Please Hit

Folks, This is a Free Site and will ALWAYS stay that way. But the only way I offset my expenses is through the donations of my readers. PLEASE Consider Making a Donation to Keep This Site Going. SO HIT THE TIP JAR (it's on the left-hand column).

Wednesday, September 4, 2013

New Book: State Dept. Knew Benghazi Was Terrorism Within 25 MINUTES!

A week from today is September 11th, the twelfth anniversary of the terror attacks of 9/11/01, and the first anniversary of the attack on the US Mission in Benghazi where four Americans were killed and many others were injured.

In the year since the Benghazi attack  Americans have wanted to know the truth about what happened in Libya that night, only to be blocked by an administration that should want answers.

A new book has reveled that the State Department, FBI and Pentagon all received cables within 25 minutes of the start of the attack that the Benghazi mission was under siege and that it was terrorism. There was no mention at the time of the Administration-created protest of a lousy you-tube video.
In “Under Fire, the Untold Story of the Attack in Benghazi,” it is revealed that an unidentified security official in the Benghazi compound protecting Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens messaged the U.S. embassy in Tripoli: “Benghazi under fire, terrorist attack.” Stevens and three others died that night.

Twenty-five minutes after it began, the operation center at State received an electronic cable announcing the attack, according to authors Fred Burton, a former State Diplomatic Security agent and Samuel Katz, an author and expert on international special operations and counterterrorism.
That description seems to agree with a statement made in July by ousted head of US Forces in Africa.  General Carter Ham was one of the speakers at the  Aspen Security Forum and said it quickly became clear the assault on the American consulate in Benghazi last year was a terrorist attack and not a spontaneous demonstration.
"It became apparent to all of us quickly that this was not a demonstration, this was a violent attack," Ham said.  
When asked whether he specifically thought it was a terrorist attack, Ham said, "I don't know that that was my first reaction. But pretty quickly as we started to gain understanding within the hours after the initiation of the attack, yes. And at the command I don't think anyone thought differently."
The claims in the book, "Under Fire," were based on interviews of those in the battle and told to authors  Fred Burton, a former State Diplomatic Security agent and Samuel Katz, an author and expert on international special operations and counterterrorism.
Under Fire, while an unbiased timeline about the heroism of the Diplomatic Security agents, is sure to stoke more criticism of the administration’s handling of the politically-embarrassing attack. It provides a wealth of information that paints a night-long war at the poorly secured consulate and CIA annex that could not be mistaken for anything but a planned terrorist attack by men in vehicles displaying “the black flag of the jihad” and armed with AK-47s and rocket launchers.
It gives details of what drones controlled far from Benghazi flown over the two installations saw — armed attackers, not movie protesters. Sources told Katz and Burton that Images of mortar fire from a Predator drone left operators that night believing that the attackers were “Libyan military veterans of veterans of the jihadist campaigns in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen or Derna.”
The book does not paint a very flattering picture of our "friends."
The book reveals that none of America’s allies in the city provided any help. Many in the neighborhood watched the U.S. facility burn, some filming it on their cellular phones. Italy’s top diplomat “allegedly watched the attack unfold from his vantage point, a reserved table at the Venezia Cafe.”

It concludes: “So much about the night just didn’t make sense, but one question everyone was asking was, ‘Where were the good guys?’ Two and a half hours of war had been waged in the city of Benghazi and everyone in the know — and many who weren’t — were aware that the U.S. presence in the city was under full-scale attack. There were no cavalry charge of men in white hats eager to save the day and rescue the besieged American positions. None of the militias — not even the one on the State Department payroll — had mobilized their forces to mount a large-scale and deterring show of force.”
The issues with the Benghazi attack are many. Why did it happen? What was Stevens doing in Benghazi?, Why were the calls for more security before the attack ignored?, Why were the cries for help during the attack ignored? And one remaining in the background during the hearings but should be at the top of the list; Were the American people lied to? And if they were who was involved in the cover-up?

With all due respect to former Secretary of State makes a big difference, America deserves to know the truth and why the truth was kept from them for so long!

No comments: