by
Lori Wallach Boxer
Doug Hagmann wrote a great piece today (see the link to “The Hidden Real
Truth About Benghazi” below). It struck me because many of my own
thoughts and suspicions about this incident were validated by his
words. I read it a couple of times, and want to bypass some of the
‘weeds’ and list in a sort-of chrono order the points he makes,
interspersed with some of my own comments.
1. Our Benghazi facility was not a consulate; it was the largest of
our CIA operations centers in the Middle East which served as the
logistics headquarters for arms and weapons being shipped out of
post-Qaddafi Libya.
2. Our personnel there, aside from other routine things they may have
been doing, were engaged in covert arms and weapons running from Libya
to anti-Assad rebels in Syria via Turkey.
3. Russia was aware of the operation and warned America against working
to destabilize Syria because (a) it would endanger Russia’s own
national security interests, and (b) they knew that as demonic, despotic
and tyrannical as Assad may be, his forced ouster would leave yet
another Mubarak-like and Qadaffi-like vacuum, and that the Muslim
Brotherhood would move in and orchestrate more Islamic chaos across the
region. (And Putin would be right about that.)
4. Ambassador Stevens was in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 to meet
with his Turkish counterpart, who reportedly warned Stevens that the
operation was compromised. The reason they met in person was so that his
Turkish colleague could show Stevens overhead satellite images, taken
by the Russians, of unmistakable surveillance footage of the anti-Assad
“rebels” being shown how to load chemical payloads onto missiles inside
Turkey near the border of Syria—weapons that were shipped from Libya by
the CIA in conjunction with various Muslim Brotherhood rebel groups;
—weapons that could be used as a “false flag” type of operation to
“set-up” Assad by making it appear that he was using these weapons on
forces dedicated to his overthrow. In that scenario, the projected
collective reaction of the international community would be swift and
punishing, and the world would demand Assad’s overthrow. NATO would
then be used to expedite his ouster, and Russia’s moral position within
the international community would be weakened. So, the purpose of that
Turkish diplomat’s in-person meeting was to show Ambassador Stevens that
the operation was compromised and that they had to stop. You can bet
that Panetta and the highest levels of the administration knew that the
operation was compromised; Stevens would have reported that to them
after the Turkish diplomat left.
5. The attack started not too long after the Turkish diplomat’s departure—no doubt the timing of which wasn’t a coincidence.
6. The Obama administration asserts that the attack in Benghazi was
conducted by a group of rebels acting alone. If that was true, our
military assets, located just an hour or two away by air, could have
easily handled them in short order and rescued our personnel. So why
was there no rescue operation?
7. No rescue effort was made because the attack was not conducted by a
group of rebels; it was a nation/state coordinated and sponsored attack
in response to our covert operation in Libya and arming the anti-Assad
Syrian opposition—and Panetta and everyone else knew it. They also knew
that the nation/state sponsored attack teams were lying in wait for
U.S. rescue forces to arrive, which is the reason the fight did not end
sooner. From signal communication intercepts, they knew those
nation/state attack teams were present but didn’t know exactly where all
of them were and that was the Obama administration dilemma. So, now,
that gives deeper meaning to Panetta’s statement about why no rescue
attempt was made, and why Dougherty/Woods was told three times to stand
down: “…the basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into
harm’s way without knowing what’s going on…” Would Obama-the-weak risk
deploying a rescue team to Benghazi, only to end up with another Black
Hawk down type scenario, especially so close to an election? Remember,
this is the president who for months kept wavering and vacillating on
giving the OK to get OBL, and even with all that time STILL couldn’t do
it (Panetta had to make the call). So, c’mon .. you don’t think he’s
capable of actually making a tough call to deploy military assets in
such a tight and fast-moving time frame, do you? I mean, Valerie
Jarrett and David Axelrod could never allow that, don’t you know? After
all, what’s ‘just’ 4 lives when you compare it to the possibility of
another 4 years?
8. As daylight approached with no response from the U.S. and no aid to
the Americans under fire, the nation/state attack teams completed their
mission in the remaining cover of darkness … killing four patriots.
Bottom line:
We were using anti-Assad forces to advance our objectives in Syria.
Russia was using Iranian-backed forces to protect theirs.
If you’re keeping score, put a check-mark in the Russian/Iranian column.
No comments:
Post a Comment