Posted on 05/09/2013 12:49:47 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
(2) When Hicks began to voice strenuous objections to the administration's inaccurate talking points with State Department higher-ups, the administration turned hostile. After being lavishly praised by the president and the Secretary of State for his performance under fire, Assistant Secretary of State Beth Jones instantly reversed course and launched into a "blistering critique" of Hicks' leadership. He was subsequently "effectively demoted." Hicks called Rice's talking points "stunning" and "embarrassing."
(3) Secretaries Clinton and Rice (the president's hand-selected messenger on Benghazi to the American people) repeatedly stated that the attack arose from "spontaneous protests" over an obscure YouTube video. This was never true. Hicks called the YouTube a "non-event" in Libya. He and others on the ground -- including Amb. Stevens -- recognized the raid as a coordinated terrorist attack from the very beginning. Hicks testified that he personally told Sec. Clinton as much at 2 am on the night of the attack, along with her senior staff. [UPDATE - Rep. Trey Gowdy also revealed an email sent on 9/12 in which Assistant Sec. Jones confirmed to a Libyan official that the attack had been carried out by terrorist organization Ansar al-Sharia]. Days later, Rice recited bogus talking points on five American television networks, and Clinton denounced the video while standing next to the flag-draped coffins of the fallen. Hicks said there he never mentioned any "spontaneous demonstrations" related to a video in his phone call with Clinton:
Questions: How, why, and by whom did the administration's talking points get scrubbed and re-written? Why did the president refuse to identify the attack as terrorism in an interview with CBS News on September 12, and why did he allow Sec. Rice to disseminate patently false information on his behalf?
(4) A small, armed US force in Tripoli was told it did not have the authority to deploy to Benghazi in the midst of the attack. Twice. Flight time between the two cities is less than an hour. Members of the would-be rescue contingent were "furious" over this obstruction. The witnesses said they did not know who ultimately gave the "stand down" orders, or why. If it was not the Commander-in-Chief calling the shots, why not, and where was he? Whistle-blower Mark Thompson, a career counter-terrorism official at State, said he called the White House to request the immediate deployment of a Foreign Emergency Support Team (FEST) to Benghazi. He was told it was "not the right time" to do so, then was cut out of the communications loop.
(5) The US' security chief in Libya, Eric Nordstrom, averred that Sec. Clinton "absolutely" would have been briefed on his (and Stevens') repeated requests for an increased security presence in Libya. This claim undercut committee Democrats' nitpicking over whether Clinton's signature appeared on the memo denying those requests:
Furthermore, the Benghazi compound was operating below the bare minimum global security standard for US diplomatic missions -- despite being in an exceedingly dangerous place, and having been subjected to previous attempted attacks. Only the Secretary of State has the authority to grant exemptions for minimum security requirements.
(6) Amb. Stevens was stationed at the vulnerable Benghazi compound on a dangerous symbolic date at the behest of Sec. Clinton, who wished to make that diplomatic mission a permanent outpost. This detail should only intensify questions as to why the consulate was so poorly protected (see item #7).
(7) Nordstrom stated that elements of the lightly-armed Libyan militia group tasked with protecting the consulate were "certainly" complicit in the attacks. No US Marines were present at the time. Hicks estimated that at least 60 terrorists swarmed into the compound during the attack. Eight months later, zero arrests have been made.
(8) A mortally wounded Amb. Stevens was taken to a hospital controlled by the Islamist extremist group (Ansar Al-Sharia) primarily responsible for the assault. Administration officials initially pointed to locals rushing Stevens to a local hospital as evidence of local goodwill from protesters who didn't approve of the mob spinning out of control. Hicks said the American contingent did not go to retrieve Stevens from said hospital during the fight because they were fearful that it was a trap.
(9) The US government did not seek permission from the Libyan government to fly any aircraft into Libyan airspace, aside from a drone. The witnesses testified that they believe the Libyan government would have complied with any such request. The fact that none was even made indicates that there was never a plan or intention to rush reinforcements to Benghazi. This renders the "would they have made it on time?" argument largely irrelevant -- the facts in item #4 notwithstanding. Another important point about the "they wouldn't have made it" defense: The assault lasted for eight hours and took place into two waves at two different compounds. How could anyone have known how long the fighting would last? How could they have anticipated that ex-Navy SEALs Woods and Doherty wouldn't have been able to stave off the enemy for a few more hours? Help was not on the way. It was never sent.
