Posted on 10/26/2012 6:30:35 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
BOMBSHELL: US troops in Benghazi would not have been painting targets on the ground unless there was air support overhead. But someone called it off – And the decision most likely came from the White House.
FOX News reported earlier today that security officers on the ground in Benghazi had a laser planted on a target that was firing on the annex.
The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Spectre gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights.
So there were two drones in the air recording the attack on the ground. And now we know the CIA team at the annex was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. The White House was able to watch the attack live back in Washington DC. Yet, yesterday Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said this,
“The U.S. military did not get involved during the attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, last month because officials did not have enough information about what was going on before the attack was over.”
How much more information did they need?
* * * * *
Then there’s this bombshell at BlackFive from a former Delta operator:
Having spent a good bit of time nursing a GLD (ground Laser Designator) in several garden spots around the world, something from the report jumped out at me.
One of the former SEALs was actively painting the target. That means that Specter WAS ON STATION! Probably an AC130U. A ground laser designator is not a briefing pointer laser. You do not “paint” a target until the weapons system/designator is synched; which means that the AC130 was on station.
Only two places could have called off the attack at that point; the WH situation command (based on POTUS direction) or AFRICOM commander based on information directly from the target area.
If the AC130 never left Sigonella (as Penetta says) that means that the Predator that was filming the whole thing was armed.
If that SEAL was actively “painting” a target; something was on station to engage! And the decision to stand down goes directly to POTUS!
This is HUGE. It should be obvious by now that someone is not telling the truth. As Blackfive says,
“This is bigger than Watergate!… The worst has to be the team on the ground knowing that the President just left you to die.“
A caller today discussed this with Rush Limbaugh.
(VIDEO AT LINK)
Here is part of that conversation.
CALLER: Well, there’s three networks, Rush. The e-mails that have been released are unclassified e-mails. On the top secret side, a flash traffic message from the embassy Tripoli to the White House Situation Room, it’s like an IM. I mean, it’s immediately responded to. You have to acknowledge receipt of it. Okay? So it’s immediate. It gets to the person, the watch officer sitting there, boom, flashes on his screen, he has to acknowledge receipt. And then there’s a protocol for who he then sends it to. He physically turns to someone, the senior guy on watch, “This is a critical element of information. POTUS needs to hear this,” and that’s what would have happened.
So no one in the White House can deny that — well, they can deny it, but the fact is the protocol says someone marched their happy little ass up to the senior guy standing next to POTUS and said, “Sir, ambassador in Libya is in peril.” And if he was missing, that is even a higher precedence. And then the chain would have also gone out automatically to the geographic combatant commander, AFRICOM, and he would have then turned to his special operations commander and said, “I want the In-Extremis Force, you know, strip ready in five minutes.” And evidently they were strip ready in Sigonella and they would have the assets to penetrate the airspace, you know, an MC-130 papa, which is a C-130 specially equipped with electronic countermeasures. They didn’t need permission to enter Libyan airspace, okay?
I’m giving you a lot of Inside Baseball stuff, and maybe putting myself in a little peril by doing it, but the In-Extremis Force, they would have been chomping at the bit to do this. It was turned down, POTUS, at his five p.m. Eastern time meeting with the principals, that’s when he put the kibosh on everything. It was a conscious act. It has to be because, you know, the In-Extremis Force is required to be prepared to do In-Extremis non-combatant evacuation operations for its geographic responsibility, the entire continent of Africa. So there’s always somebody ready to go, and the aircraft are always prepared to go.
Read the rest here. Hat Tip Truth and Common Sense
They are far too sharp to accept as an insult the identification of a strawman argument. They, too, fully understand the frustration of deal with strawmen. It is, indeed, like chasing a roach around the kitchen table.
One must wonder if there was some sort of mass mutiny going on relative to the rescue of our people in Bengazi - Coincidental to General Ham’s firing:
Navy replaces admiral leading Mideast strike group
WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Navy said Saturday it is replacing the admiral in command of an aircraft carrier strike group in the Middle East, pending the outcome of an internal investigation into undisclosed allegations of inappropriate judgment.
