Exclusive: Dozens of CIA operatives on the ground during Benghazi attack-CNN has uncovered exclusive
Source: cnn
Exclusive: Dozens of CIA operatives on the ground during Benghazi attack
CNN has uncovered exclusive new information about what is allegedly happening at the CIA, in the wake of the deadly Benghazi terror attack.
Four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens, were killed in the assault by armed militants last September 11 in eastern Libya.
Programming note: Was there a political cover up surrounding the Benghazi attack that killed four Americans? Watch a CNN special investigation — The Truth About Benghazi, Tuesday at 10 p.m. ET.
Sources now tell CNN dozens of people working for the CIA were on the ground that night, and that the agency is going to great lengths to make sure whatever it was doing, remains a secret.
CNN has learned the CIA is involved in what one source calls an unprecedented attempt to keep the spy agency's Benghazi secrets from ever leaking out.
Read more: http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/01/exclusive-dozens-of-cia-operatives-on-the-ground-during-benghazi-attack/?on.cnn=1
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)Masters of distraction.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)Arms and other exports to Syria are banned under US law.
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)We both agreed it had to be a CIA operation housed in that annex.
jehop61
(1,735 posts)Another Benghazi investigation. This time, the sterling reporter, Jake Tapper, is offering us a "Special Report". Tune in, new information. Unnamed sources and was there a political coverup? HA! Do they actually think they'll get more viewers by copy catting Faux?
As one Faux Reporter says, "Give Me A Break"!
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)I remember hearing various things about CIA being there. Didn't some people rush to the scene...called "ex special forces people" in media? Just what the fuck was going on?
When the Republicans were blathering about it, it sounded ridiculous because they didn't know what they were talking about. It was a manufactured scandal. More or less, they buried it away from our attention because we passively dismiss crazy Benghazi talk.
But what if the CIA was doing something fucked there that triggered this directly, and the government knew all the time it wasn't necessarily a terrorist attack or a muslim-you-tube-riot attack, but a response to CIA activity. I'd love to know, but thats probably all classified.
Itll be interesting to see if this source is just a Republican hack or the real deal
ZRT2209
(1,357 posts)dawn frenzy adams
(429 posts)Tapper is the little weasel that went screaming foul all over the media when President Obama wanted to deny Fox News access to the White House Press Corps. The President's reasoning was they were not a news organization. Tapper got all the major news outlets to issue the President an ultimatum, that if Fox was banned, they would no longer cover the White House. I only wish Obama would have taken them up on it. After all, Tapper and his colleagues had no problem reporting the lies of George W. Bush -as he started two illegal wars, and decimated the economy.
If we ever find out anything of any value who would believe it after all this time, not me. There will be certain people that will and will proclaim coverup.
spin
(17,493 posts)If this had happened while Bush the Younger was in office would you feel the same?
If you can honestly reply, "Yes", then good for you but if not then you may be a hypocrite.
Do you remember the Iran-Contra affair? The Republicans did their best to support President Reagan during this scandal. They failed and 14 administration officials were indicted and 11 were convicted.
Now I am not saying that Benghazi will ever rise to the level of Iran-Contra. I hope not but I honestly have no idea how insignificant or important this incident may be. I hate to say this but there does appear to be some evidence of a cover up. It is my opinion that we need to have a fair investigation of this incident. Let the chips fall where they may. Remember it is rarely the scandal that causes the most damage, it's usually the cover-up.
I really don't give a crap who is in office. Republican or Democrat, they should follow the law. I like to watch football and my team is the Pittsburgh Steelers. Still I want to see a fair game and do not want the refs to favor one team over the other, even if it is my team who gets the benefit. But football is just a game.
I also am upset about the NSA surveillance scandal which started out under Bush the Younger. Obama opposed this when he campaigned in 2008 which is one of the many reasons I voted for him.
