The U.S. Navy Drone surveying the ocean. Looking for the NextWave. Wu Hu!
Hey Wray let’s make it easy fore U. CTO EE. It’s so much more than the Tsin Tsin Road.
SMILE! Find Judge Advocate. Find Affirmed.
“Everybody’s gone surf in’…Surf in’ USA…”
CNN: Two Fox News hosts question Trump’s comments about Iran: ‘This just doesn’t add up’.
ANSWER IS: Shure it does.
And the $240 million dollar bill which includes all the upgrades needs to go to…WHO knows…
“Poor Shep and Chris. They walked right into it. Such a thing. GO figure. &.” – The Shark and Sparky the Clown
Trump Hits FOX News at PA Rally: “Something Very Strange Is Going On”
– Donald Trump, President of The United States of America
Mueller, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Wray…This is your Fools Brought In fore a reason…still Not Sure Dunno.
It is truly amazing when a significant piece of intel given to DHS, the FBI, and the Intel community, and after nothing was done, it winds up on a jihadi website and in perfect english. How could it be…WHO knows…Now back to that airplane hanger at Ft. Hood. U.O.
What is the DOJ, the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, the Intel Community, the Department of State, and Congress hiding?
SUA has proprietary intel concerning the greatest crimes ever committed against the American people.
New York (CNN)Fox News hosts Chris Wallace and Shep Smith challenged President Donald Trump’s comments about when and why he decided to call off a strike against Iran.
Trump said Friday that the military was “cocked and loaded” to fire on Iran in retaliation for shooting down a US drone earlier this week. But he reversed course “10 minutes before the strike” when he learned 150 people could die in the attack, the president said in a series of tweets.
Smith said Fox News’ reporting found that Trump would have been given a casualty estimate at a briefing hours before that.
“Something’s wrong there,” Smith said about the president’s comments.
Wallace also had questions.
“I talked to a former top national security official in an earlier Republican administration who says this just doesn’t add up,” Wallace said during a midday segment Friday.
“The timeline for when he learned information and when he decided to act doesn’t make a lot of sense,” Wallace told Shep during the Fox News segment. “Maybe that’s the biggest problem. You could argue: if you don’t want to strike, don’t strike. If you want to strike, do strike — but don’t send mixed messages that confuse not only your enemies, but even your allies and people here in this country.”
Smith then questioned Trump’s decision to “tweet out the whole thought process of American foreign policy and intervention.”
“That’s an observation,” he added. “Not a critique.”
Trump has a cozy relationship with Fox News. He’s hired a number of former employees from the network to posts within his administration.
The president also reportedly corresponds directly with Fox News hosts like Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity, conservative firebrands who currently host evening programs that routinely praise the president.
Smith, who hosts daytime news coverage, and Wallace, the anchor of Fox News Sunday, have stood apart from Fox’s opinion-oriented colleagues. Smith and Wallace have previously questioned or criticized actions by Trump or his administration.
How The U.S. Could Respond After Iran Shoots Down A $240 Million U.S. Drone
By Mark Cancian
Tensions continue to escalate in the Persian Gulf as the Iranians down one U.S. drone, shoot at another and, likely, sponsor attacks on tankers and a Saudi airport. Let’s take a look at the most recent incidents and what they might mean for the future. Will there be a war?
What happened? Early Thursday the Iranians used a surface to air missile to shoot down a U.S. drone just outside the Straits of Hormuz. The Iranians posted a video that purported to show the shootdown, and the United States acknowledged that it had lost a Broad Area Maritime Surveillance drone (BAMS-D). The Iranians claimed it was in their territorial airspace while the United States claimed it was in international airspace. Under international law, it’s a critical question, and, eventually, there will be an answer. The United States will likely salvage the wreckage, as it has with recent aircraft crashes, and the location will show where the drone actually was. However, that will take many weeks and likely be of historical interest, rather than helpful in resolving the current crisis.
