Benghazi – Why it Makes a Difference By Kevin Shipp Member Citizen’s Commission on Benghazi Contributor, Intelligence Summit Author, From the Company of Shadows Former CIA Officer
November 20 2013
It has been over a year since the September 11, 2012 attacks on the American compound and Annex in Benghazi that killed US Ambassador Chris Stevens, Glen Dougherty, Sean Smith, Ty Woods and wounded several others. We still know nothing about the details of what happened that fateful night, there has been no justice for those killed in the attack and the victim’s families have not been given information about how their loved ones died. Despite the family’s demands for answers – the White House remains silent.
This is in stark contrast to the killing of Osama Bin Laden and events in Syria, where we were given blow-by-blow accounts by the Obama administration, every detail gleefully provided to the American people, even to the extent of revealing information that may have been classified.
Congress, the representative body of the American people, has been ignored, lied to, provided with false information and Congressional inquiries have revealed little regarding why Ambassador Stevens and the others were left to die without support from their government.
With no evidence, from any source, the President of the United States and the Secretary of State quickly told the American people the attack was prompted by an anti-Islamic video posted on the Internet – Just weeks before the 2012 presidential election. Evidence now reveals the administration, and specifically the Department of State, knew the incident was a planned terrorist attack, just days after it happened. Intelligence indicated this within a few days. Three attempted attacks had been carried out previously and chatter about the attack was on the Internet prior to its occurrence.
This begs the question – Why is the Obama administration withholding important information on the attack? If the administration has nothing to hide, why has it withheld critical information from Congress and the victim’s families for over a year? The initial falsehood regarding the Internet video, and concealment of the most basic information, could point to an intentional operational cover up by President Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, UN Secretary Susan Rice, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, CIA Director David Petraeus and John Brennan, then Head of the National Security Staff and now Director of the CIA. The allegations of a cover up could be erased completely if the administration simply releases the truth about what happened in Benghazi. But, it refuses to do so.
Upon orders by Obama, Ambassador Rice, on five morning news programs, made the claim the attacks were the result of an Internet video.
Two weeks after the attack, President Obama went before the world community at the UN and, during his speech, blamed the Benghazi attack on the video. The producer of the video, called “Innocence of Muslims,” was arrested just after the controversy erupted. Nakoula Basseley Nakoula was sentenced to one year in jail. The official explanation: Nakoula was arrested for a “probation violation.” According to the Associated Press he had violated a probation order and acquired a driver’s license under a false name.
When the body of Joe Wood’s son, Ty Woods, arrived in the US for the official ceremony, President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told Mr. Woods the attack was the result of an “Internet video.” Families of the other victims were told the same. Woods said Obama came over and spoke with him. According to Woods, Obama was “totally insincere,” and added, “His face was looking at me, but his eyes were looking over my shoulder, like he could not look me in the eye.”
My CIA training in detection of deception tells me this is the behavior of a person who is lying.
When talking to Secretary of State Clinton, Woods commented, “She did not appear to be one bit sincere at all. She mentioned that thing about we’re going to have that person arrested and prosecuted who did the video.” And arrest him they did.
Wounded survivors from the Benghazi attack were secretly transported to Walter Reed Army hospital, where they were kept behind closed doors, guarded by government agents who prevented anyone from getting into the ward to talk to them. Members of Congress were blocked from entering. Returning State Department and CIA personnel who were on the ground during the attack were prevented from talking to Congress, and their careers were threatened.
Forbidden Questions
Time after time administration officials have blocked any attempt to find out the details surrounding the Benghazi attack, especially from Congressional officials. The Obama administration refuses to answer these fundamental questions:
1. What is the exact timeline of events in Libya? Why are those not provided as they were in the killing of Bin Laden and rebel attacks in Syria?
2. What exactly happened in the White House situation room? Why won’t administration officials talk about it?
3. Where was the president when he was absent from the situation room during the unfolding crisis? Why do his spokesmen refuse to answer that question?
4. What orders, if any did the president give?
5. What was learned from the autopsy of Ambassador Stevens?
6. Who had custody of the bodies of the four Americans?
7. Who silenced the American survivors brought back from the attack?
8. What orders did Secretary Clinton give before and after the attack?
9. What cables from Ambassador Stevens and others did Secretary Clinton receive? Did she speak with Deputy Chief of Mission Gregory Hicks the night of the attacks?
10. Why was an investigation opened by the FBI on CIA Director David Petraeus without probable cause or a warrant? Who ordered the confiscation of tens of thousands of his private e-mails? How were these e-mails obtained?
