Investigative journalist and radio host: The three imperative questions NOT being asked about Benghazi
Title: The REAL Benghazi Story: What the White House and Hillary Don’t Want You to Know
Author: Aaron Klein
New York Times bestselling author, investigative journalist and radio host Aaron Klein has a new book out titled “The REAL Benghazi Story: What the White House and Hillary Don’t Want You to Know,” in which Klein does yeoman’s work in combing through the thousands of pages of available government documents to chronicle the numerous breathtaking but oft-underreported facts on Benghazi, identify the various inconsistencies between and among the testimony of the various parties involved, and ask the questions begging to be answered.
Klein in fact devotes a whole section of his book to a comprehensive set of suggested questions he believes must be pursued by the Benghazi Special Investigative Committee led by Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC). In an extensive interview with Klein, we had the opportunity to ask him what three questions in particular heretofore NOT being asked must be asked. Klein asserted:
One: Why did we hire the February 17th [Martyrs Brigade] militia [to defend the Benghazi special mission compound]? Number two…were there any weapons transfers through this facility? And were the weapons transfers involved in any way, shape, or form, in the attack in the first place…Third: Why were no special forces sent? What were they [our forces] really doing on the night of the attacks on a “training mission,” in Croatia.”
On this third question, Klein elaborated:
There’s something called the C110…forty man special training force. They’re supposed to be maintained to respond to diplomatic emergencies…The anniversary of the 9/11 attacks you would think is the one night…in the entire calendar…that everybody knows jihadists are most motivated to attack. So why would you take the main force to respond to all such emergencies in Africa, and put them, that very night, on a so-called training mission in Croatia.
And I ask…there was a weapons shipment — hundreds of tons by the way — that was going through Croatia at that exact time…You would think if the United States is shipping these weapons, somebody has to protect them…So, was that special force protecting the weapons the night of the attack?
To Klein’s point, the New York Times has reported on significant weapons shipment efforts — to Syrian “rebels” by way of other Arab governments — running through Croatia all throughout 2012. In a March 2013 article titled “Arms Airlift to Syria Rebels Expands, With Aid From C.I.A.,” the Times notes:
From offices at secret locations, American intelligence officers have helped the Arab governments [based on military cargo flight records, including Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Qatar] shop for weapons, including a large procurement from Croatia, and have vetted rebel commanders and groups [in Syria] to determine who should receive the weapons as they arrive, according to American officials speaking on the condition of anonymity. The C.I.A. declined to comment on the shipments or its role in them.
This portion of our interview, which continues with Klein going into further detail on the role of theFebruary 17th Martyrs Brigade, begins at 21:11 below.
During the extensive interview with Klein, we also had a chance to discuss a number of other issues including:
- Why Klein believes that, echoing past Blaze Books guest Ken Timmerman, Benghazi represents “Iran contra times infinity” and “the Fast ‘N Furious of the Middle East”
- What America was doing in Benghazi in the first place
- “Moderate” vs. “Extremist” groups in the Middle East, and how America effectively created “an Al Qaeda army” through our efforts related to Libya and Syria
- How and why the State Department created such an unsafe situation in Benghazi, and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s direct link to such security lapses, especially with respect to the so-called “colocation” waiver
- The serious issues as to the veracity of the narrative regarding what happened to Ambassador Christopher Stevens on the night of Sept. 11, 2012
- Klein’s take on the first day of Benghazi hearings
- The broader significance of Benghazi in context of America’s foreign policy in the Middle East
- And much more
Department Of Justice, Media Matters Coordinate To Attack Reporter
Since when does the Department of Justice coordinate with an obviously liberal media organization to go after a conservative reporter? It’s official: At least since 2011.
In email exchanges obtained by The Daily Caller in two separate FOIA requests, a coordinated effort to slam Breitbart News reporter Matthew Boyleemerged. To be sure, Boyle is not a reporter who is beloved by other reporters and he’s been critiqued on any number of matters that include his youthful chipmunk cheeks, his previously questionable Twitter avatar and his TV skills. But his beat was DOJ and Eric Holder and shouldn’t a reporter be commended for going after an enterprising story or two on his beat?
Even Slate‘s Dave Weigel agreed with that sentiment. “I see Media Matters giving Holder a huzzah for calling the Caller out,” he wrote in November 2011. “But calling it out for what? Are news organizations not allowed to enterprise stories by asking people whether they think someone should resign? News organizations do this all the time. The Caller’s ‘sin’ seems to be doing it with no back-up from the rest of the press.”
