According to reports from the British newspaper the Independent, the Obama administration was warned of potential attacks on U.S. embassies on the anniversary of 9/11 – and did nothing to stop them.
This, combined with the allegations that our Marines in Cairo were handcuffed on orders that they could not use ‘live ammunition’, makes the President’s failures in handling this situation even more dumbfounding.
The killings of the US ambassador to Libya and three of his staff were likely to have been the result of a serious and continuing security breach, The Independent can reveal.
American officials believe the attack was planned, but Chris Stevens had been back in the country only a short while and the details of his visit to Benghazi, where he and his staff died, were meant to be confidential.
The US administration is now facing a crisis in Libya. Sensitive documents have gone missing from the consulate in Benghazi and the supposedly secret location of the “safe house” in the city, where the staff had retreated, came under sustained mortar attack. Other such refuges across the country are no longer deemed “safe”.
Some of the missing papers from the consulate are said to list names of Libyans who are working with Americans, putting them potentially at risk from extremist groups, while some of the other documents are said to relate to oil contracts.
According to senior diplomatic sources, the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted, but no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and “lockdown”, under which movement is severely restricted.
The White House is denying allegations that they had warning of a planned attack on the embassies (h/t Hot Air).
The Obama administration is flatly denying a blaring British newspaper report that the U.S. diplomats in Libya were killed as a result of a “continuing security breach,” and that “credible information” about possible attacks had been ignored.
A U.S. official told POLITICO: “There’s no intelligence indicating that the attack in Benghazi was premeditated.”…
Shawn Turner, spokesman for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, emailed: “This is absolutely wrong. We are not aware of any actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent.”
Of course, they’re parsing words by specifically denying that their was intelligence on the attack in Benghazi. The Independent’s report simply states that their was credible evidence of an attack on ‘American missions’. Henceforth, security should have been heightened in all American interests abroad. But it wasn’t.
Further, their are actual indications that diplomats in Libya knew that something was afoot. As we reported Wednesday, one of the diplomats killed in the attack, Sean Smith, had expressed concerns for his safety through an online gaming forum.
But there was also a statement from Smith that seemed to hint that something was being planned against the Libyan embassy.
“We saw one of our ‘police’ that guard the compound taking pictures.”
Those actions prompted Smith to wonder about future conversations with his fellow gamers:
“Assuming we don’t die tonight.”
Those same police forces according to the Independent all scattered when the attacks began:
According to security sources the consulate had been given a “health check” in preparation for any violence connected to the 9/11 anniversary. In the event, the perimeter was breached within 15 minutes of an angry crowd starting to attack it at around 10pm on Tuesday night. There was, according to witnesses, little defence put up by the 30 or more local guards meant to protect the staff. Ali Fetori, a 59-year-old accountant who lives near by, said: “The security people just all ran away and the people in charge were the young men with guns and bombs.”
Wissam Buhmeid, the commander of the Tripoli government-sanctioned Libya’s Shield Brigade, effectively a police force for Benghazi, maintained that it was anger over the Mohamed video which made the guards abandon their post. “There were definitely people from the security forces who let the attack happen because they were themselves offended by the film; they would absolutely put their loyalty to the Prophet over the consulate. The deaths are all nothing compared to insulting the Prophet.”
There seems to be little doubt that the guards assigned to protect the embassy were involved in this coordinated attack. When the signal was given, they abandoned our men and women inside that embassy, leaving them to die.
The President has a lot of explaining to do – just as soon as he can tear himself away from those seemingly more important campaign fundraisers.
This absolutely can not be true. If even a sliver of it is however, multiple people need to be fired effective immediately.
Via the Washington Free Beacon:
U.S. Marines defending the American embassy in Egypt were not permitted by the State Department to carry live ammunition, limiting their ability to respond to attacks like those this week on the U.S. consulate in Cairo.
Ambassador to Egypt Anne Patterson “did not permit US Marine guards to carry live ammunition,” according to multiple reports on U.S. Marine Corps blog spotted by Nightwatch. “She neutralized any US military capability that was dedicated to preserve her life and protect the US Embassy.”
If true, the reports indicate that Patterson shirked her obligation to protect U.S. interests, Nightwatch states.
“She did not defend US sovereign territory and betrayed her oath of office,” the report states. “She neutered the Marines posted to defend the embassy, trusting the Egyptians over the Marines.”
That is beyond abhorrent if true.
While the media continues to focus on Mitt Romney’s statements regarding the disgraceful respon to the attacks by the Obama administration, keep this in mind – the President may be putting the security and safety of U.S. citizens in the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood-backed Egyptian security teams over the United States Marines.