11. The State Department website describes the Foreign Emergency Support Team (FEST) as, “the United States Government's only interagency, on-call, short-notice team poised to respond to terrorist incidents worldwide. The FEST, which has deployed to over 20 countries since its inception in 1986, leaves for an incident site within four hours of notification, providing the fastest assistance possible.” Who gave the order not to send the FEST team to Benghazi?
12. Who gave the DOD orders to “stand down” or “remain in place” instead of sending military help - available just a few hours away in Italy?
13. Who made the decision to delay the FBI investigation team from going to Benghazi for twenty-four days, when classified documents had been left behind?
14. Why did the Department of Justice wait over a year to arrest the mastermind of the attack, despite the fact that he had been located and interviewed by CNN, and did so preventing a special operations team poised to capture him?
15. Was the CIA running guns to Turkey bound for Syria, a violation of international law?
16. Was the CIA engaging in gun running without the approval of Congress, a Constitutional violation?
Involvement of Obama Administration Officials
Senior Obama administration officials at the top of every Agency involved in Benghazi have gone to great lengths to conceal what they know about the Benghazi attack, and silence their subordinates.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
Under oath, Secretary Clinton stated she did not see any of the emergency cables transmitted from Benghazi and, despite the sworn testimony of Chris Steven’s second in command, Deputy Chief of Mission (DCM) Gregory Hicks - who stated he spoke with her the evening of the attack - claimed she had no contact with State officials on the ground that night, the communication being below her level. Secretary Clinton feigned ignorance regarding Ambassador Steven’s pleas for increased security before the attack, communication that would have gone to the highest levels of the State Department.
In her testimony before Congress Clinton made the now infamous statement, “With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night decided to go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make?” In fact it makes a huge difference. It matters greatly if the America people have been lied to by their government, and four Americans were left alone to die in Benghazi.
A forty-six page report by five committees of jurisdiction cited an April 19, 2012 cable bearing Clinton’s signature acknowledging a formal request dated March 28, 2012, from then-US Ambassador to Libya Gene Cretz, requesting additional security in Benghazi.
Accountability Review Board Secretary
Clinton repeatedly invoked the State Department Accountability Review Board (ARB) investigation as the final authority on the matter of the attack. In reality, the ARB only looked at the security situation at the Consulate before and during the attack and not the actions of administration officials involved. Despite Secretary Clinton’s portrayal of the ARB as an impartial, unbiased investigation of the Benghazi attack and the officials involved, the report was shockingly lacking in important detail.
The ARB did not investigate any of the Department of State official’s actions before, during and after the attack, Secretary Clinton was never interviewed by the ARB and during interviews with selected witnesses, orders were given that no notes were to be taken - hence no official record of witness statements would be retained. For reasons unknown, major outlets of the news media refused to report this fact.
The ARB further states, “The Ambassador chose to travel to Benghazi that week, independent of Washington [the Department of State and Secretary Clinton], as per standard practice.” According to DCM Gregory Hicks, the man closest to Ambassador Stevens, Secretary Clinton ordered Stevens to go to Benghazi to establish a permanent State Department facility.
Of course, there is always a classified version of every report which contains information government agencies do not want Congress or the American people to see. You can count on the fact that there will be a “classified” version of this one. I have read the ARB report released to the public. As a former CIA investigator, I find it embarrassing in its lack of detail and intentional avoidance of the most basic and important questions.
UN Secretary Susan Rice
On orders from the President of the United States, US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice went on five television news talk shows, a standard government practice for dissemination of its version on important issues, just after the attack.
Ambassador Rice claimed without hesitation the attack on the Benghazi “Consulate” was the result of a demonstration in reaction to an anti-Islam Internet video. Despite Rice’s claims, officials in Libya and the intelligence community had already indicated the event was a planned terrorist attack. In the midst of Congressional investigations into the Benghazi attacks, President Obama formally named Rice as his next National Security Adviser, calling her a “trusted advisor.” This position now gives Rice immunity from testimony in future Benghazi hearings.
Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta
The combat code of the US Military states services do not abandon their dead or wounded on the battlefield. Throughout US military history this code has remained the core of conduct, honor and responsibility.
Benghazi was a tragic exception.
Testifying before Congress, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, accompanied by Army General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Congress, "Time, distance, the lack of an adequate warning, events that moved very quickly on the ground prevented a more immediate response.”
General Dempsey commented the military was dealing with possible threats worldwide and, "we wouldn't have gotten there in time."
