Articles tagged with: Ambassador Christopher Stevens
According to an email obtained under FOIA dated September 12, 2012, 15:06 [3:06 PM] from REDACTED at the Navy’s [Office of Legislative Affairs] hours after the Benghazi attack: “We are now receiving the second level of questions, the first of which is problematic absent some information.”
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. Updated with a State Department FOIA release
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.
Libya has become dangerously unstable. It is a land loaded with armed fighters affiliated with al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood. Who do we have to thank for that? The Obama-Clinton regime.
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.
“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..”