(10) Despite committee Democrats' repeated claims and leading questions, reduced funding or "austerity" had absolutely nothing to do with the inadequate security presence on the ground. The State Department itself made this fact crystal clear at previous hearings, as did the administration's internal "ARB" review. Why did multiple Democrats flog an obsolete, thoroughly-debunked explanation, if not to muddy the waters?
(11) Oversight Democrats tried to cast doubt on Mark Thompson's credibility, suggesting that he'd declined to participate in the administration's ARB probe. Thompson corrected the record, noting that he "offered his services" to those investigators, who in turn did not invite him to testify. Democrats also claimed that the House hearings were slanted because the leaders of the ARB investigation were not invited to participate. In fact, Chairman Issa explicitly did invite them, as confirmed by letters obtained by ABC News. They chose not to participate. Democrats were dead wrong on both counts.
(12) During her Congressional testimony on Benghazi, Sec. Clinton memorably asked, "what difference does it make?" in regards to the provenance of the administration's incorrect talking points. Gregory Hicks and Eric Nordstrom both attempted to answer that question. Hicks did so in granular detail (the false explanation opened a nasty rift between the US and Libyan governments, impeding the FBI's investigation for weeks). An emotional Nordstrom was more general (we lost friends; the truth matters):
One of the few points of bipartisan agreement was that the number of unresolved issues merit additional hearings on Benghazi.
The President and his Dept. heads, wanted these survivors dead. They were hot-running arms and got caught, by feuding Islamic factions. Who in turn, gave their common enemy, an embarrasment of unfolding proportions. The complicity of Our Goverment with jihad, is full and complete.
No, it was one of the guys who took him to the hospital.
Regardless, I think it very possible the reason the call was made because they saw that Stevens would not live and so to appear to cooperate would be better at this point since he could not be taken hostage.
Guy Benson is now guest hosting the Hugh Hewitt show. 3-6:00 PDT. He just had on one of the Rep committee members from the hearing. I forget his name - the one from Ohio. I recommend the program.
Bolton calls this revelation stunning:
http://nation.foxnews.com/benghazi/2013/05/08/benghazi-whistle-blower-amb-stevens-was-taken-hospital-under-enemy-control
But then a while later because security was so bad and there were apparently worse things than ansar al shariah in some local folk's eyes ?anarchy or other groups?, there were people who reportedly regretted that and wanted to let them back in. I didn't follow up so I'm not sure if they were let back in or not.
Ambassador Chris Stevens was still breathing as video emerges showing Libyans trying to rescue him
Published: Monday, September 17, 2012, 2:20 PM Updated: Monday, September 17, 2012, 10:40 PMCAIRO — Libyans tried to rescue Ambassador Chris Stevens, cheering "God is great" and rushing him to a hospital after they discovered him still clinging to life inside the U.S. Consulate, according to witnesses and a new video that emerged Monday from last week's attack in the city of Benghazi.
The Libyans who found him expressed frustration that there was no ambulance and no first aid on hand, leaving him to be slung over a man's shoulder to be carried to a car.
"There was not a single ambulance to carry him. Maybe he was handled the wrong way," said Fahd al-Bakoush, a freelance videographer who shot the footage. "They took him to a private car."
Soon after the attack, Libyan civilians roamed freely around the trashed consulate, its walls blacked and furniture burned. Among them were the videographer al-Bakoush, and a photographer and art student he often works with.
They heard a panicked shout, "I stepped over a dead man," and rushed to see what was going on, al-Bakoush said. The body had been found inside a dark room with a locked door accessible only by a window. A group of men pulled him out and realized he was a foreigner and still alive.
He was breathing and his eyelids flickered, al-Bakoush said. "He was alive," he said. "No doubt. His face was blackened and he was like a paralyzed person."
Video taken by al-Bakoush and posted on YouTube shows Stevens being carried out of the room through a window with a raised shutter. "Bring him out, man," someone shouts. "Out of the way, out of the way!"