But, the closest US military asset was not half-way around the world, but as near as Aviano Air Base, Italy where two squadrons of F-16Cs are based. Dempsey rejected the use of these assets claiming they could not have been ready in time and they were the "wrong tool for the job," despite the fact that an F-16 strafing attack is a sure-fire method of stopping enemy forces on the ground.
In reality, messages from the NSA provided continuous details of what was going on inside the diplomatic compound, including what the terrorist were saying to each other. A Predator drone circled over the compound providing a continuous video stream to decision-makers in Washington, including the Secretary of State and the Commander-in-Chief.
Benghazi DCM Gregory Hicks testified that Lt. Col. Steve Gibson, a member of the Army, was in Tripoli, ready and willing to go to Benghazi. Hicks testified Gibson was told to “stand down.”
Pentagon spokesman Major Rob Firman told the news media: “They weren’t told to stand down. They were simply told not to go to Benghazi. They were told to go to the airport in Tripoli to provide security there.”
Senator Lindsey Graham asked General Dempsey if AC-130 gunships on patrol could have provided a response. Dempsey never provided information regarding the approximate distance between the nearest AC-130 and Benghazi. More than one witnesses interviewed by Congress has stated the military was ordered not to respond to the attack.
Invoking the dubious ARB report, Secretary Panetta testified, "Unfortunately, there was no specific intelligence or indications of an imminent attack on U.S. facilities in Benghazi. And frankly, without an adequate warning, there was not enough time given the speed of the attack for armed military assets to respond. That's not just my view or General Dempsey's view. It was the view of the Accountability Review Board that studied what happened on that day."
Media reports stated, "various" military actions were examined and rejected – leaving the Americans to die in Benghazi. Reports also indicated there were no “optimum” choices for a military response, but options were available. There was simply no attempt to try them. It is unclear who gave the orders to ignore these options. No official will own up to it. Apparently, the Commander-in-Chief went to bed, before the battle in Benghazi was over, leaving his top advisors to fend for themselves.
Immediately after his testimony, Panetta retired, in keeping with the pattern of government officials involved in Benghazi - Leaving before any further testimony could occur.
At the very least, Benghazi represents a shocking lack of contingency planning by the CIA and the DOD. The significant intelligence threat profiles were well known by both organizations, but neither acted on the information.
The Obama administration claimed, for months, that no special operations forces were available to assist Ambassador Stevens and others during the attack. Recent reports now indicate a unit of eight special operations soldiers, Delta Force and Green Beret, were on the ground in Tripoli when the attack unfolded. Two members of the unit volunteered to respond along with five private security contractors to rescue the Americans. The Pentagon finally admitted that two of the operators engaged in the efforts to save Americans. Other members of the unit were ordered to stay behind to protect the embassy in Tripoli. When pressed for an answer as to why this information was withheld by the administration, officials claimed the presence of the forces was “secret.” The two operators were awarded medals for bravery behind closed doors.
CIA Director David Petraeus
By all accounts General David Petraeus is a man of integrity and dedication, with a long record of distinguished service to America.
During closed door testimony to Congress, Petraeus initially testified the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was an act of terrorism committed by al Qaeda-linked militants. He testified he developed unclassified talking points days after the attack, but he had no involvement in developing the ones used by Susan Rice in media interviews. Petraeus was not asked to testify under oath.
Before he could testify further, the Obama administration revealed Petraeus’ affair with his autobiographer Paula Broadwell. Acting on orders from Attorney General Eric Holder, the FBI collected thousands of Petraeus’ private e-mails to Broadwell, printed 20,000 – 30,000 of them, passed them to Holder, who provided them to the White House.
In later testimony, the FBI admitted there was no warrant for Petraeus’ private e-mails, no crime had been committed and there was no evidence he passed classified information to Broadwell. Petraeus resigned before engaging in further testimony to Congress. Many in Washington are convinced the incident smacks of blackmail, designed to keep Petraeus from testifying further.
John Brennan,
Head of the National Security Staff and now CIA Director
At the time of the Benghazi attack, John Brennan was Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counter Terrorism and Head of the National Security Staff. Brennan has been a close advisor to President Obama since 2008. He was intimately involved in events before, during and after the attack.
John Brennan was the government official who removed Al Qaeda from the Benghazi talking points and furthered the story that the attack was the result of an Internet video - despite his knowledge of existing intelligence. Brennan was also responsible for reviewing security measures in place in Benghazi prior to the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. He is alleged to have unilaterally ordered an attack on the Islamist group Ansar al-Sharia days before the attack, which could have been the instigation for the assault.
