Articles tagged with: Ambassador Christopher Stevens
Per Secretary of the Navy instruction (SECNAVINST) 5720.42F, expedited processing is granted only when a requester can demonstrate a compelling need for the requested information. A compelling need exists under any of these circumstances: (1) when failure to obtain the records could reasonably be expected to pose an imminent threat to the life or physical safety of an individual; (2) when the information requested concerns a breaking news story of general public interest; or (3) when failure to provide the information will result in loss of substantial due process rights.
“The response time to any emergency is predicated by many factors such as time of day, advance notice or no-notice, current activities, and the locations of off-duty members of the detachments. The MSGs conduct a minimum of two no-notice drills per month, but most detachments conduct more drills than the minimum standard. The MSGs train to respond to protests, mass casualty/bombings, intruders, and fire and bomb threats/searches …”
“Yes, ‘Threat Letters’ have been confirmed to exist for a while now. The [United Nations] local staff, for example, were issued with such letters and instructed even to stop collaborating with any U.S. affiliated ventures or programs. These staff stopped working now till the situation is fully assessed. I also understand that the Basra Palace is being shelled almost daily now. Beyond this, it is confirmed that some families wake up in the morning and find threat letters by their door steps and they comply by selling off their property and leaving their places instantly.”
The immediate concern for the Obama administration after the attack in Benghazi was to cover up the connection with Iran and Syria to Ansar al Sharia and Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) according to my Benghazi whistleblower source. The attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens, was not a terrorist attack; it was a nation-state attack, an escalation of war, and an opening of a new front in the tit for tat conflict with Iran and by extension their proxy partner Russia that is now being fought in Syria.
Meanwhile, back in Obama’s America, don’t call Libya’s weapon recovery program “buyback” that then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton funded using $40 million of your tax dollars after the Obama–Clinton regime toppled Col. Muammar Gaddafi because if you do, the State Department will deny it exists. You can however refer to it as the MANPAD program—Man-Portable-Air-Defense Systems or shoulder-fired-anti-aircraft missiles that the U.S. is “helping” Libya to recover and secure among its weapon stockpiles.
According to a well-placed source that was working with the staff at the Libyan Transitional National Council (TNC) which was established after Col. Muammar Gaddafi was killed, at that time, the talk there was very surprising. Apparently the Libyans thought America had only a handful of people in Eastern Libya and Benghazi. They were surprised to learn the real number.
Yes, the talking points were altered to mislead America and protect Hillary but Benghazi is bigger than Hillary. The talking points were also edited to protect the administration’s policy and that is what needs to be exposed. They like to arm “rebels”—just don’t call them Islamic extremists as we witnessed in Egypt and Libya.
These people needed to be put in motion, that’s the first deception. They werenever put in motion. The Obama administration did not lift a pinky finger to put options in play. Sounds to me like CYA. The whole point was they did not give these guys an option—and that in itself is a failure of command at every level.
“In addition, the House Armed Services Committee conducted a review of air assets available to respond to Benghazi. No U.S. government element refused or denied requests for emergency assistance during the crisis. The evidence also does not show there were armed air assets above Benghazi at any time or that any such assets were called off from assisting U.S. personnel on the ground. According to witness testimony, the security officials on the ground did use laser sights, but they did so as an escalatory demonstration of force in an effort to deter some attackers. They were not lasing targets for air assets..”
Benghazi, Media & Book News, U.S. News, World »
We still do not know what Ambassador Christopher Stevens was doing in Benghazi or what his meeting with Turkish Consul General Ali Sait Akin was about. We still do not know what time his body was recovered or how he died. We still do not know who issued the stand down orders declining to help Americans under attack.
Benghazi, Media & Book News, U.S. News, World »
Benghazi, Media & Book News, U.S. News »
The best part of political theater, otherwise known as the ‘ah ha’ moment for truth seekers, can often be found when the show ends. In this epic tragedy, called the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations Hearing: Benghazi: The Attack and the Lesson Learned, held on December 20, 2012, starring Senator John Kerry, as the Chairman, it happened right after Kerry’s dramatic closing statement concluded. The lights dimmed, the press started packing up their gear, the stars/senators, in crisp suits, with their shine-free faces courtesy of heavy pancake make-up, exited stage left. It was a quick moment but a telling one. Did you catch it?
“The Board found that Ambassador Stevens made the decision to travel to Benghazi independently of Washington, per standard practice. Timing for his trip was driven in part by commitments in Tripoli, as well as a staffing gap between principal officers in Benghazi. Plans for the Ambassador’s trip provided for minimal close protection security support and were not shared thoroughly with the Embassy’s country team, who were not fully aware of planned movements off compound. The Ambassador did not see a direct threat of an attack of this nature … His status as the leading U.S. government advocate on Libya policy, and his expertise on Benghazi in particular, caused Washington to give unusual deference to his judgments.”
While it might sound callous to some people, there is very good reason for Ambassador Bolton’s skepticism considering the last time Hillary avoided testifying it was due to ‘scheduling conflicts’ which included a wine tasting in Australia. But it goes much deeper than that. Hillary turned dodging indictments and perjury charges into an art form during the Clinton era. The question is will lawmakers on both sides of the aisle finally hold her accountable or allow Hillary to continue making a mockery out of the rule of law?
What you witnessed from the Obama-Clinton regime is called “cohesive strategy.” We have seen that cover-up tactic before. It was successfully used by the Clinton White House during the investigations of the Clinton era as documented in The Whistleblower: How the Clinton White Stayed in Power to Reemerge in the Obama White House and on the World Stage. Additionally, it notably appears in my latest book, Following Orders: The Death of Vince Foster, Clinton White House Lawyer.