Published: June 7, 2013
Obama on Surveillance, Then and Now
Throughout his Senate career, Barack Obama was a fierce critic of surveillance efforts in the Patriot Act, and he vowed during the 2008 presidential campaign to end “illegal wiretapping,” casting the question of liberty versus security as a “false choice.” But over his years in the White House, Mr. Obama has increasingly spoken of needing to “make some choices as a society,” as he did on Friday when he addressed revelations about data collection of phone and Internet records by the National Security Agency.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/06/08/us/politics/08obama-surveillance-history-video.html?_r=0
I understand that if you wish to find a needle in a haystack, first you must have a haystack. I just want to make damn sure that the people digging through the haystack are not taking advantage of their efforts to gather dirt on anyone who disagrees with them.
NoMoreWarNow
(1,259 posts)I don't think any of this has to do with Obama. The CIA is just out of control.
Archae
(46,301 posts)The CIA has ALWAYS been out of control.
leftyladyfrommo
(18,866 posts)This sort of stuff has been going on for as long as I can remember.
Remember the TV show" I Lead Three Lives"?
NoMoreWarNow
(1,259 posts)just seems like they never get called out enough for it.
kpete
(71,964 posts)CIA=rogue
peace, kpete
Tumbulu
(6,268 posts)
benld74
(9,901 posts)Cooley Hurd
(26,877 posts)
I believe that unfortunately Ambassador Stevens knew that Benghazi was not just an embassy, but a CIA covert station.
neohippie
(1,142 posts)Benghazi was an outlying consular compound, not an embassy. And the whole reason that from the beginning that they never wanted to bring any attention to this compound or the mission going on there even at the very beginning of the attack was that there was collusion between the State Department mission and the CIA mission there, which is a huge diplomatic no no.
The GOP will not be satisfied that they are actually doing more damage to the country by continuing to draw attention to these events, because they are always willing to put their political agenda ahead of what is good for our nation.
There was clearly an outed CIA annex and their operation probably had something to do with moving arms to rebels, this is why from the very beginning everyone in both the CIA and the State department never were willing to tell the truth about what was going on there.
There is plenty of evidence linked in articles about the US being very aware of the threats in that region prior to these attacks, the CIA annex that was located near the consular compound wasn't just there by coincidence.
go west young man
(4,856 posts)is right on the money. They were most likely double crossed as there were rebel elements that leaned heavily toward anti Americanism. Same as in Syria. It's also possible they were there to cover up any former dealings with Ghaddafi. Either way it was SOP.
John2
(2,730 posts)working for CNN playing politics. Some of them are clearly associated with conservatives and the Republiucan Party. I'll point out Ambassador Stevens' personal diary, that was on his possesion and taken from the scene by a reporter, before the FBI could get there. That was clearly evidence and should have been handed over to the Government. In any crime scene, that would be tampering with evidence.
That reporter, who also went into Iraq during that invasion, was able to get in there before the FBI and slipped that diary to a former Bush Intelligence officer, who was consulting for CNN. That is when the rumors of a coverup began. The claim was Stevens wanted extra security in Libya, but the Administration denied it. It was alleged that ambassador Stevens didn't prefer too much security and he was even helping militia groups while they were fighting the Gadaffi regime, so he already took risks. The two people he had with him were attached to the CIA.
This is not a cover up, but probably a covert activity, that was classified. The only persons that would know about it would be Intelligence committees authorized by Congress. That is the CIA's mission, as part of the military. Look up the definition of the CIA and covert activities.
The only thing that was done illegally, was what Chaffetz and Issa did. They blew the cover of persons working with the CIA, because they want so bad to bring the Obama Administration down. That is why I claim, President Obama is working with snakes period! They will put this country at risk, just to destroy his Administration, so they can gain power. That is why I would advise him to do an about face, on the neocon regime change Policy of the Middle East. They accuse him of being weak on Syria and Iran while at the same time plotting to bring down his Administration. These people are nothing but snakes! They did the same with President Clinton! As far as giving weapons to rebels for regime change, that is exactly what the McCain rightwing republican cabal was crticizing Obama for not doing. Apparently they probably was doing it covertly because it was against International Laws, like other things the U.S. don't want people to know. President Obama is probably just continuing the Neocons own Policies. He has hired the same neocons in the intelligence agency and have some of the same people that got us into Iraq in his Administration.
