« the solution to the "stand down" controversy .... barack obama did not have to tell the military to "stand down" on any rescue mission, because he had never told them to "stand up" ... | Main | two u.s. senators gain access to benghazi attacker held in tunisia .... someone looks for truth .... amazing .... »

November 02, 2012


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Jewel Atkins

A couple of Republican Senators went to Tunisia and negotiated for one of the terrorists that appeared in the Benghazi video. Fancy that!

john jay


will you please explain all of that.

who were the senators?

when did they go to tunisia?

and, what do you mean, "they negotiated for one of the terrorists ...?"

what is going on here, and will you please explain, and where may i find any kind of news account of this?

what in the hell kind of world is this turning into?

who can we trust, if anyone?


p.s. will you please elaborate. please.


There are so many issues that it is hard to know where to start...

First - An Ambassador is a representative not just of the Nation but also the person appointed by the President, thus a personal representative of the Head of State, as well. An attack on an Ambassador is an affair of State, and an assassination an act of war.

Second - US Soil via the extra-territorial enclave was attacked, which is also an act of war.

Third - INTEL was left unguarded, laying around for anyone, including the enemy, to find. If you can't rescue the Ambassador, then the sites must be sanitized. A specialized military team would be tasked for that and 'to make sure' there would be additional steps taken for anything that was buried (a number of methods are available for that). If a military team could not get there then there is sanitizing from the air. When an act of war has happened and involves valuable information to the US, the first job of the President is to ensure that nothing critical falls into the hands of the enemy. Not to do so is a dereliction of duty. With two acts of war having taken place, why wasn't (and why hasn't) the sites in question been sanitized? Especially if one of them was a CIA site.

Fourth - Where was the concern by the President for his personal representative to Libya? Ambassador Stephens is appointed with consent of the Senate, so it requires a bit of input by the President to get that done. And just what were Stephens' qualifications, anyways? Who was this man? What awards did he get? What was his background? And just why was he meeting up with the Turks in Libya? Where is the personal outrage by the President? Or at least feigned outrage?

Fifth - Leaving aside Stephens' implied CIA work (which goes with the territory) one of the stated goals of the US was to secure the MANPADs and WMD material in Libya. Some of the WMD materials were secured, but 3/4 of the MANPADs went walkabout. They are critical as any ground force without air cover needs a way to counter enemy air, and was the reason that NATO via the UN assisted the Libyan 'rebels'. Soviet SA MANPADs have since shown up in Syria in the hands of the 'rebels' there, via Turkey. Why is the US helping to shuttle MANPADs around the Middle East? Are we unconcerned with the presence of AQIM in Libya and Syria? AQIM has demonstrated capability to get arms from the Libyan debacle and move them to Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Burkina Faso and other places, so is that not a concern to the US that our activities are resulting in the spread of arms to al Qaeda?

All of this before you can even get to the cover-up... and it appears there is a lot to distract the American people from and cover up.

Neglect of duty at this level is not by accident, considering how al Qaeda is already fighting us wherever they can. Even if it is completely and utterly unintentional, the shift of arms to al Qaeda and the non-response to their provocative acts of war against the US is horrifying.

al Qaeda has been consciously carrying out The Management of Savagery doctrine and it just taken at face value of what is going on with the so-called 'Arab Spring', Libya and now Syria, it is a successful utilization of a primitive doctrine aided and abetted by US negligence (at best) and complicity (at worse).

This stinks, and the assassination of our Ambassador isn't even the worst of it.

john jay

a jacksonian:

and exceedingly well thought out and spot on comment.

as to your third point.--

it is fact that it took the united state 8 days to gain access for the f.b.i. to go to the embassy.

my guess is, it took this long for the libyans to get the iranians, syrians, russians and chinese out of and off the embassy grounds. may as well toss in the frenchies, as they are about as hostile as anyone in the region.

the incompetence of the obama administration simply transfers in purposeful conduct, when you look at it in all its facets.

the obama administration is not a bunch of keystone cops, it is a 5th column.

i would imagine that people in the military and in intel will be seething about this for a good long time.


john jay

" .... simply translates into purposeful conduct ... " is what i meant to type.

don't know how that other sentence got in there. :)

john jay

john jay

this note from "captains journal" a very fine blog. i've reprinted it here, withe the writers permission, because i wanted to get a very good link in front of you.

john jay


Good job, John. And in followup to the recent Fox News article, I
raise the issue of forces again.


The comments to this entry are closed.