Brennan also allegedly ran a highly compartmentalized program out of the White House transferring weapons from Libyan stockpiles. Although the White House denies it, indications are these weapons were being transported to Turkey, for shipment to Syria. This would be a violation of international law. Ambassador Stevens was aware of shipment platforms from Turkey to Syria.
In the midst of the Benghazi scandal, Obama appointed Brennan as Director of the CIA. In this role, Brennan blocked Congress from obtaining information about the CIA’s reason for being in Benghazi and what the CIA knew about the cause of the attacks. After Congress’ demands for interviews with CIA witnesses who were on the ground in Benghazi, Brennan began a program of intimidation inside the CIA, forcing them to sign non-disclosure agreements and subjecting them to monthly polygraph tests, to ensure they did not talk to Congress or the press about what really happened.
In my entire career as a former CIA polygraph examiner, counterintelligence investigator and internal security investigator, I never witnessed this frequency of polygraph examinations on employees not suspected of committing a crime or participating in a security violation. I was the signing witness on hundreds of non-disclosure agreements. The non-disclosure, or secrecy agreement, is particularly intimidating because it threatens career termination or criminal penalties for violating the agreement. Employee’s who breach the agreement, even to talk to Congress, could lose their career, family security and, even worse, go to jail.
President Barack Obama
In the midst of the Benghazi scandal, President Obama has fired nine decorated US military generals. Reports indicate these generals disagreed with Obama’s emasculation of the US military. Three of the nine firings by Obama, this year alone, were linked to the cover up of the terrorist attack on the Special Mission in Benghazi. In one case, U.S. Army General Carter Ham, who commanded the U.S. African Command when the consulate was attacked, was highly critical of the decision by the State Department not to send in reinforcements.
General Ham stated reinforcements could have been sent in time. He contends he never was given a stand-down order. But, others close to the general advised he was given the order - but defied it. General Ham was relieved of his command and retired. Military regulations forbid officers at all ranks from speaking out against decisions made by the Commander-in-Chief. If they do, they face harsh consequences.
Obama has insisted there were no reinforcements available that night.
Despite firing top US generals who disagreed with his actions, Obama has not fired any civilian employees responsible for the negligence and fabrications involved in the Benghazi attack. These individuals have just been reassigned - or promoted. This smacks of Chicago-style politics, a destructive trend for a democracy.
Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette commanded the Carrier Strike Group. General Gaouette contends US aircraft could have been sent to Libya in time to help Americans under fire. He was removed from his post for alleged profanity and making “racially insensitive comments.”
Army Major Gen. Ralph Baker, commander of the Joint Task Force-Horn at Camp Lamar in Djibouti, Africa contended attack helicopters could have reached the consulate in time the night of the attack. He was fired from his command.
In a clear attempt to instill fear in the minds of military personnel, Obama has fired one hundred ninety-seven military officers in the past five years. This is an apparent attempt to purge the military of officers who disagree with his re-make of the armed forces and degradation of US military superiority.
The whereabouts of Obama the night of the Benghazi attack are unknown. Indications are he went to bed as the attack unfolded. It is clear he was not in the situation room with top officials monitoring the attack. The white House spokesman refused to disclose where Obama was that night. No president in US history has removed himself from his command role in the situation room during a national security crisis.
As noted earlier, immediately after the attack, Obama claimed it was the result of a protest prompted by an offensive Internet video. He continued this fabrication for two weeks after the attack, despite hard intelligence the event was a pre-planned terrorist operation and, most disturbing, propagated this story before the world community at the UN.
This occurred two weeks before the presidential election. If this was the reason for obstruction of a Congressional investigation, spreading falsehoods about an Internet video, intimidating witnesses, blocking their testimony and concealing intelligence revealing Al Qaeda involvement in the Benghazi attack, this scandal rivals Watergate, and may exceed it.
State Department Security in Libya
Prior to the Benghazi attack, the Department of State hired the February 17th Martyrs Brigade to augment Consulate (“Special Mission Compound”) security.
The February 17th Brigade was founded by members of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), beginning in the 2011 coup in Libya.
The LIFG was established by Libyan Mujahedeen fighters during the Afghan war against the Soviets. Just prior to the Benghazi attack the LIFG continued to run terrorist training camps in Afghanistan with direct connections to Al Qaeda. When the Libyan coup began, members of LIFG formed the February 17th Brigade. The Department of State hired a group with connections to Al Qaeda to protect Ambassador Stevens.