Here’s a demonstration of the importance of reading the fine print when there is any new policy presented by this administration. The Shark Tank is reporting on a Marine who claims his combat pay has been eliminated despite being in a war zone, unless he or she is actively being shot at or in imminent danger.
President Obama’s latest policy outrage makes no attempt to hide his contempt for our military, as he is ordering that our troops serving overseas in war zones overseas are not to receive combat pay unless they are being shot at, or at risk of being injured by hostile aggression. A Marine who lives in Florida has just posted a note on Facebook which stated that he received a letter from his MyPay account that he would only be receiving his Hazard pay (Imminent Danger Pay) if he is actually in a hostile area and at risk of being shot at.
Here is the Marine’s statement (language):
So I just got a letter from MyPay (the way we get paid in the military), saying that I will only (receive) Combat Pay while deployed for the days that I take fire or am in a hostile area. Now, as an Infantry Marine, I’m constantly in a combat zone…it may not always be popping off, but for them to take that away from us is bullshit. Now, the aviation tech who sits on Camp Leatherneck, sure, I can see him not getting Combat Pay, but to take it away from the grunts, the ground pounders, the front line of defense…come on, Uncle Sam. You let the Liberals win a big one here… Marine from Florida
This particular Marine is apparently stationed in Afghanistan.
Essentially, our service men and women can be in a combat zone for a month (just an example), and if they are shot at on three of those days, they will only receive three days worth of combat pay.
Please read more at The Shark Tank…
On Friday, in analyzing Allen West’s response to the Marine video incident, we opined about the possibility of him being named to the GOP ticket as vice-president.
Should Mitt Romney win the nomination, he would be wise to “give West serious consideration as his running mate. It would give him credibility in areas such as foreign policy and national defense, as well as giving him credibility with staunch conservatives.”
For months West has downplayed that possibility. Last week however, he struck a different tone.
Via the Palm Beach Post:
… West offered a different response last week when Boca Raton public relations agent Barry Epstein popped the inevitable VP question on his internet TV show.
“I’ve always said that that’s something I’d have to pray about, I’d have to talk to my family about, make sure we make the right decision,” West began. “But if someone asks you to step up and serve your country, I’m not going to turn my back on my country.”
West added: “I’m not going to say no, but I doubt that I’m on anyone’s list for consideration.”
If any of the cream puff moderates would like to add a spine to their ticket, then West should most certainly be on their list for consideration.
Thank God for men like Allen West. The more I hear this great American speak, the more I think he is destined to attain an even greater role in the recovery of our country as a nation of morals, a nation of courage and conviction, and a nation that takes pride in its exceptionalism. Mitt Romney should give West serious consideration as his running mate. It would give him credibility in areas such as foreign policy and national defense, as well as giving him credibility with staunch conservatives.
In an e-mail to the Weekly Standard, former Army lieutenant colonel West, shows us once again that he and other men and women who have fought on the battlefield, understand what pompous pundits in the media will never understand.
“I have sat back and assessed the incident with the video of our Marines urinating on Taliban corpses. I do not recall any self-righteous indignation when our Delta snipers Shugart and Gordon had their bodies dragged through Mogadishu. Neither do I recall media outrage and condemnation of our Blackwater security contractors being killed, their bodies burned, and hung from a bridge in Fallujah.”
“All these over-emotional pundits and armchair quarterbacks need to chill. Does anyone remember the two Soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division who were beheaded and gutted in Iraq?”
“The Marines were wrong. Give them a maximum punishment under field grade level Article 15 (non-judicial punishment), place a General Officer level letter of reprimand in their personnel file, and have them in full dress uniform stand before their Battalion, each personally apologize to God, Country, and Corps videotaped and conclude by singing the full US Marine Corps Hymn without a teleprompter.”
“As for everyone else, unless you have been shot at by the Taliban, shut your mouth, war is hell.”
And this, ladies and gentleman, is just another demonstration of how United States Marines are BAD ASS.
Via the Daily Mail:
A U.S. Marine officer has told the incredible story of how he survived a street robbery by plugging bullet holes in his body with his fingers.
Lieutenant Colonel Karl Trenker, 29, of Miramar, Florida, was shot three times as he confronted two men who had stolen a gold chain from him.
He said he used his battlefield training from Afghanistan and Iraq to stem blood from chest wounds by shoving his finger into the gaping wound.
‘I put my fingers in the holes to stop the bleeding and ran back to the truck and told my kids I had been shot, but not to worry.’
The armed assailants have been arrested and now face attempted murder charges.
Lieutenant Colonel Karl Trenker – Calm in the face of fire…