people to understand the sequence of events in Benghazi, “it’s important to discuss the wider context of that tragic day.”


In the months before the attack, the official said, hundreds of reports surfaced of possible threats to U.S. citizens and facilities across the globe. In the Middle East and North Africa on Sept. 11, the official added, U.S. facilities in more than 16 countries were operating on a heightened force-protection level, based on specific threats.


“I would note … that there was no specific or credible threat that we knew of on the day that the attacks … occurred in Benghazi,” the official said.


The official acknowledged that since Sept. 11, many people have speculated on whether increased military intervention, including the use of manned and unmanned aircraft, might have changed the course of events in Libya that night.


“Unfortunately, no alternative or additional aircraft options were available within … [enough time] to be effective,” the official said. “Due to the incomplete intelligence picture on the ground, armed aircraft options were simply not feasible.”


The DOD timeline records that in the first hours following the initial attack, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, conferred first with the president, and shortly after with senior officials including Army Gen. Carter F. Ham, who leads U.S. Africa Command. Africom’s area of responsibility includes Libya.


During those meetings, the official said, Panetta verbally ordered two fleet antiterrorism security team, or FAST, platoons to prepare to deploy from their base in Rota, Spain. The secretary also issued verbal prepare-to-deploy orders for a U.S. European Command special operations force then training in Central Europe and a second special operations force based in the United States.


At 6:30 p.m. EDT, according to the timeline, a six-person security team, including two DOD members, left the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli for Benghazi.


The official noted the Pentagon’s National Military Command Center staff, within hours of the attack, began planning support and contingency operations with transportation and special operations experts, as well as with representatives from the four services and Africa, Europe and Central commands. By 8:39 p.m., the official said, the command center had started issuing written orders for the forces the secretary had alerted.


At 11 p.m. EDT, the official said, a second unmanned, unarmed surveillance aircraft relieved the first, and at 11:15 p.m. -- around 5 a.m. Sept. 12 in Benghazi -- the second U.S. facility there, an annex near the consulate, came under mortar and rocket-propelled grenade fire.


By 1:40 a.m. EDT Sept. 12, the first wave of Americans left Benghazi for Tripoli by airplane, with the second wave, including the bodies of the fallen, following at 4 a.m. A C-17 aircraft, under Africom direction, flew the evacuees from Tripoli to Germany later that day, the official said.


As the timeline makes clear, the official said, the evacuation took place before the FAST platoons or special operations forces arrived, although all were converging on Libya -- noting repeatedly that DOD leaders lacked a clear picture of enemy, civilian and American positions in the area.


“There are people out there who have suggested that an overhead surveillance aircraft could have perfect visibility into what was happening on the ground, and on that basis alone, you could send in a team,” the official said. “That is not necessarily how things work.”


An overhead surveillance aircraft operating at night over a city can’t always help military members separate friend and foe on the ground, the official said.


“You get a lot of good information from a surveillance aircraft, … but it doesn’t necessarily provide you a complete and instant picture of what is happening on the ground. … If you’re going to undertake military action, you’d better have solid information before you decide to take the kinds of steps that are required to effectively complete a military mission of this sort,” the official told reporters.


Over the roughly 12 hours between the start of the attacks and the time the last Americans were evacuated from Benghazi, the official said, defense leaders postured forces to meet any contingencies that might develop, as there was no way to know in the early, “murky” stages whether the situation would be resolved within hours, days or longer.


“We absolutely had our forces arrayed in a way that could potentially respond to events that might unfold,” the official said. “We are an excellent military -- the finest in the world. We’re always prepared. But we’re neither omniscient nor omnipresent.”

DOD Releases Detailed Timeline for Benghazi Response
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Was he a neocon? Oh wait that must be under your bed.
Might be ... who knows where them little stinkers have gotten off to now that Mitt no longer needs 'em and has cut 'em loose ...

We'll be keepin' an eye out for 'em though ...

BTW - that timeline thingie - it looks like it was briefed ... so the AP tweet may be reflecting a time after that briefing and the subsequent Q & A period had ended ;)
 
Top