Ed's Blog

"Some people know everything, but that's all they know."

BENGHAZIGATE

Increasing evidence indicates the Obama administration has engaged in a cover up of intelligence that forewarned it of the September 11 terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Iranian support for jihadists throughout the North Africa-Middle East region, and al Qaeda penetration of Egypt and Libya.  (Read the full column at EWRoss.com)

About these ads

Filed under: Terrorism, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

14 Responses

  1. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    LinkedIn Group: International Security & Defence Network

    Discussion: BENGHAZIGATE

    Why NONE of this is ‘making the President look good!’

    1. By making the intel community the fall guys.

    2. Secretary of State providing false information to the world.

    3. Sending Susan Rice of UN to five TV shows falisifying reality.

    4. Presiden in all his UN & TV appreances proving false information to the world.

    5. Testiminies of the all Government officials to the Cogressional Commitees proved
    that government officials were falsifying the Beghazi tragedy.

    6. As a result of all these revelations, federal and state indictment requests should be
    submitted to the Grand Juries. As soon as Congressional investigations and their
    finding are published.

    Posted by Dr James Afshar Jafsharcpp

  2. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    LinkedIn Group: International Security & Defence Network

    Discussion: BENGHAZIGATE

    To stand for 6 hours without action while watching live the unfolding of the blatant murders of your people (who would have been relying on you for their rescue is hard to understand.
    Don’t stress my dear the cavalry WILL be along shortly, they have never let their people down!

    Some euphemistically say: “Well, sometimes Shit happens”.
    Some others add to that: “Yes, and it is assholes that make it happen”.

    What are the [deciders/influencing factors] for an order for a team to respond?

    Cost?

    Political Media benefit vs. embarrassment?

    Don’t need the person according to someone’s view of the politics?

    Absolutely need the person at all cost?

    Apathy (therefore prosecutable incompetence)!

    Failure to think straight in sufficient time? I won’t believe or accept this one!

    Another intrigue in its early development?

    A favour to a possible new friendly? Who is the friendly and
    what are they promising to deliver in return?

    General Cock-Up? He/she [General Cock-Up] needs court-martialling.

    Posted by Doug Sinclair
    Posted by Dr James Afshar Jafsharcpp

  3. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    LinkedIn Group: International Security & Defence Network

    Discussion: BENGHAZIGATE

    Kent Clizbe • Where are the DNI and DCIA? It doesnt’ matter.

    In this administration, all intel power is in the hands of the Czar–John Brennan.

    That’s the only guy you need to watch/listen to.

    Where is Brennan?

    “This massive cluster-failure of a foreign policy looks like an amateur operation, run by a wannabe operator. The one personality in the Obama administration that fits that description is John Brennan.”

    http://intelctweekly.blogspot.com/2011/02/cairo-meddler-czar-brennan-needs-to-go.html

    Dr James Afshar Jafsharcpp • Mr. Clizbe: He is the highest National Security Official and closest to the president who should have persuaded president to send [Rapid Response Strike Teams] stationed closest to Libya and Benghazi. The overseas teams have two hours time to be at the sites. The firefight took six hours before they murdered four Americans. I personally believe that they could have saved those perished 100%.

    Now we have to find out why this did not take place?!

    Posted by Dr James Afshar Jafsharcpp

  4. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    LinkedIn Group: International Security & Defence Network

    Discussion: BENGHAZIGATE

    One of the many troubling aspects of the administration’s story is the assertion that the talking points used by Ambassador Rice were provided by CIA Director Petraeus. General Petraeus won my respect for his independent thinking that produced a successful Iraqui strategy. Why he would produce talking points that were found to be misleading is only part of the puzzle. More troubling is the fact that the CIA is intentionally prohibited from engaging in propaganda activities directed at the US population. This is a very serious matter. Why did the CIA Director lend his name to Obama’s politically convenient strategy based on a violation of the law?

    Posted by Manuel Aragon
    Posted by Dr James Afshar Jafsharcpp

  5. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    LinkedIn Group: International Security & Defence Network

    Discussion: BENGHAZIGATE

    Tonights talking points (and debate points) will be that republicans are to blame for having voted to deny additional funding to the State Department for security. The reality is that Dems out numbered Republicans in that vote, the State Department’s budget had doubled from 2011 and the request was a general one not specific for any site. Additionally the funding for site security comes out of the Pentagon’s budget not that of State. I pray that Mr. Romney is prepared.