"Alive, Alive!" come other shouts, then a cheer of "God is great."
The next scene shows Stevens lying on a tile floor, with one man touching his neck to check his pulse. Al-Bakoush said that after that scene, they put Stevens in a private car to rush to the hospital.
The video has been authenticated since Stevens' face is clearly visible and he is wearing the same white t-shirt seen in authenticated photos of him being carried away on another man's shoulders, presumably moments later. The photographer and student who were with al-Bakoush at the scene gave the same account as he did.
"We were happy to see him alive. The youths tried to rescue him. But there was no security, no ambulances, nothing to help," said Ahmed Shams, the 22-year-old arts student.
When they entered the consulate, "there was no one around. There was no fire fighters, no ambulances, no relief," said the photographer, Abdel-Qader Fadl.
The accounts of all three witnesses mesh with that of the doctor who treated Stevens that night.
That said, I haven't seen the translated video so your assessment is likely true. Plus I don't think Ansar al Shariah or any other group is sufficiently intimidated by the Obama admin to turn over an ambassador or his corpse for fear Obama might actually DO something in retalliation.
Thanks Ernest.
Yes.
I suspect the CIA annex and its personnel are what they were trying to find and destroy from the outset, with the attack on the diplomatic compound intended to draw these "first responder" Americans to the scene like a typical jihadist two-part bombing... or at minimum get the CIA to come out of its cover so they could follow them back to the nest.
This is probably the least destructive aspect of this debacle, but the results of this lame cover up narrative have never been quantified before this hearing from a 1st hand witness (Hicks, 2nd in command).
WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE...
H.R. Clinton
Well, just to play Devil's advocate...some speculation :
The hospital was Ansar al Shariah's headquarters in Benghazi; where else would they take him?
Why did one of them take his cell phone and call the first saved number in it, which was to the Tripoli embassy, and tell them they had rescued him and he was at the hospital?
Do we have a recording of that phone call or are we taking state's word for it what was said? If not, for all we know they called the embassy to give us their suggested retail price for his return, and our government may have paid it, whatever it was, or made some other blackmail deal.
Maybe the deal was to stand down and have our President and his officials conduct a very public, very humiliating international apology tour for the blasphemy of insulting the Prophet Muhammed?
If there was no such deal then they won that long-coveted prize for free because Obama and Hillary put on quite a show with that ridiculous apology ad aired in Pakistan, where Ansar al Shriah's dear al Libi was killed the previous June. obama and Hillary parroting BS for FREE.
[On the other hand they already had the humiliating 2009 Cairo speech from Obama for free too, so they need not have worked so hard to get concessions and tribute from Obama.] Contrary to some here, I do not believe all Libyans are bad guys. Until some real evidence pops up I still assume they were friendlies.
Hicks said the mortars were deadly accurate.
To me that says they had known just where the annex was for quite some time.
They would collaborate even if they weren't telling the truth.
That is a much repeated headline today but the actual testimony was that the surrounding neighborhood was controlled by Ansar al Shariah not specifically the hospital. A fact that has been reported since at least Sept. 13th.
White House Watched Benghazi Attacked And Didn't Respond 10/24/2012Looters ransacking the empty consulate discovered Ambassador Stevens lying unconscious from smoke inhalation on the floor and rushed him to a hospital where doctors were unsuccessful in saving his life. Not knowing who he was, they took a cell phone from his pocket and called numbers. By about 2:00 a.m. Libyan time, the American embassy received word he was dead.
But this could very well be one.
I'm not saying it is; I'm saying along with all the other disinformation given out about Benghazi it is not beyond the pale to think it is.
The fact that Bolton calls it "stunning" that the hospital may have been under terrorist control and the fact that Hicks testified that they were preparing for a hostage situation makes me think I might not be alone.
Since an honest answer would belie the notion that, since Barack Hussein Obama is our leader, everybody in the Middle East loves us now.
30,000 Libyans protest against militiasThe rally comes after last week's attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi left the US ambassador and three other Americans dead. At least one militia is suspected of taking part in the attack, which has caused Libyans to speak out against the armed factions in their country.
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.