Rear Adm. Charles M. Gaouette is being sent back to the USS John C. Stennis’ home port at Bremerton, Washington stae, in what the Navy called a temporary reassignment. The Navy said he is not formally relieved of his command of the Stennis strike group but will be replaced by Rear Adm. Troy M. Shoemaker, who will assume command until the investigation is completed.
It is highly unusual for the Navy to replace a carrier strike group commander during its deployment.
The Navy did not reveal details of the allegations, citing only an accusation of “inappropriate leadership judgment” that arose during the strike group’s deployment to the Middle East. Rear Adm. John Kirby, the Navy’s chief spokesman, declined to discuss the investigation.
The Stennis group deployed from Bremerton in late August and had entered the Navy 5th Fleet’s area of operations in the Middle East on Oct. 17 after sailing across the Pacific. The Stennis made port visits in Thailand and Malaysia on its way to the Middle East.
It deployed four months earlier than scheduled in response to a request by the commander of U.S. Central Command, Marine Gen. James Mattis, to maintain two aircraft carriers in the Middle East. The Stennis replaced the USS Enterprise carrier group.
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta visited the Stennis and its sailors in Bremerton shortly before they departed. He thanked them for accelerating their deployment on short notice.
“I understand that it is tough,” Panetta said. “We are asking an awful lot of each of you, but frankly you are the best I have and when the world calls we have to respond.”
Wow...criminal...trials are needed asap.
Believe, me. I will continue to express my DISGUST with our very highest and most senior military officers and their contempt for the Constitution and for the HONORABLE, BRAVE, LOYAL, and HIGHLY TRAINED men and women serving our nation. I will do so at every opportunity not only here on Free Republic but on other forums as well.
Thank you for providing the opportunity to do so again.
It's about the Constitution and our nation's freedom. It isn't about changing **your** mind.
Rush’s caller was careful to say he was leaving out the details——as he should. But his basic drift was accurate as to how chain-of-command stuff works. That’s why they give some of us stars/bars on our shoulders. Sometimes we draw the short straw and have to get the job done whether someone answers the aircover/artillery/backup/permission slip phone or not. That oath that “O’s” take carries a lot of responsibility with it and it sounds like there was at least one slider in the loop this time. Notably missing from this whole story is the absense of any actual US military people anywhere on the ground in Libya that had any direct involvement in the whole clusterflock. By all accounts Stevens and his staff were either “state dept. “ or security contractors. The guys at the Annex were either all CIA or security contractors. While CIA can designate targets they don’t have heavy weapons themselves which explains why FOX’s Greg Palkot explained that the Annex rescue party was armed with handguns. But there are plenty of survivors from the event and until we hear from at least a few of them we probably won’t have a reasonable picture of the whole hootenany-———————I just remember how it usually works out for people who waste our guys.
LOL ... didn't stop you from trying though, and neither did it stop me. At least we agree on some things. Better than not to agree at all. We have one sticky point between us, it does appear, and so it will be.
I missed your post, Piasa, sorry.
Yes, that is an interesting question.
My purpose for posting on Free Republic and other forums is about getting ideas out into wider circulation. Any one individual ( regardless of the topic I am addressing) is irrelevant to that goal.
But...Thanks for posting to me. I always appreciate the opportunities given to me.
If someone won’t believe Fox News, then I have nothing to help. The reporter (Jennifer Griffin) is in all likelihood a liberal, as most reporters are. She is also a straight-shooter, from what I can tell.
Thanks for the link, I appreciate it. It sure looks like that’s the case. I’m sure these men are also being threatened with losing their pensions and any related benefits if they come forward in regards to what they know about the situation. I wonder if all of these men are in custody somewhere and being kept quiet?
Question - for you or anyone else on the thread:
Under what circumstances can a second-in-command apprehend and relieve a 4-star-General of his duties W/OUT direct authorization from the President? Are there any? (I’m guessing there are only a few VERY specific cases, and that defying a direct order may be one of them...)