David Krout
(423 posts)I believe that it's not as bad if some countries help rebels in other countries where the President is a dictator who was never elected by the people. If the President is elected, then I believe nobody should mess with him who is not a person in that country.
Zen Democrat
(5,901 posts)
24601
(3,955 posts)
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)See : CIA 'running arms smuggling team in Benghazi when consulate was attacked' http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023392394
dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)
truth2power
(8,219 posts)
Mr.Bill
(24,246 posts)if someone said we had no CIA operatives there.
Steviehh
(115 posts)giving weapons top rebels. What could go wrong?
Now everyone is abandoning embassies as jails full of political prisoners are emptied by radicals. I can't believe we are standing behind the military in Egypt. I hope sophisticated arms never reach Syrian rebels. Our internet business is suffering from revelations made by Snowden.
Our foreign policy makes no sense.
Zen Democrat
(5,901 posts)The Republicans and Fox News won't like that. Even if true, they'd still blame the President and Hillary Clinton, even though it's generally understood that the big bad talking points were given to Susan Rice by the ... wait for it .... the C I A!!! How convenient.
Initech
(100,041 posts)
alp227
(32,006 posts)
leveymg
(36,418 posts)happened.
Daily Kos: Blowback in Benghazi: Attack Linked to Regime Change ...
www.dailykos.com/.../-Blowback-in-Benghazi-Attack-Linked-to-Regime...
Sep 14, 2012 - leveymgFollowRSS. Daily Kos ... [Stevens] knew the rebels in Benghazi. ... The assault on the US Consulate in Benghazi appears to have been ... http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/09/14/1131854/-Blowback-in-Benghazi-Attack-Linked-to-Regime-Change-Operations-in-Libya-and-Syria
Last edited Fri Sep 28, 2012, 04:10 PM USA/ET - Edit history (9)
Three days after the attack that killed the US Ambassador to Libya, The Times (UK) carried a story that a Libyan freighter loaded with stolen SA-7 antiaircraft missiles had offloaded at a Turkish port.
That September 14 article was captioned, “Syrian rebels squabble over weapons as biggest shipload arrives from Libya.” http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/middleeast/article3537770.ece
Meanwhile, ABC has reported that one of three Americans killed with Ambassador Stevens was part of group assigned to locate these looted Libyan MANPADS, shoulder-fired missiles that can be used to shoot down airliners.
Jake Tapper is such a tool - he's only on top of this now because it's been politicized by the GOP.
Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)
PuffedMica
(1,061 posts)There were CIA operatives in Benghazi. I would be surprised if the statement was made that there were NO CIA operatives in Benghazi.
There were dozens of them. Is this significant? How does the number in Benghazi compare to other middle east cities?
Why doesn't one of these ace journalists ask the question about how many CIA operatives are in the city of TelAviv?
NoMoreWarNow
(1,259 posts)is that number real, and if so, what were they doing?
John2
(2,730 posts)in any Foreign country, it is to do covert military activities, which includes collecting intelligence on the ground and causing unrest, for something like regime change. This is nothing but the continuation of the neocon republican Policies of John McCain and George W. Bush, along with the Israeli Government of Netanyahu. President Obama has signed on to it. The Republicans are just stabbing him in the back like they do on everythingelse because they don't want him to succeed. You should have listened to President Obama in the Debate. It was really about who could do the job better of bringing down Iran and working with Israel.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)You might want to worry about all the CIA/NSA people in your newsroom.
Cooley Hurd
(26,877 posts)Cooley Hurd
(26,877 posts)...a new Church Commission.
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)WTF? Media at the time claimed she was confused. Funny claim
I was never curious about this story really enough to follow it due to idiot Republicans
coldmountain
(802 posts)Wasn't the scuttlebutt at time that the State Department was protecting the CIA?