And yet, all this media scheming from the Department of Justice.
As revealed in the FOIA docs, Media Matters Deputy Research Director Matt Gertz sent a post concerning the NRA’s growing contributions to Holder’s critics to DOJ spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler, Holder’s top press flack who resigned in March, 2013. She replied, “Thanks, you know boyle has been doing robo calls to top members right? This is campaign mounted by daily caller. He has called 60 offices and gotten to 8 last week.” Gertz replied, “Yeah, that was what my original piece on the story was about.”
At the time of the exchange, Boyle worked for The Daily Caller.
Years later in February, 2013, Boyle wrote a story for Breitbart News about Schmaler’s “colluding” with “far left wing” Media Matters to attack him, lawmakers and other members of the media. Funny enough, Boyle attempted to seek comment from Schmaler on why she resigned. He wrote, “Schmaler has not answered when asked by Breitbart News whether her resignation has anything to do with the coming hearings on DOJ collusion with groups like Media Matters.”
Weirdly, it takes two years (or longer) for DOJ to respond to FOIA requests.
Further perplexing: TheDC FOIA’d the Justice Department for all mentions of Matthew Boyle in agency communications. The specific request was ”All records relating to and about Matthew Boyle.” Carmen Mallon, chief of staff for DOJ, replied in a formal letter saying that no such records existed despite the above exchange between Schmaler and Gertz.
“For your information, neither this Office nor any of these senior leadership offices of the Department typically maintain records on individuals,” she wrote. “As such, this office would not maintain the type of records you are seeking.
“However, in an effort to be of assistance, please be advised that a search has been conducted of the electronic database of the Departmental Executive Secretariat, which is the official records repository for the Offices of the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, and Associate Attorney General, and no records subject to FOIA were located. A search has also been conducted in the Office of Information Policy and no records subject to the FOIA were located.”
Gee, thanks Carmen. Except that the records concerning DOJ and Boyle were maintained, located and sent.
Please be advised. If you’re the DOJ and want to get some bad press out there on a reporter who may or may not be a thorn in your side, Media Matters is on speed dial.
Above: ISIS fighters in Mosul, Iraq
by Brian Hayes | Top Right News
Congressman Jason Chaffetz broke this stunning news Wednesday that four known terrorists were apprehended at the US border in Texas on September 10 – the day before the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.
Chaffetz questioned Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson on whether he is “aware of any apprehensions of suspected or known terrorists.”
Johnson dodged the question.
Rep. Chaffetz told Megyn Kelly there were four terrorists arrested crossing the US border in Texas on September 10.
“There were actually four individuals trying to cross through the Texas border, who were apprehended at two different stations, that do have ties to known terrorist organizations in the Middle East.”
At press time, Chaffetz’ staff were unable to confirm to Top Right News what nation from which these terrorists had originated, but noted that DHS had confirmed to Congressional intelligence members last week that ISIS is planning an infiltration of our Southern border.
Benghazi: The language in an email from Obama aide Ben Rhodes used to prep Susan Rice is virtually identical to one issued by the former secretary of state 36 hours before — the first public official to mention the video.
One of the first questions we hope the Select Committee on Benghazi asks is who gave Ben Rhodes the authority and the content for the Sept. 14, 2012, email from him, an assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser, on how to prep Susan Rice for her talk show tour on Sept. 16 blaming a video for the terrorist attack.
Either Rhodes is the most powerful communications assistant in American history or he was instructed by superiors in the administration to launch the video lie.
A clue may be found in a State Department press release that night and in a comparison of emails sent 36 hours apart by Clinton and Rhodes.
At 10 p.m. Washington, D.C., time on Sept. 11, 2012, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton received a call from the man she wants to replace, President Obama, while terrorists were in the midst of massacring Americans in Benghazi, Libya.
The call came more than six hours after the attack started, more than an hour before Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were killed, and literally just minutes before Hillary first released a statement linking the slaughter to “inflammatory material posted on the Internet,” a reference to an anti-Muslim video on YouTube.
Amidst new revelations concerning emails that show the Obama administration conspired to create a phony narrative around the Benghazi attacks, the true purpose behind the cover-up is being obfuscated – the fact that an annex near the U.S. embassy was being used by the CIA to transfer surface to air missiles to terrorists in Syria.
House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa today issued a subpoena for Secretary of State John Kerry to testify before the committee on May 21 about Benghazi following the release of emails by Judicial Watch which show that the White House crafted a deceptive policy to falsely frame the attack as a spontaneous protest sparked by a YouTube video in order to protect Barack Obama’s image.
Lost in the haze of claims and counter claims is the real reason why the White House is desperate to prevent the attack from coming under any further scrutiny – because it would likely reveal an arms smuggling scandal that could rival Iran-Contra.
In May last year, Senator Rand Paul was one of the first to speculate that the truth behind Benghazi was linked to an illicit arms smuggling program that saw weapons being trafficked to terrorists in Syria as part of the United States’ proxy war against the Assad regime.
“I’ve actually always suspected that, although I have no evidence, that maybe we were facilitating arms leaving Libya going through Turkey into Syria,” Paul told CNN, adding that he “never….quite understood the cover-up — if it was intentional or incompetence”.
At the same time it emerged that the U.S. State Department had hired an Al-Qaeda offshoot organization, the February 17th Martyrs Brigade, to “defend” the Benghazi Mission months before the attack.
Senator Paul was vindicated less than three months later when it emerged that the CIA had been subjecting its operatives to monthly polygraph tests in an effort to keep a lid on details of the arms smuggling operation being leaked.
On August 1, CNN reported that dozens of CIA agents were on the ground in Benghazi during the attack and that the polygraph tests were mandated in order to prevent operatives from talking to Congress or the media about a program that revolved around “secretly helping to move surface-to-air missiles out of Libya, through Turkey, and into the hands of Syrian rebels.”
Although the Obama administration is now openly arming the Syrian rebels, it has been keen to stress that such weaponry has been restricted to so-called “moderate” fighters, despite the fact that it is now widely acknowledged that Al-Qaeda is by far the most potent fighting force in Syria and indeed commands all the other militant groups.
The real truth behind Benghazi is likely to reveal that the Obama administration knowingly and deliberately provided surface to air missiles and other weapons to the most bloodthirsty Al-Qaeda jihadists in Syria who are now busy crucifying Christians while promising to bring their reign of terror to the west.
If a proper investigation into the Benghazi attacks uncovered concrete evidence of this arms smuggling scandal, Obama would face impeachment and many members of his administration would be facing long stretches in prison.
That’s the real reason why the White House is desperate to bury Benghazi.
This article was posted: Friday, May 2, 2014 at 11:53 am
In an unusually frank disclosure, White House spokesman Jay Carney said Wednesday night, March 5, that US intelligence services and military had worked with Israel to track the Iranian Panama-flagged ship KLOS C, which was apprehended by Israeli naval commandos on the Red Sea earlier that day carrying missiles for Gaza via Sudan. The ship was boarded by the Israeli elite Shayetet 13 (Flotilla 13) and found to be carrying dozens of 302mm rockets made in Syria with a range of 150 km made in Syria. It is now on its way to Eilat.
The White House spokesman said that Washington worked with Israeli through intelligence and military channels, and at the national security adviser level, as soon as it knew the shipment was on the move. He said that President Barack Obama also directed the US military to work out contingencies in case it became necessary to intercept the vessel (thereby sanctioning military action).
“Our Israeli counterparts ultimately chose to take the lead in interdicting the shipment of illicit arms,” Jay Carney said.
DEBKAfile reports that this was the first time in four years that the US and Israel have collaborated in an operation against Iran – ever since the Stuxnet virus attack in 2010 on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Until now, the Obama administration steadfastly refused to act against Iran for fear of jeopardizing the international diplomatic track for curbing its nuclear program.
The unusual frankness with which the Obama administration announced its coordination with Israel is both dramatic in itself and a road sign pointing the way to a radical change in its Iran policy. The US and Israel appear to be lining up – in their military policies as well – against the Iranian-Syrian-Hizballah bloc.
This radical turnabout was most probably the high point of the conversation between the US president and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu at the White House Monday, March 3, after which Netanyahu raised comment by showering Obama with praise during his speech to the AIPAC conference in Washington the next day.
DEBKAfile’s US and Israeli intelligence sources report that both countries are braced for a swift and stinging response from Tehran to the capture of the missile ship and its condemnation by the White House. As Carney put it: “We will continue to stand up to Iran’s support for destabilizing activities in the region in coordination with our partners and allies.These illicit acts are unacceptable to the international community and in gross violation of Iran’s Security Council obligations.”
Read DEBKAfile’s mearlier report on the interception and capture of the Iranian missile boat in Red Sea waters.
Israel’s elite Shayetet 13 (Flotilla 13) early Wednesday, March 5, boarded an Iranian Panama-registered cargo vessel KLOS C. Concealed in its hold under sacks of cement were dozens of 302mm rockets with a range of 150 kms, manufactured in Syria and destined by Iran for the Gaza Strip after being offloaded in Sudan.
The Israeli commandos seized the vessel in open sea on the maritime border of Sudan and Eritrea, 1500 south of Israel, and have set it on course for Eilat.
Sudan has been revealed by DEBKAfile’s military sources as having been transformed in the last two years into a major Iranian weapons manufacturing and logistic depot, which supplies Syria, HIzballah and Hamas. Port Sudan is also the hub for the smuggling of Iranian arms to various Middle East locations.
The IDF said the Iranian missile cargo was destined for the Palestinian Hamas which rules the Gaza Strip. If this is so, it would mean that Iran had gone back to arming Hamas with missiles and rockets after a two-year pause during which the Palestinian extremists were cold-shouldered by Tehran for their animosity to Syria’s Bashar Assad.
By the same token, it is hard to believe the Assad would consent to relay Syrian-made missiles to this antagonist. Some Middle East military sources believe the shipment as not destined for Palestinian terrorists for use against Israel, but rather for Muslim Brotherhood activists fighting the Egyptian army from their forward base in the Gaza Strip. They don’t rule out the possibility of Al Qaeda affiliates fighting in Sinai as being the address. Western intelligence has recorded instances of Iran entering into ad hoc operational collaboration with al Qaeda elements when it suits Tehran’s book.
The operation was carried out under an air umbrella by hundreds of naval commandos without casualties. It was directly commanded by the IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz from high command headquarters and the Navy Chief Maj. Gen Ram Rottberg from a floating command post at sea.
The rockets were flown from Syria to Iran, then loaded on a ship where they were concealed under sacks of cement inside containers. From the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas, the ship headed into the Red Sea bound for Sudan where it was intercepted by Israeli commandos.
The Iranian arms ship’s progress was tracked all the way.
In congratulating the forces which seized the shipment, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu commented that this episode showed Iran’s true colors – in contrast to its diplomatic posture in nuclear negotiations with the West. Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon said that Iran is again exposed as the biggest arms exporter in the world to terrorist organizations.
Benghazi Critique by USAF Pilot
|Assets available to respond to Benghazi – Ordered to STAND DOWN! [PhiBetaIota.net]|
We’re posting this commentary by Phil “Hands” Handley [Colonel, USAF, (Ret)] who wrote this commentary in response to the announcements by Secretary of Defense Panetta and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that the closest rescue assets were 18 hours away in Fort Bragg, NC! Colonel Handley, with considerable knowledge of the Air Force assets available, provides details of precisely what support the Air Force could have rendered.
[We’ve taken the liberty of adding to the map above many of the assets available in the area from the US 6th Fleet — all the Secretary of the Navy denies any US Navy craft were in the area — they were “deployed elsewhere”!]
He flew 275 combat missions, and flew operationally all but 11 months of his 26 year career in fighters such as the F-86 Sabre, F-4D, F4E, F15 Eagle, and even drove the C-130A workhorse into hazardous areas.
Unlike most of the obsequious, pusillanimous popinjays strutting the halls of the Pentagon today, his medals are real, and earned in actual combat; they include 21 Air Medals, three Distinguished Flying Crosses, and the Silver Star — so this man has credibility, more than we can say for any flag rank officer in the Pentagon today!
Consider the following scenario (all times Benghazi local): When Hicks in Tripoli receives a call at 9:40 PM from Ambassador Stevens informing him
“Greg, we are under attack!”
(his last words),
Hicks immediately notifies all agencies and prepares for the immediate initiation of an existing “Emergency Response Plan.”
By 11:30 PM, two F-16Cs with drop tanks and each armed with five hundred 20 MM rounds are airborne. Flying at 0.92 mach they will cover the 522 nautical miles directly to NAS Sigonella in 1.08 hours.
While in-route, the flight lead is informed of the tactical situation, rules of engagement, and radio frequencies to use.
|Setting Priorities [Politifake.org]|
Of course all this depends upon a Commander In Chief more concerned with saving the lives of those he put in harm’s way than getting his crew rested for a campaign fund raising event in Las Vegas the next day.
It also depends upon a Secretary of State who actually understood “What difference did it make?”, and a Secretary of Defense who was watching the feed from the drone and understood what the attack consisted of instead of making an immediate response that “One of the military tenants is that you don’t commit assets until you fully understand the tactical situation.”
TO AVOID THIS HAPPENING AGAIN,
LYONS: Benghazi was a planned tragedy
The event was no surprise, and the massive cover-up appalls
By James A. Lyons
Monday, March 3, 2014
The recent reports by the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee and the House Armed Services Committee make clear that no organization in the chain of command, including the White House, should have been surprised by the tragic events that occurred at our Benghazi Special Mission Compound (SMC) on Sept. 11, 2012.
Clearly, there was both strategic and tactical warnings.
The security situation in eastern Libya, particularly Benghazi, was out of control. Trying to explain our failure to protect the SMC as a lack of appreciation of the seriousness of the deteriorating security situation or incompetence does not pass muster. This was a planned event and explains the massive cover-up.
There were numerous hostile acts leading up to the attack on the compound. For example, on April 6, 2012, an attack with improvised explosive devices was conducted on the outer wall of the compound.
On May 22, the Benghazi International Red Cross office was hit by two rocket-propelled grenades. On June 1, a car bomb exploded outside the Benghazi hotel where the British ambassador was staying. On June 6, an IED blew a hole in the compound’s perimeter wall. On June 7, Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens requested two mobile security teams for his protection but was denied by the State Department.
On June 11, the British ambassador’s convoy was hit by RPGs. On June 17, the U.K. closes its Benghazi consulate, and the International Red Cross closes its office. On June 19, the Tunisian Consulate is stormed by the rebel group Ansar al Shariah.
On Aug. 2, Stevens requests 11 additional personal-security bodyguards. He calls the security situation unpredictable and violent, but his requests are turned down by State. Stevens sent a cable to State on Aug, 16 stating that the compound cannot withstand a coordinated attack.
At this point, AFRICOM offers to provide additional security, but Stevens feels compelled to turn down the offer owing to State denying all his requests for increased security.
The State Department turning down all of Stevens‘ requests for increased security as well as drawing down security assets in country is more than puzzling, particularly since an internal State Department analysis completed two months after the compound opened stated that unless security was increased, the compound should be closed. This assessment is buried in the Accountability Review Board (ARB) report.
The question that needs to be answered is, with the out-of-control security situation in eastern Libya, why were there no contingency plans or forces pre-positioned ready to respond to potential attacks on the anniversary of 9/11?
According to one report, the administration was focused on Tunisia, not Libya. Mind-boggling. Nonetheless, if that were the case, where were the forces positioned to respond to an attack on Tunisia?
On the day of the attack, according to a report in The Guardian, the readiness of the ambassador’s five-member security detail raises questions. Three of the four agents with Stevens, according to the report, left their rifles, helmets and body armor in another area under orders by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, which was confirmed by the ARB report.
This makes no sense, given that standard operating procedures in a hostile environment require that weapon be kept at the ready all times. Another question that needs to be answered: Why would the secretary of state give such an order?
Based on numerous reports, the Obama administration and every organization in the chain of command knew almost instantly that this was a terrorist attack on the SMC.
Within hours, it was known that the attack was executed by Ansar al Shariah, which is a coalition of Islamic and Salafist rebel groups linked to al Qaeda, al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, Libyan Islamic Fighting Group and the February 17th Martyrs Brigade.
It should not be overlooked that the February 17th Martyrs Brigade was tasked with supporting the U.K.-based Blue Mountain Security Group that had the contract from our State Department to provide security for the compound.
According to my source, who is a confidential informant for the FBI, the Blue Mountain Security Group is a cover company for MI-6. My source also told me that the February 17 Martyrs Brigade contract personnel were positioned near the compound the day of the attack and were ready to respond but never received orders to execute. Interesting.
My FBI confidential informant has also confirmed my assessment on the Lou Dobbs TV show in October 2012; namely, that this was an operation that went terribly wrong.
According to my source’s in-country contacts, there never was any intention to kill Stevens. He was supposed to be kidnapped and held as a hostage in exchange for the release of the blind sheik, Omar Abdel Rahman. It should be recalled that this was the No. 1 objective of then-Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi in his Washington visit in 2012.
All the unanswered questions and the truth of what actually took place at our Benghazi compound that cost the lives of four Americans can only be resolved by the formation of a special committee with subpoena powers.
House Speaker John A. Boehner, appoint such a committee as called for by Resolution 36 put forth by Rep. Frank R. Wolf, Virginia Republican, and restore integrity to the office of the speaker.
James A. Lyons, U.S. Navy retired Admiral, was commander-in-chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet and senior U.S. military representative to the United Nations.