We sure need some here.
FReepathon Day 50!
Posted on 11/19/2012 1:08:20 PM PST by maggief
In October Paula Broadwell told an audience that the CIA in Benghazi "had taken a couple of Libyan militia members prisoner" at its secret annex.
The CIA flatly denied the claim, saying that the agency "has not had detention authority since January 2009, when Executive Order 13491 was issued. Any suggestion that the Agency is still in the detention business is uninformed and baseless."
Marc Thiessen of the American Enterprise Institute points out that the denial is factually incorrect because while Obama ordered the closure of all CIA detention facilities (i.e. “Black Sites”), the order states that it "does not refer to facilities used only to hold people on a short-term, transitory basis."
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
Just what we thought, so why the secrecy?
As usual with Dems, it depends on what the meaning of “is” is.
Annex pics of “prisoners”/detainees?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/89009379@N04/8147136686/in/photostream/
It’s because one of Obama’s big boasts has been no more renditions, foreign prison facilities, etc. and no more sending prisoners to Guantanamo. This means that not only has it been going on (and I don’t see any reason why it shouldn’t be, but remember that this was one of Bambi’ s big pledges to the terrorists there and to the lefties here), but it proves the point that these people should have been at Guantanamo, where their buddies couldn’t have come and broken them out, as they did.
But how did SHE know, and why would she reveal it?
Assuming that this is true.
Her mention of it was the first time I had ever heard about it, did I miss earlier reports of this?
I suppose the campaign staff will morph into the Legacy committee....
And suppression of unfriendly facts will continue....with assistance from the friendly establishment media.
http://www.israpundit.com/archives/50224
October 26, 2012
According to a source on the ground at the time of the attack, the team inside the CIA annex had captured three Libyan attackers and was forced to hand them over to the Libyans. U.S. officials do not know what happened to those three attackers and whether they were released by the Libyan forces.
I was aware of the captive(s) at the time of the attack, but I assumed that they were taken in as they were the attackers.
When I heard PB's speech, I got the impression they were prisoners that were being held well before the attack took place and were the reason for the attack its self.
Gack!! I'm confused!
Thanks, Ernest!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2961245/posts
Broadwell told a Denver audience in October: “Now I don’t know if a lot of you heard this, but the CIA annex [to the consulate] had taken a couple of Libyan militia members prisoner and they think that the attack on the consulate was an effort to try to get these prisoners back.”
I read that the attack may have been two-phased; the consulate for Stevens and later the annex for the prisoners.
Everyone is making like she needed Petraeus to get info.
Thanks you two.
May the truth prevail!
My understanding is that she currently holds no security clearance and hasn't for a long time.
This whole thing stinks to high heaven.
Several things don’t make sense from the reports.
1) Obama wasn’t interested enough after the NCA meeting to issue CBA or inquire if anything else was needed, but he made an unscheduled call to Netanyahu about the time Stevens was being killed by smoke inhalation.
2) Only 4 people were killed of some 30 or more in the compounds. 2 apparently by smoke inhalation by accident from mob mayhem and explicitly the only 2 actively resisting with firepower, the 2 exSEALs, not by small arms, nor by grenades, but by mortar rounds, fired at nighttime, after displacing, in a crowded Annex under direct observation while able to displace to secondary positions.
3) All the others were able to leave not only the compound, but the city by not one, but 2 planes by 0830, while also being able to track down the Ambassador’s body when his whereabouts wasn’t fully known until dawn (about 0600).
4) Administration public announcements by multiple parties follow a 24 year old’s perspective of worldly affairs without any wherewithal, claiming the activity is all due to a anti-Muslim video, when there were no protests at 20:30 Benghazi time, and the Ambassador was fully exposed at the location of the attack about an hour preceding it.
Point 3 I can understand if performed by well disciplined organized unit, trained to respond to fluid situations and simply left unopposed. Reports seem consistent,...but not with 1 and 2.
Point 4 I can understand if this were a preplanned operation/ coordinated attack planned by and for a company to regimental sized operating force, but definitely not division or larger scale operation. It wasn’t national league intel.
Point 1 indicates either Obama and the NCA
a) didn’t trust their intel or
b) didn’t care about any of the staff or Ambassador
c) didn’t want an international terrorist event on the anniversary of 9/11
d) were worried the security of other operations had been compromised.
e) were searching for Israel to conduct a rescue and attack Muslims in the process.