John2
(2,730 posts)confidant don't you? What else did she snitch about?
That whole thing was odd. I hate to think too much about it, but I wonder if she was smeared with this thing on purpose (I remember her father made a statement that there was more to the story than what the media was talking about).
lindysalsagal
(20,592 posts)about.
CNN has no hope of explaining anything, good, or bad, because they're too stoopid to understand real american government operations.
The multi-national corporate looters pay cnn to throw out some red meat whenever one of them either has done something illegal or is planning it.
Another red herring. Of course there were cia people there. They're everywhere, but they're not military or police protectors: They deal with information, not bazookas. And if it weren't dangerous, we wouldn't need cia there.
Far as I know, I won't be needing any cia personnel at my daughter's birthday party. They're busy in dangerous places where people get killed all the time: It's just not usually our ambassadors.
Think about this: When do we ever hear about anyone else's ambassadors getting killed? But it's happening constantly. We just don't care about anyone who's not american.
John2
(2,730 posts)wrong. They are really owned by corporations and align themselves mostly with Republicans. The media has moved to the right ever since Ronald Reagan attacked them.
truth2power
(8,219 posts)I've been holding onto a hard copy of the following article for the past 6 months. It's a LONG article, but goes into detail about the events in Benghazi on 9/11/12.
I was going to post a link and summary of the article, but I figured it would just cause great consternation among some DUers. Just figured I'd be patient and watch it all play out.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-benghazi-affair-uncovering-the-mystery-of-the-benghazi-cia-annex/5320872
"The Benghazi Affair: Uncovering the Mystery of the Benghazi CIA Annex"
January 28, 2013
“The U.S. effort in Benghazi was at its heart a CIA operation, according to the officials who briefed on intelligence.” WSJ, Nov 1, 2012
According to the article, there were 2 versions of the State Dept. Benghazi report that was released on 12/18/12. One, unclassified, to share with the public. The other, classified, and available only to Congress in closed session.
The unclassified version could not mention CIA activities.
The "Annex" was CIA. The Special Mission Compound was created to provide diplomatic cover for the CIA facility.
From the article:
>snip
Such examples <providing weapons to Libyan rebels; see article> provide the context for how the US government has covertly and overtly been helping to provide the weapons that are then used by those hostile to the US to inflict harm on the Libyan and Syrian people and even on Americans, as those killed in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. This situation, several commentators have noted, is reminiscent to the Iran Contra Affair where the US government entities covertly acted in a way that jeopardized the interests and even the physical well being of US officials and civilians. And it is likely that the actions being taken by US government officials to arm and provide other forms of support for the Libyan and Syrian insurgencies, are contrary to US laws and constitutional obligations.(24)
This article is a good read. Also, please see the endnotes for documentation of the author's assertions.
John2
(2,730 posts)does admire Ronald Reagan. He mentions him more than any Liberal Democratic President.If the Senate Intelligence committee and House Intelligence Committees knew about it, then it is not like Iran\Contra. So that needs to be clear.
If their game was to get President Obama to reveal classified information or embarrass the Administration for ignoring International Law, then that is what I expect the Republican rightwing strategy was. The media is just acting in concert, the same as the IRS alleged scandal, where the media carried the water.
All of this should be ignored and focus on the entire picture. This Congress itself does not respect International laws, because they think they are above every other country.
OldRedneck
(1,397 posts)What was the CIA station in Benghazi doing? Buying weapons, ammunition, and ordnance.
Buying from the various militias and from remnants of Ghadaffi's military.
Why?
1. To get this stuff out of the hands of radical wackadoodles.
2. To give it to Syrian rebels.
Also, it's likely they were running operations out of Benghazi aimed at uncovering and destroying Al Qaeda throughout North Africa.
