“The only people to respond were already in Libya, which gives footing to the idea that CBA was not granted.”
And SOMEONE made the deicision to use only in-country assets. At the least the media should find out, and report, who that was.
Not necessarily. The CIA assets already in-country might have been put into action soley on the authority of the acting ambassador or CIA station chief in Tripoli.
They were the only forces under the control of Americans already in Libya.
Sending assets such as a full military rescue requires CBA, so all the White House needed to do was passively NOT grant CBA.
This would still leave the acting ambassador or CIA honcho in Tripoli free to use the local in-country assets. If anybody from Washington had tried to tell that brave guy not to assist the Benghazi mission, he would have told them to F themselves. He had "the chop" on the assets in Libya, the authority, and he would have moved them no matter what Washington said.
But he couldn't do jack-squat to get those 100 Force Recon Marines from Italian territory into Benghazi except to beg and plead for help, and he probably did.
I'll say it again: the six CIA "shooters" from Tripoli, by the time they arrived in Benghazi, they should have been met by 100+ Force Recon Marines who had already secured the perimeter, while USN and USAF jets circled high above, ready to spit doom at anybody lifting a finger against an American in Benghazi.
And the single reason why they were not there, is because Obama refused to grant CBA for the rescue mission that was already staged at Sigonella.
We both know this wont happen unless we keep pounding every news site out there about the CBA. Im pounding every news site carrying this story.