The CIA
The CIA was intimately involved in supporting the Islamic Jihadist’s overthrow of the Gaddafi government, despite the fact that Libya had been removed from the State Department’s list of state sponsors of terrorism, Gaddafi had eliminated his program of weapons of mass destruction and the US had reestablished ties with the Libyan government.
The CIA was in Benghazi prior to the attack locating and storing the huge cache of weapons and explosives left by the Libyan government. This cache of weapons was breached by the jihadist rebels, who were probably connected to the LIFG. Four hundred surface-to-air missiles were lost and fell into the hands of the jihadists, and probably Al Qaeda. This would represent a CIA operation gone horribly wrong. These missiles are capable of bringing down a Seven-Forty-Seven Jetliner.
In violation of international law, there are indications the CIA was involved in buying back arms and explosives captured by the rebels and transferring them to Turkey for shipment to Syria, to arm the Syrian Jihadist rebels. In other words, the CIA was running guns to the Syrian rebels without Congressional approval.
Ambassador Stevens met with Mahmoud El-Mufti, owner of the Libya-based shipping company Al-Marfa, which was shipping weapons to aid the Syrian rebels. His final meeting the day of the attack was with Ali Akin, the Turkish Consul General in Benghazi. When he arrived in Benghazi, Stevens did not set up a Consulate; the standard procedure usually involved in processing visas, but established the “Special Mission” post, which does not exist as an official US government organization. News reports indicated the CIA had established a presence in Turkey.
The CIA is now openly delivering weapons to the jihadist rebels in Syria. The State Department is delivering vehicles and other gear. This marks a major escalation in the US role in supporting the jihadist rebels in Syria’s civil war. Claims the Syrian government used chemical weapons on the rebels have not been completely substantiated. Some evidence exists indicating the chemical weapons may have been disbursed by the rebels themselves as a false flag, to place blame on the Syrian government. Christian sectors in Syria, protected by the Assad regime have been attacked by the rebels, killing several people. There is no doubt Assad is a bad actor. But the Obama administration’s support of the rebels is very possibly supplying weapons to Al Qaeda factions and causing a major rift in Russian-American relations.
These activities have now fallen back into the shadows, replaced in the media by the controversy over Obama Care, but they continue.
Summary
When government officials lie to Congress and the American people with impunity, whether to gain reelection, cover up negligence or conceal nefarious covert operations, it represents a trend towards tyranny – a term mocked by the current administration. It is clear senior officials in the Obama administration, the Department of State, the Department of Justice and the CIA have engaged in a concerted effort to conceal important information surrounding the Benghazi attack, apparently at all costs. In total, the actions and statements of these officials appear to represent an orchestrated cover up at the level of a well planned operation. As has been the case in so many scandals in Washington, the cover up has been accompanied by blacked out documents, witnesses silenced by their secrecy agreements, officials fired, reassigned or threatened from speaking out and claims simple details are “classified,” shielding them from Congress.
Such an organized effort, which can only be mandated by the President himself, only indicates the truth about Benghazi is very serious. In fact, it is so serious senior government officials are willing to lie under oath, lie to the news media, misrepresent the facts to the world community, fire decorated generals for speaking out, intimidate State Department and CIA witnesses and publish a deceptive report resulting from a sham investigation.
There is only one solution to finding out the truth about Benghazi. Virginia Congressman Frank Wolfe has introduced House Resolution 36, recommending the creation of a select committee to investigate Benghazi. This would take the investigation out of the hands of those who potentially have something to hide - and place it in the charge of a non-partisan, unbiased committee objectively seeking the truth about events that happened that fateful night.
Congressman Wolf’s recommendation has obtained one hundred sixty-two cosponsors. Despite broad support for Wolf’s recommendation, House Speaker John Boehner has blocked every attempt to create a select committee to investigate Benghazi. Why would Speaker Boehner block objective attempts to find out the truth, and why a US Ambassador and three other Americans were left alone to die? Polls show the majority of Americans want to know the truth about Benghazi. This would seem to eliminate the explanation that Boehner’s actions are politically motivated. What other logical reason could the speaker have for standing in the way of an investigation? What does he really know? Benghazi could possibly be a scandal of massive proportions. Boehner’s reason for blocking the investigation is another unanswered question.
The families of the Americans left to die in Benghazi demand an answer. The American people, whom the government is Constitutionally obligated to serve, demand an answer. The US military, which abides by the core principle that it never abandons its own in battle, demands an answer. The truth itself - demands an answer.
Print 