DRoseDARs
(6,810 posts)...during the early days of their little witch hunt. Hurr durr? 
quadrature
(2,049 posts)lots of things here need to be investigated
CNN knew too, but they went with the Republican theme that didn't work. They are still trying to find something that will damage the Administration. The whole goal is to put the Republicans back in power or controling all three Branches of Goverment. These pundits are not as dumb as people are trying to paint them as. They are part of the top establishment in this country influencing policies. They played the same ignorance about Iraq and are doing the same with Syria probably. Most of the American media today are controled monopolies by a few people. They are the ones pushing Policies on the Debt and Entitlements. The media has a lot of power in this country, to decide what gets reported. That is how they control Public opinion. The Republican Party and Ronald Reagan figured this out after the Vietnam War, so they vigorously attacked the media. The media has moved towards the right now, and supports the government, which is mostly conservative. They made being Liberal a dirty word.
CanSocDem
(3,286 posts)http://reclaimdemocracy.org/powell_memo_lewis/
"One of the bewildering paradoxes of our time is the extent to which the enterprise system tolerates, if not participates in, its own destruction.
.......................................snip.............................................................
Most of the media, including the national TV systems, are owned and theoretically controlled by corporations which depend upon profits, and the enterprise system to survive."
Check the link to see how the ruling class deals with this.
.
Uncle Joe
(58,298 posts)Thanks for the thread, kpete.
MjolnirTime
(1,800 posts)Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)spin
(17,493 posts)defends our liberty and our laws. It really doesn't mater which party is in power.
I fully supported the efforts of the press to bring to light the scandals that occurred during Republican administrations. One example was Iran-Contra which occurred during the Reagan administration. Of course another example was the Watergate Scandal which happened during the years Nixon was President. I could easily list many more examples of where a Republican administration was caught with its hand in the cookie jar.
It is my opinion that if a news organization uncovers damaging information they have an obligation to publish it. Let the chips fall where they may. If there is a hint of a scandal, a good news organization should invest some effort to find our the truth.
As a Democrat I want my party to be more honest and transparent than the Republican Party. If i happened to be a Republican, I would feel exactly the same.
Unfortunately both Parties have a tendency to abuse power. It should be the watchdog's job to sound the alarm when either gray wolves or black wolves attack the herd.
I fully understand why the news media is driven by ratings. Fox cable news has become a powerhouse in the 24/7 news industry because it has opposed Obama, often unfairly. While it is fair that CNN will point out the bias at FoxNews it should not cover up actual scandals that Fox was lucky enough to uncover.
Allowing either a Democratic or Republican administration to run amok and trample the laws of our nation will only damage our reputation in the world and may result in a loss of the liberties which we enjoy and citizens in many other nations admire and hope to obtain.
The CIA has a LONG history of running amok. You can check out a list of some of the scandals at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency#Controversies
It's not inconceivable that CNN has uncovered something important that even FoxNews missed.
Time will tell.
The bottom line is that in a representative democracy such as ours, a well functioning free press will help guarantee that our government at least tries to obey our laws and act in an honest and responsible manner.
Party are you claiming is in Power, when it comes to Foreign Policy? This is not the same Press of the Vietnam Era or Iran Contra, that you think it is. You have political consultants now from both Parties working for the Press and working for Corporations.
Lets talk about the monpolization of the Press by a few people like Murdoch. FOX News is a tool for his agenda. So you want to talk about the Free Press?
There was no cover up in Benghazi. THe Republicans are playing Politics. There was a cover up in Iran\Contra and Water Gate. Let me go over this for you one more time. Congress represents the people of the United States. We have three equal branches of Government with oversight.
The difference from those other incidences and this, was one political party hiding things from another, and carrying out illegal acts not approved by Congress.
You don't see any Democrats complaining about not knowing about Benghazi. The Republicans knew about what the CIA was doing in Benghazi, because the President is carrying out their dam Policy of regime change! They are playing politics with people's lives on the line. Including in the military with their Bullshit!
