The REAL Benghazi Story: What the White House and Hillary Don't Want You to Know (19 page)

• In October 2013 US Special Forces seized wanted militant Abu Anas al-Libi, who was living openly in his home in Libya, in a daylight raid outside his home while his family looked on. Family members immediately and predictably told the news media about the raid, which thwarted an ongoing operation in which covert U.S. operatives were hours from arresting Ahmed Abu Khattala, a senior leader of the Ansar al-Sharia militia wanted for the Benghazi attack. Why was al-Libi seized in a public operation in Tripoli?

• Obama previously vowed to make it a “priority” to bring the Benghazi suspects “to justice.” Did he personally make the call to arrest al-Libi before Khattala, and to do so in such a public manner?

QUESTIONS FOR HILLARY CLINTON

• Because the U.S. Benghazi facility was so dangerous and did not meet the security standards set by the State Department, the Benghazi mission actually required special waivers in order to be occupied by American personnel. Such a waiver could have only been issued by you, Madam Secretary. Did you issue this waiver? If so, were you adequately briefed on the glaring security lapses at the facility?

• If you were not fully briefed, how can you justify issuing this waiver? (Some of the necessary waivers the Senate affirmed could have been issued at lower levels within the State Department. However, other departures, such as the co-location requirement, could only be approved by the Secretary of State.
24
The co-location requirement refers to an unusual housing setup in Benghazi where intelligence and State Department personnel were kept in two separate locations.)

• The decisions to deny guard towers and to pull a special reaction team from the hot zone of Libya were made by your top deputies. We know you took particular interest in Libya, the lynchpin for the so-called Arab Spring. Were you aware of these and other perplexing security decisions made by your deputies regarding the Benghazi compound?

• Not only were your deputies the ones who made central perplexing security decisions; they were also involved in drafting the now-discredited talking points on the Benghazi attacks. Were you involved with the talking points drafting?

• Did you know the attacks were coordinated jihadist assaults when you publicly blamed the attacks on an obscure YouTube video?

• On January 23, 2013, you testified under oath that no one within the government ever recommended the closure of the U.S. facilities in the Libyan city. Your testimony is contradicted by Lt. Col. Andrew Wood, who led the U.S. military’s efforts to supplement diplomatic security in Libya. Wood testified that he personally recommended the Benghazi mission be closed. Did you mislead lawmakers and the public under oath?

• According to congressional testimony by Gregory Hicks, the former State Department deputy chief of mission and chargé d’affairs, who was in Libya at the time of the attack, Stevens went to the compound that day in part because you wanted to convert the shanty complex into a permanent mission as a symbol of the new Libya. Hicks said you wanted to announce the establishment of a permanent U.S. State Department facility during your planned visit there in December 2012. Apparently Stevens was up against a specific, tight funding deadline to complete an extensive survey of the mission so the compound could be converted. Did you play any role in Stevens’ decision to go to the dangerous facility on the anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, a day when jihadists are particularly motivated to strike our country’s assets?

• You should have been aware of the terrorist camps in Benghazi. Fox News reported that the officials
at the U.S. mission in Benghazi convened an “emergency meeting” in August 2012 to discuss the training camps. The news network obtained a government cable addressed to your office stating that the U.S. diplomats in Libya were briefed “on the location of approximately ten Islamist militias and AQ training camps within Benghazi… [and that] these groups ran the spectrum from Islamist militias, such as the QRF Brigade and Ansar al-Sharia, to ‘Takfirist thugs.’”
25
What actions, if any, did you take to protect the U.S. special mission in light of the emerging high-threat environment, including the proximity of terrorist training camps?

• The
New York Times
described you as one of the driving forces behind advocating a plan to arm the Syrian rebels.
26
Were you involved in efforts to arms the Mideast rebels? Were any of these efforts centered in Libya? In the U.S. special mission in Benghazi?