I’m also assuming that my answer would lie in the UCMJ - and are there any differences in how this would be handled depending on the branch the General served in? I’m beginning my research in this area as I am completely unfamiliar with these laws/codes that apply to commissioned officers (or otherwise).
If anyone can give me a little push in the right direction as to where I should look for this info. it would be greatly appreciated. Google isn’t helping as much as I would wish (and I’m usually good at finding this stuff).
Wanted to direct your attention to the (admittedly hearsay) story I posted in #194 on this thread.
[MM - feel free to copy and paste to the Threat Matrix if you think it worth it to do so... I don’t want the story getting “lost”, but don’t think I should post it as it’s own thread as I don’t have clear citations.]
Also note that there is an Admiral who is being replaced as well (see a response to the post a little above this one - or follow the “replies” link). A huge shake-up at the top of ALL of these command posts that were in a position to act on orders to HELP the men in Benghazi.
I’ll be doing some research later tonight into the UCMJ and provisions for relieving a 4-Star General “on the battlefield” by his second-in-command. Just so I’m aware of the official laws that cover this specific circumstance. If either of you know exactly where to look, I’d be grateful for any assistance. I’m aware that the President is the ONLY one who can officially relieve the General - however, there have to be contingencies in regards to being on the battlefield and perhaps not in communication directly with the President or the Pentagon at that precise moment.
I have a ton of military-connected friends, active duty and vets on my profile over at FB, but they are - understandably - quite mum on the topic right now, and I don’t want to push by linking them by name to the posts over there as I don’t want anyone getting into trouble over answering these questions, or commenting.
It IS looking like the “story” I shared in post #194 may indeed be the “real truth” behind why the gunship was purportedly “in the air over” and why men on the ground were already painting targets, but those targets were never fired upon.
NOTE: I “spoke” with Navy Seal Woods mother last night on FB, and have made a promise to do all within my (admittedly little) power to make sure the truth comes out and these people are brought to justice - both those who committed the terrorist act, and those who stood by and watched. I intend to keep that promise to her, but I’ve got a lot of “catching up” and research to do in order to do so to the best of my ability... Please keep in mind - EVERYONE on this thread - that these men’s families are EXTREMELY grateful for everyone’s efforts to expose the truth. And, please keep them all in your prayers - especially Tyrone’s family as they are taking the lead in speaking out.
On a personal note: BDZ, and MM I hope you are both doing well, it’s been a while since I’ve been a “regular” around here... just busy...
Going a little nuts trying to keep up with this story as it seems something is breaking every minute and a half. Other than that...doing just fine. You?
Yeah, I have been trying to keep tabs on too many different things - and spending time debating which perhaps I shouldn’t bother so much with as it just ends up frustrating me! LOL
Glad to hear you’re well. We’re doing OK here, too. Found out my husband and I are going to be Grandparents in early June of next year - we are shocked and a little worried (this damn economy), but working hard to replace that with happiness and excitement! LOL
Now, if this election goes the way it SHOULD I will be able to relax even more! I don’t want this little one to be born under total tyranny - which is what I believe is in store for us if, God forbid, Obama is re-elected!
At least now there is much which is known about you. I'm irrelevant FRiend. Your accusations and insults are irrelevant FRiend. You and your opened mindedness statement keyed me in as to who you are. For some liberalism never dies. Thank you for helping me to understand who you are, if in fact you are real. After having read you am in serious doubt you are real, but instead a bot, an intelligent bot, but a bot nevertheless programed by a liberal. Thank You for the enlightenment.
Well, I take it back. Apparently some cell phone cameras can see IR:
http://www.instructables.com/id/Poor-Mans-Cell-Phone-IR-Filter/
There are only 4 legal ways to get him out. Impeachment in the House and subsequent removal in the Senate (impossible with this Senate no matter what he does or doesn’t do), resignation (yeah right), the 25th Amendment (like that would ever happen), and our only viable chance, the election.
I have one question. If this gunfight lasted seven hours where are all the dead terrorists? How many were killed? What happened to their bodies? Ok; three questions.
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.