You know why they are liars. They knew what the CIA was doing in those classified meetings. The President has to let them know. And it is their asses that keep passing these resolutions in Congress forcing the President to take actions against certain states, which amount to a declaration of War. So if those Select Intelligence Committees in both chambers know what the President is doing in classified Briefings, there is no such cover up! And these Republicans think they are slick, because they know the Executive Branch can't reveal classified information to the public. So they play these political games out in the Public, just like the IRS and everythingelse. So quit playing the game of this coverup crap. This Party needs to be seen for what it is. They are a bunch of racist rightwing extremists. The only thing needs to be clean out is them! The sooner America realizes that, the better off this country will be.
spin
(17,493 posts)You believe that there was no cover up on Benghazi and perhaps you will be proven correct. Time will tell.
I hope that you are right and all the efforts of the Republicans to smear Obama and Hillary over this incident will be proven totally false. Perhaps an obscure video about Mohammad actually did infuriate the crowd and they brought their AK-47s and mortars and successfully managed to launch a well coordinated attack against our diplomatic facilities. Perhaps Benghazi is indeed a "phony scandal."
If so, I find it suspicious that this weekend our government is closing a number of embassies in many nations fearing that a team of terrorists is in place to attack an undetermined location.
It's the responsibility of a free press to report fairly and also to investigate any potential problem to provide American citizens with the facts. Of course this also applies to the IRS scandal and the possible invasion of the privacy of innocent citizens by the NSA.
In recent years I have noticed that Republican administrations have had a bad habit of lying to Congress and to the American people. Consequently we ended up fighting useless wars that have proven extremely expensive and failed miserably to accomplish anything positive.
For example:
THURSDAY, SEP 6, 2007 07:16 AM EDT
Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction
Salon exclusive: Two former CIA officers say the president squelched top-secret intelligence, and a briefing by George Tenet, months before invading Iraq.
On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam’s inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again.
Nor was the intelligence included in the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002, which stated categorically that Iraq possessed WMD. No one in Congress was aware of the secret intelligence that Saddam had no WMD as the House of Representatives and the Senate voted, a week after the submission of the NIE, on the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq. The information, moreover, was not circulated within the CIA among those agents involved in operations to prove whether Saddam had WMD.
On April 23, 2006, CBS’s “60 Minutes” interviewed Tyler Drumheller, the former CIA chief of clandestine operations for Europe, who disclosed that the agency had received documentary intelligence from Naji Sabri, Saddam’s foreign minister, that Saddam did not have WMD. “We continued to validate him the whole way through,” said Drumheller. “The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming, and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy, to justify the policy.”
Now two former senior CIA officers have confirmed Drumheller’s account to me and provided the background to the story of how the information that might have stopped the invasion of Iraq was twisted in order to justify it. They described what Tenet said to Bush about the lack of WMD, and how Bush responded, and noted that Tenet never shared Sabri’s intelligence with then Secretary of State Colin Powell. According to the former officers, the intelligence was also never shared with the senior military planning the invasion, which required U.S. soldiers to receive medical shots against the ill effects of WMD and to wear protective uniforms in the desert.
http://www.salon.com/2007/09/06/bush_wmd/
It's sad that our news media was unable to reveal this information before Bush the Younger launched the invasion of Iraq.
While I feel that overall Democratic administrations have been more honest, I still believe that as a citizen it's best to adopt a trust but verify policy. Obviously I don't have the resources to find the truth so I can only hope and pray that our "free press" does its job and ferrets out any underhanded lies and illegal practices no matter who is in office as President.
Even if all the current scandals are merely hot air, the fact that they have received so much attention from the press will help insure that power will not go to the head of a future administration or even the current one. A vibrant press will also help insure that the people we elect to Congress do the job we hired them to do and not follow the wishes of any President like a herd of lemmings.
Our free press is our watchdog and a good watchdog will sound the alarm before a problem becomes serious.
I should also point out that when I grew up most cities had at least two major newspapers one of which was liberal and one conservative. In those days I was able to read both and had a better chance to formulate a good opinion. Today I watch all three cable news channels and try my best to form an informed view on many issues.