The Benghazi “Special Mission” Diplomatic compound was set up as a temporary facility on the eastern part of Libya which is a stronghold for Islamic rebel groups. Within a mile from this compound, there was the CIA operation in a walled area called the Annex. The CIA had contracted for six highly competent, well trained and experienced, “Special Ops” military type personnel to assist with security details. Another Navy Seal from Tripoli later connected with these six military experts to provide back up on the evening of 9/11/12.
1.) Any “Stand Down” Orders Were Not Delivered By the State Department
According to the book, “13 Hours: The Inside Account of What Really Happened in Benghazi” by Mitchell Zuckoff with the Annex Security Team,” the Benghazi compound was attacked by national rebel forces around 9:30 pm local time on 9/11/12. It took about five minutes for the military personnel in the CIA Annex to be ready to assist the nearby diplomatic mission, but they were stopped from rendering any help by their CIA boss, “Bob.” These military heroes kept asking for the go-ahead sign with no success.
Finally, there was about a 30 minute delay before these brave heroes took off as they ignored the “stand down” orders of their CIA chief, “Bob.” Two were later killed when the battle moved from the diplomatic entity to the Annex. The surviving men have testified before a US Congressional hearing held in December 2013. These witnesses are absolutely convinced that they could have prevented the smoke inhalation deaths of Ambassador Chis Stevens and his assistant, Sean Smith. When they first presented themselves to their CIA chief, no fires had yet been set anywhere by the rebels.
The following was reported on FoxNews.com by Bret Bair on 9/5/14:
“After a delay of nearly 30 minutes, the security team headed to the besieged consulate without orders. They asked their CIA superiors to call for armed air support, which never came.”
Now, looking back, the security team said they believed that if they had not been delayed for nearly half an hour, or if the air support had come, things might have turned out differently.
“Ambassador Stevens and Sean Smith, yeah, they would still be alive, my gut is yes,” Paronto said. Tiegen concurred.”
“I strongly believe if we’d left immediately, they’d still be alive today,” he added.”
“All I can talk about is what happened on that ground that night,” added Paronto. “To us. To myself, twice, and to– to Tig, once. It happened that night. We were told to wait, stand– and stand down. We were delayed three times.”
“In a statement to Fox News, a senior intelligence official did allow that the security team was delayed from responding while the CIA’s top officer in Benghazi tried to rally local support.”
2.) Why the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton received less email deliveries from diplomatic personnel than from friends, had nothing to do with her not caring. It just meant that the primary form of communication among diplomats is not via email.
The 11/30/10 FP (Foreign Policy) Explainer, answers the question, “Why Do Diplomats Still Send Cables?” The response is, thanks to Charles Hill, diplomat in residence at Yale University, and Marc Ginsberg, former U.S. ambassador to Morocco. The following are some excerpts:
“Of course, State Department “cables” aren’t actually transmitted by cable anymore. They’ve been transmitted electronically since the early 1970s. But the format and protocol for these transmissions remains largely unchanged since the Cold War days.”
“The concept of secret diplomatic communications dates back to the birth of modern diplomacy during the European Renaissance, when ambassadors would send correspondence back to their home governments in sealed diplomatic pouches that could not, by law, be opened. The inviolability of diplomatic pouches is still enshrined in international law.”
“The development of undersea telegraph cables in the late 19th century made for much faster communication. Yet because of the high cost of sending and encrypting sensitive telegrams, longer reports were still sent by diplomatic pouch, while telegrams were used for shorter messages. Deputy Moscow mission chief George Kennan’s 1946 description of “The Sources of Soviet Conduct” — probably the most famous cable in U.S. diplomatic history — became known as “The Long Telegram” because at over 5,000 words, it initially annoyed the penny pinchers at Foggy Bottom.”
“These days, embassy officials use cables to describe important meetings, analyze political trends in the countries where they are based, and make policy recommendations. Cables are easily encryptable and allow the State Department to keep a permanent record of diplomatic efforts. These documents are typically declassified after 25 years. Although most diplomatic cables end with an ambassador’s electronic “signature,” they are quite frequently written by lower-level staffers and often haven’t even been seen by the ambassador in question.”
“Diplomatic cables include detailed routing information indicating who should be given access to them. Those are the abbreviations like “OVIP,” “PREL,” and “PGOV.” There are also classification levels ranging from “Unclassified” to “Top Secret.” Many of the documents are also marked “NOFORN,” indicating that the information they contain is not to be shared with foreign governments.”
“Since 9/11, in an effort to promote information sharing, embassies have increasingly been uploading diplomatic cables onto a database known as SIPRnet, which is accessible to military personnel as well as State Department staff. That means that the cables in question were accessible to any of the 3 million soldiers and officials holding secret clearance.”
3.) The Original Video excuse, as a possible catalyst for any local unrest is not a lie created by DS to deflect from the fact, that Islamic terrorists were solely responsible for the surprise attack on the Benghazi US facilities on 9/11/12. There is a reason for the confusion which was cleared up within one week after the State Department fully reviewed the Benghazi War video tapes.
As per the book, “13 Hours,” page 76-77 there are details regarding the confusion over the controversial video having incited unrest on 9/11/12 in the Middle East and the following are the pertinent excerpts:
“(9/11/12) One of the DS (State Department) agents in Benghazi, Alec Henderson, heard about Cairo protests from a counterpart in Tripoli. From his post in the Compound, Henderson called the Annex to be sure that all Americans in Benghazi were aware of the escalating unrest, seven hundred miles away in Egypt.”
“By all accounts, the Cairo demonstration was sparked by Egyptian media reports about an amateurish movie trailer posted on YouTube for an anti-Islamic film called “Innocence of Muslims.” The video, made by a Christian Egyptian-American with a history of bank fraud and multiple aliases, defamed the Prophet Mohammad by depicting him as a bloodthirsty, womanizing buffoon, a homosexual, and a child molester.”
“Fueling the anger among Egyptian Muslims, erroneous reports suggested that the US government was somehow involved in producing the film. The US Embassy in Cairo might have unwittingly contributed to that impression by issuing a noontime statement awkwardly disavowing the video. As Gregory Hicks told Ambassador Stevens, the Egyptian protesters had scaled the embassy wall and burned the American flag. They replaced it with a black jihadist flag with white lettering in Arabic that read: “There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is His messenger.”