• Did you mislead lawmakers when you claimed during your Benghazi testimony that you did not know whether the U.S. mission in Libya was involved in procuring or transferring weapons to Turkey and other Arab countries?

• The Senate’s extensive report by its Benghazi investigative committee charged a “strong case can be made that State engaged in retaliation against witnesses who were willing to speak with Congress.”
27
Were senior State officials engaged in retaliation or otherwise involved with intimidating witnesses? Did senior State officials interfere with legislative investigations into the Benghazi attacks?

TALKING POINTS PROBE

• Did the Obama administration deliberately mislead the public when it claimed the attacks were a spontaneous protest in response to a “hateful video”?

• Why were the talking points edited to remove references to
terrorism
and
al-Qaeda
in the attacks?

• Was the Obama administration in immediate possession of surveillance video from the mission that showed there was no popular protest on September 11, 2012?

• Logic dictates that spontaneous protesters do not show up with weapons, erect armed checkpoints surrounding a compound, and evidence insider knowledge of a facility while deploying military-style tactics to storm a U.S. mission. Nor do spontaneous protesters know the exact location of a secretive CIA annex, including the specific coordinates of the building that were likely utilized to launch precision mortar strikes. Spontaneous protesters are not capable of mounting a fierce, hours-long gun battle with U.S. forces stationed inside the annex. Yet the initial reports from the Obama administration blamed the attack on spontaneous protestors. How does the administration explain its rejection of logic in explaining what happened that fated night?

• What was the exact role in the talking points scandal of Mike Morell, then acting CIA director?
Morell claimed the talking points were changed to protect a criminal investigation. Did he know this was not the case?

• In June 2013, Morell announced he was stepping down from his CIA position to spend more time with his family. Did Morell, a favorite CIA chief, really leave the agency because of the talking points scandal?

• Morell later reemerged as a counselor to Beacon Global Strategies, a consultant group particularly close to Hillary Clinton.
28
Was Morell given this job in exchange for his silence in the talking points scandal?

• In February 2014 a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report revealed that Morell was in receipt of critical information on September 15, 2012, one day before Rice used the talking points publicly. The report said that Morell and others at the CIA received an e-mail from the CIA’s Libya station chief stating the attacks were “not an escalation of protests.”
29
What did Morell do with this information?

• In perhaps one of the most damning sections of the Republican House Interim Progress Report on the events in Benghazi, lawmakers who penned the investigation wrote that they were given access to classified e-mails and other communications that prove the talking points were not edited to protect classified information but instead to protect the State Department’s reputation. Who at the State
Department made the decision to alter the talking points?

• The Obama administration spent seventy thousand dollars in taxpayer funds on an ad campaign denouncing the anti-Muhammad film. The ads, featuring Clinton and President Obama, reportedly aired on seven Pakistani networks. Did the White House know at the time that anger over the film was not the motivating factor for the Benghazi attacks?

APPENDIX C
RESPONSE TO
HARD CHOICES
BY HILLARY CLINTON

J
ust as this book was being sent to press, Hillary Clinton released her own book, entitled
Hard Choices
(New York: Simon & Schuster, 2014), containing an extensive chapter on the Benghazi attacks. A review of the chapter finds her narrative contains misleading statements about the deadly assaults and the then secretary of state’s personal role in the decision-making process.

Here are twelve significant problems with the Benghazi section of Clinton’s book.

1) CLINTON CLAIMS NO RESPONSIBLE FOR BENGHAZI SECURITY.

Denying a personal role in the decision-making process regarding security of the compound, Clinton writes that she did not see the cables requesting additional security.

She claims cables related to the security at the compound
were only addressed to her as a “procedural quirk” and didn’t actually land on her desk.

Clinton writes: “That’s not how it works. It shouldn’t. And it didn’t.”
1

However, as documented in
chapter 7
of this book, the Senate’s January 2014 report on the Benghazi attack reveals lawmakers found that the Benghazi facility required special waivers to be legally occupied, since it did not meet the minimum official security standards set by the State Department. Some of the waivers could only have been signed by Clinton herself.