    Posted by David Riviello

  6. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    LinkedIn Group: International Security & Defence Network

    Discussion: BENGHAZIGATE

    Karrie: Please read Mr. Glizbe’s comment and my response to him im the above section. Regardless of the outcome of the investigation, president decided [TO DO NOTHING] in order to save the life of the US ambassador and three of his staff.
    It could have been done ONE HUNDRED PERCENT. Belive me. Ask military pros, and security professionals.

    Posted by Dr James Afshar Jafsharcpp

  7. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    LinkedIn Group: International Security & Defence Network

    Discussion: BENGHAZIGATE

    Correct, Dr. J. No matter how many alphetized agencies there may be. The last call of the intelligence consumer – here being the president – should reflect that it has been read, heard or digested.

    It seems in this case, that the fonts of information were flowing and the president only gargled, spit it out and reached below the bar for something else, not on the carte, that appealed to him and fostered his goal.

    Dr James Afshar Jafsharcpp • Mr. O’Connor: Excellent, well said and easy to digest. You should make it a FLASH to the entite Intel community.

    Posted by Dr James Afshar Jafsharcpp

  8. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    LinkedIn Group: International Security & Defence Network

    Discussion: BENGHAZIGATE

    Many of us have followed and some of us actually investigated through other intel channels the flow of information. I have no doubt that this was a FUBAR at the highest levels.

    What is to happen regardless of the debate is that even if absolute proof is acquired that this was criminal and even additional proof that it was all part of a secondary planned setup, Obama will never be prosecuted and sent to prison. Unfortunately as it is the best that can be hoped for is for the truth to be revealed to the American public so that closure for the families of the victims and the public be understood in order to prevent them from happening again.

    That is politics as it is today.
    This was not the first administration in any country that has a body count associated with it and I am sure it will not be the last.

    Posted by Sal (JT) Tuzzo

  9. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    LinkedIn Group: International Security & Defence Network

    Discussion: BENGHAZIGATE

    Mr. Husher:

    Now you blame the ambassador for his death and three of his staff. Because “he had the last call not the WH”. I’m quite surprised by your statement knowing and reading every comment and news about this tragedy.

    Also, [Rapid Response Strike Teams] have been created domestically by the federal and state governments. And are supposed to respond within twenty minutes after the activation in the US.

    Overseas teams are run by the Defense Department Special Forces globally. And are supposed to be at the location within two hours. These teams are all stationed near the HOT ZONES either in the US military bases, or in the US Navy ships all arounfd the world.

    Sir. you keep asking what could these teams do? Didn’t you see what they did to OSAMA?

    These operations are not new at all for the US Armed Forces.

    Posted by Dr James Afshar Jafsharcpp

  10. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    LinkedIn Group: International Security & Defence Network

    Discussion: BENGHAZIGATE

    I would hope they don’t think the American sheeple will buy into the budget “defense”. There hadn’t been a budget in over 4 years. The last couple years were blocked by Harry Reid from even being discussed.

    Posted by Michael E. Homer

  11. Reposted from LinkediIn says:

    LinkedIn Group: Global Security & Defence Network

    Discussion: BENGHAZIGATE

    Mr. Knorr:

    Africom commander has been removed temporarily for [poor judgment].

    He covered Benghazi “Rapid Response Strike Teams.”
    He might be the scapegoat.?!

    Posted by Dr James Afshar Jafsharcpp

  12. Reposted from LinkediIn says:

    LinkedIn Group: Global Security & Defence Network

    Discussion: BENGHAZIGATE

    Yep, someone has to be held accountable and it cannot be the boss. The AFRICOM CO was playing it safe and was waiting for info/orders from higher up. He was probably not in the CIA intel /hotline loop. CIA, as recently as 2006, was notorius for not sharing intel with the military and other agencies. I personally saw that behavior at the NCTC. Old habits are hard to break and all Intelligence agencies are guilty. The CO probably requested more info and orders from higher ups whom he believed had the big picture.

    Posted by Roland St. Germain

  13. Reposted from LinkediIn says:

    LinkedIn Group: Global Security & Defence Network

    Discussion: BENGHAZIGATE

    Saw article last day or two (possibly a post on one of my groups) that AFRICOM CO had actually started moving FAST teams into position for deployment, w/o orders (doing his job) is why he was relieved of command.

    Posted by Michael E. Homer

  14. Reposted from LinkediIn says:

    LinkedIn Group: Global Security & Defence Network

    Discussion: BENGHAZIGATE

    Wow, that puts a new spin on this incident. Makes sense to me to have assets in position to go if POTUS orders it….not. Only in a politiucal sense does that demonstrate poor judgement.

    Posted by Roland St. Germain

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Share This Blog

Bookmark and Share

EWRoss on Twiter

RSS EWRoss.com RSS

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,621 other followers

%d bloggers like this: