Well, the time explains Barry's absence from the scene!
Posted on 11/21/2012 4:59:01 AM PST by maggief
On Hugh Hewitt’s show Tuesday, we had the pleasure of speaking with Vince Flynn, America’s preeminent thriller writer. His latest in the Mitch Rapp series, The Last Man, deals extensively with the relationship in remote parts of the world between the dipomatic corps and CIA operators. And while you would think since they’re isolated and technically on the same side, those relationships are often times strained at best.
During Hugh’s interview, the parallel between the book and the 9/11 attack on our consuate, and the CIA annex buiding in Benghazi, came up, and here’s what Flynn had to say:
(snip)
VF: They don’t, there is, now every outpost is different, but there is often an extremely tense relationship between the diplomatic corps and the clandestine service at the CIA at these various outposts. And I’ve witnessed it in countries where you’d think they’d be getting along. So it’s a serious problem. The Benghazi deal? Oh, man, I just…nobody’s asking the million dollar question, which is why on 9/11 does an ambassador who has already written in his journal that he’s feared for his life, has already reached out to Foggy Bottom back in Washington, D.C., State Department headquarters, and said I need more security. Why on 9/11 does he leave our fortress-like embassy in Tripoli and go down to Benghazi with a light detail? Why? Nobody’s asking that question, and it blows my mind away that I haven’t heard anybody push the State Department on that issue or the White House.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
well that is an amazingly good question, did shrillery send him to Benghazi? Yes, he was to be kidnapped to be “exchanged” for the Blind Sheik
Since most of our illustrious government representatives are lawyers they learned this in lawyer 101: Don’t ask the question if you don’t know the answer already or don’t ask the question if you cannot handle the answer.
Orders from the Boss?
My question: Mr. President, didi you order “cross border authority?” That will explain a lot.
“.....Why on 9/11 does he leave our fortress-like embassy in Tripoli and go down to Benghazi with a light detail? Why? Nobody’s asking that question, and it blows my mind away that I haven’t heard anybody push the State Department on that issue or the White House.”
WE at the ranch haven’t “pushed the State Department on that issue, or the White House”, but we’ve asked precisely that question aloud, perhaps only to ourselves, and I’ve read several posts here at FR asking that same question.
Perhaps it’s time to ask the Sec. of State, and the White House, but then what’s the use!? They will just lie and persue their Marxist goals.
No one has explained where Obama had been for ALL of those 7 hours... probably packing for Las Vegas....
Right on queue?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443684104578066631931377740.html
At 4:20 p.m., State Department executive secretary Steve Mull alerted Mrs. Clinton in her office. According to a person present, (snip)
And she said: “Find Chris,” the U.S. ambassador. She had handpicked him for the posting.
I couldn’t get the link to do anything except ask me to sign up, but from your quote it seems Madame Secretary was concerned enough to start tracking down the ambassador.
Vince Flynn is a terrific author- I’d like to see him do a non-fiction book on this story. He knows people.
I have decided that what we’re seeing in Israel now is why 9/11 happened. Stevens was a sacrifice fly.
She uses “republican” sex scandals as a cover story.
During Clinton's impeachment the term “Scorched Earth Policy” was used and everyone believed it was the sex scandals that popped up with a number of republicans.
The “Scorched Earth Policy” premise is from Bill Ayers book “Prairie Fire”. Find an incident, a spark to ignite the flame, ratchet it up to a raging inferno.
“Scorched Earth Policy” actually means to orchestrate civil unrest and race riots, then carry out terrorist attacks.
The attack in Libya follows the same pattern, Weather Underground playbook, as the attacks in this country.
Well, the time explains Barry's absence from the scene!
Hubert Humphrey, back in the day, used a scorched earth policy.
Ambassador Stevens going to unsecure Benghazi on 9-11 of all days stinks to me of a setup. The ribbon cutting at the new Benghazi school cover story is laughably lame. You can bet that given his own input in the matter, Stevens would have told the Turks, “No, 9-11 is not a good day for us,” and stayed in Tripoli behind many high and thick walls. For him to go to hyper-dangerous Benghazi on 9-11 means the Turks insisted on that day, but why would they care about the meeting date, unless they were in on an assassination plan as the Judas goat?
Alternatively, the order for Ambassador Stevens to meet the Turks in Benghazi on 9-11 might have come down our own U.S. chain of command. Stevens seems to have been wearing two hats as ambassador and CIA arms shipper. His job involved moving between the far more secure embassy complex in Tripoli, the Benghazi “consulate,” and the CIA “annex.” So his orders might have come down either State Department or the CIA channels. I am unclear on his job title and true position, but either the CIA or State sent him his final instructions, and copies of those orders still exist, to be discovered on computer hard drives by future historians.
Ambassador Stevens meeting the Turks at the unsecure Benghazi “consulate” on 9-11 of all days screams out to me of a deliberate ambush. The Turkish “diplomats” (or arms shipment middlemen) left the meeting after dark and perhaps flashed their headlights to the Al Qaeda attack team commanders lurking in shadows. A coded text, a word on a phone, meaning, “The Amriki ambassador is there, with minimal security—proceed with the attack plan.” But that is pure speculation on my part. (The smoking gun clue will be the official CIA or State Department message ordering him to Benghazi on 9-11, perhaps using the preposterous “school opening” as a cover story for his later meeting with the Turks.)
I leave that for future investigators and historians. What I know for certain is that the rescue mission stand-down issue revolves around granting or withholding cross-border authority. And that sword of authority belongs 100 percent to President Obama. No weasel words or smokescreens should be allowed to cloud that very basic truth.
President Obama owns cross-border authority, so he owns the failure to rescue the American heroes who were fighting for their lives in Benghazi for seven hours. More than a hundred gung-ho Force Recon Marines were waiting on the tarmac in Sigonella just two hours away for the launch order that never came.
Semper Fidelis, President Obama?
Seems like I remember seeing an “official” explanation for his being in Benghazi:
“to be present at the opening of a new school”...
Or, some BS like that... ??
Another question is why aren’t witnesses talking? Out of fear of the administration or what?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.