Clinton would have a lot of explaining to do if she signed waivers allowing the facility to be legally occupied without reviewing the U.S. special mission’s security posture.

Further, as noted in this book, the Senate found it was Clinton’s top deputies, including officials known to be close to the Clintons, who were responsible for some major denials of security at the compound.

For some lawmakers, it defies logic that Clinton was not informed, especially since she was known to have taken a particular interest in the Benghazi facility. She reportedly called for the compound to be converted into a permanent mission before a scheduled trip to Libya in December 2012 that eventually was canceled.

2) CLINTON MISREPRESENTS STEVENS’ REASON FOR VISITING BENGHAZI.

Clinton suggests that Ambassador Christopher Stevens
traveled to Benghazi before the attacks and implies he took meetings at the U.S. special mission that ill-fated night on his own initiative.

Clinton writes: “U.S. Ambassadors are not required to consult or seek approval from Washington when traveling within their countries, and rarely do. Like all Chiefs of Mission, Chris made decisions about his movements based on the security assessments of his team on the ground, as well as his own judgment. After all, no one had more knowledge or experience in Libya than he did.”
2

She writes that Stevens “understood Benghazi’s strategic importance in Libya and decided that the value of a visit outweighed the risks.” She does not provide the actual reason for Stevens’ visit to the Benghazi compound.
3

Clinton failed to mention Stevens may have gone to Benghazi for a project that she specifically requested.

Recall in
chapter 7
I cited congressional testimony by Gregory Hicks, the former State Department deputy chief of mission and chargé d’affaires who was in Libya at the time of the attack, Stevens went to the compound that day in part because Clinton wanted to convert the shanty complex into a permanent mission in a symbol of the new Libya.

Hicks said Clinton wanted to announce the establishment of a permanent U.S. State Department facility during her planned visit there in December 2012. Apparently Stevens was up against a very specific funding deadline to complete an extensive survey of the mission so the compound could be converted.

He further testified that in May 2012, during a meeting with Clinton, Stevens promised he would give priority to making sure the U.S. facility at Benghazi was transformed into a permanent constituent post. Hicks said Stevens himself wanted to make a symbolic gesture to the people of Benghazi that the United States “stood behind their dream of establishing a new democracy.”

3) CLINTON WHITEWASHES HER OWN BENGHAZI STATEMENT.

At about 10 p.m. Eastern on September 11, 2012, Clinton was one of the first Obama administration officials to make a public statement about the Benghazi attacks.

In her book, Clinton writes: “As the cameras snapped away, I laid out the facts as we knew them – ‘heavily armed militants’ had assaulted our compound and killed our people – and assured Americans that we were doing everything possible to keep safe our personnel and citizens around the world. I also offered prayers for the families of the victims and praise for the diplomats who serve our country and our values all over the world.”
4

Clinton fails to mention that in her initial statement she also first linked the Benghazi attacks to the infamous anti-Islam film.

Her brief official statement included this: “Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes
back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.”
5

4) CLINTON LIED ABOUT THE LOCATION OF NEAREST SPECIAL FORCES.

Clinton wrongly writes that the closest U.S. special forces that could have responded to the attacks were “standing by in Fort Bragg, North Carolina, but they would take several hours to muster and were more than five thousand miles away.”
6

She continued: “Critics have questioned why the world’s greatest military force could not get to Benghazi in time to defend our people. Part of the answer is that, despite having established United States Africa Command in 2008, there just wasn’t much U.S. military infrastructure in place in Africa.”
7

Other books

The Fire Inside by Virginia Cavanaugh
The Last Plea Bargain by Randy Singer
Final Justice by Hagan, Patricia
Worth Dying For by Luxie Ryder
Love at First Date by Susan Hatler


readsbookonline.com Copyright 2016 - 2024