Point 2 indicates the attackers had
a) liaison with friendlies or
b) vastly superior intelligence and information and
c) better high tech target acquisition on station than did the US or
d) the 2 ex-SEALs were KIA from friendly fire or directly targeted by friendlies.
e) also Pt 2 indicates the attackers were not violently predisposed to kill all Americans (because all but 4 made it out alive and quickly). Instead, during hours of darkness and fog of war, were able to explicitly kill the only 2 exSEALs not being controlled by Washington. (That’s very hard to do.)
First this block buster tid bit out of the report below, which has flying under the radar:
"According to multiple intelligence sources who have served in Benghazi, there were more than just Libyan militia members who were held and interrogated by CIA contractors at the CIA annex in the days prior to the attack. Other prisoners from additional countries in Africa and the Middle East were brought to this location.
The Libya annex was the largest CIA station in North Africa, and two weeks prior to the attack, the CIA was preparing to shut it down. Most prisoners, according to British and American intelligence sources, had been moved two weeks earlier."
Now back to the Fox news story:
Petraeus mistress may have revealed classified information at Denver speech on real reason for Libya attack
By Jennifer Griffin, Adam Housley
Published November 12, 2012
FoxNews.com
Biographer Paula Broadwell could be facing questions about whether she revealed classified information about the Libya attack that she was privy to due to her relationship with then-CIA Director David Petraeus.
At an Oct. 26 speech at her alma mater, the University of Denver, on the same day that Fox News reported that the rescue team at the CIA annex had been denied help, Broadwell was asked about Petraeus’ handling of the Benghazi situation.
Her response was reported originally by Israel’s Arutz Sheva and Foreign Policy’s Blake Hounshell.
Broadwell quoted the Fox News report when she said: “The facts that came out today were that the ground forces there at the CIA annex, which is different from the consulate, were requesting reinforcements."
Broadwell went on to explain more sensitive details from the Benghazi attacks, particularly concerning what the real cause might have been.
“Now, I don't know if a lot of you heard this, but the CIA annex had actually, um, had taken a couple of Libyan militia members prisoner and they think that the attack on the consulate was an effort to try to get these prisoners back. So that's still being vetted.”
In the original Oct. 26 Fox News report, sources at the annex said that the CIA’s Global Response Staff had handed over three Libyan militia members to the Libyan authorities who came to rescue the 30 Americans in the early hours of Sept. 12.
A well-placed Washington source confirms to Fox News that there were Libyan militiamen being held at the CIA annex in Benghazi and that their presence was being looked at as a possible motive for the staged attack on the consulate and annex that night.
According to multiple intelligence sources who have served in Benghazi, there were more than just Libyan militia members who were held and interrogated by CIA contractors at the CIA annex in the days prior to the attack. Other prisoners from additional countries in Africa and the Middle East were brought to this location.
The Libya annex was the largest CIA station in North Africa, and two weeks prior to the attack, the CIA was preparing to shut it down. Most prisoners, according to British and American intelligence sources, had been moved two weeks earlier.
The CIA, though, categorically denied these allegations, saying: “The CIA has not had detention authority since January 2009, when Executive Order 13491 was issued. Any suggestion that the agency is still in the detention business is uninformed and baseless.”
Broadwell’s affair with Petraeus was likely known to Holly Petraeus, according to family friends. The FBI reportedly knew about it months beforehand and White House Counterterrorism adviser John Brennan reportedly was aware that there was a relationship as early as the summer of 2011.
The White House strongly denied that Brennan was aware so early.
“It is irresponsible and flat out wrong for Fox News to run an anonymous, unsubstantiated, and blatantly false accusation, as Mr. Brennan was first made aware of the issue last Wednesday," spokesman Tommy Vietor said.
Broadwell, whose affair with Petraeus reportedly ended earlier this year, continued to serve as an informal spokesman for the CIA director. She suggests in her Denver speech that Petraeus knew almost immediately that the attack was a terror attack -- possibly to free militia members.
Well, with all these lawyers at the White House, I have yet to hear an explanation from them saying what the motive was for this raid other than it was some movie. They’ve gone back on the movie story, but they still haven’t come out with a motive for these thugs to do this.
So any leader of a foreign country has the authority to have their intelligence agencies imprison Americans within the US?
Thanks Ernest.
I believe Al Jazeera reported it this past summer.
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.