What is this BAMS-D drone? This is a Navy prototype version of the Air Force RQ-4 Global Hawk. The Navy’s fully developed version is called the MQ-4C Triton and is just entering production. These are very large unmanned aircraft. The wingspan is 132 feet, comparable to a civilian airliner. (For comparison, a Boeing 757 has a wingspan of 124 feet.) The drone is designed for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR), the Pentagon term meaning that it has sensors to find things on the earth surface. The Navy’s version focuses on the sea, whereas the Air Force version focuses on land. Here’s how DOD describes the Navy version: “The MQ-4C will provide the Navy with a persistent maritime ISR capability. Mission systems include inverse Synthetic Aperture Radar, Electro-optical/Infra-red Full Motion Video, maritime moving target detection, Electronic Support Measures, Automatic Identification System, a basic communications relay capability, and Link-16.” Because of their size, BAMS-D and Triton are land based.
BAMS-D is not stealthy, is unarmed, flies relatively slowly, and has essentially no defensive systems. Its only defense is to fly high, at 60,000 feet. Because of its vulnerability, it is not designed to operate in a contested area. Its great advantage is that it can fly for over 32 hours continuously, far longer than any human crew could endure.
So, what was it doing there? Although the Pentagon has not stated what the mission was, one presumes that it was watching for more tanker attacks. Four ships were attacked in May and two more last week. If the U.S. could catch whoever was doing the attacks, presumedly Iran, then it might be able to thwart future attacks and have the evidence needed to convince domestic and international audiences of Iran’s culpability.
Does this thing really cost $240 million? Yes…and no. Because DOD weapons are custom-built, they don’t have price tags like equipment does in the civilian world. Systems have many possible costs depending on what is included and what the number is used for. Thus, different commentators have cited different costs for this aircraft, for example, $120 million or $180 million.
Since BAMS-D is a version of the Air Force RQ-4, we can use the RQ-4’s official acquisition report, called the Selected Acquisition Report, to calculate a cost for BAMS-D. This report shows an average procurement cost over the whole program of $122 million in FY 2015 dollars or about $130 million in FY 2019 dollars. That excludes the research and development costs, which are mostly sunk at the beginning of the program. If those were included, the cost per aircraft would increase to about $240 million (FY 2019 dollars). To make things even more complicated, there is something called the “flyaway cost,” which is the cost of a system coming out of the factory without some of the support elements in the “procurement” cost. The “flyaway cost” of a new MQ-4C replacement for the lost BAMS-D is a bargain, at $102 million (FY 2019 dollars).
No matter which cost you pick, however, this was an expensive system. It is a very large aircraft with many sophisticated sensors on it.
What were these other attacks? Apparently, Iranians also shot at another drone last week, an MQ-9 Reaper (replacement for the legendary MQ-1 Predator), but missed. That it missed is likely because Reapers are much smaller than the MQ-4C and thus harder to hit. They are also much less expensive, costing about $30 million. The Reaper drone, like the MQ-4C that was shot down, was likely looking for perpetrators of the tanker attacks and was probably the source of the video about Iranians removing mines from the attacked tankers.
Also last week a group of Iranian back Yemeni rebels attacked a Saudi airport with cruise missiles, one of a series of such attacks. The bottom line is that these drone and tanker attacks are not isolated incidents but part of the campaign by Iran to put pressure on its major enemies, the United States and Saudi Arabia, and, indirectly, on the Europeans, Japanese and others to get relief from U.S. sanctions.
What’s going to happen next? The Iranians are signaling that they will not accept the U.S. imposed sanctions passively. They are striking back as they always have: asymmetrically and in the “gray zone.” Asymmetrically means they are not meeting U.S. strength head-on and the gray zone means they are maneuvering in the space between war and peace. Likely, the Iranians will continue to initiate “incidents.” By maintaining some deniability and not injuring human beings, the Iranians have been very clever in keeping these incidents below the level where the United States would respond with force.
At some point, the Iranians may cross these lines either by injuring an American or by being caught red-handed in conducting an attack. Then, the United States would almost certainly respond with force. This happened in the 1980s when the United States caught the Iranians laying sea mines in the Persian Gulf and retaliated by sinking half of the Iranian Navy.
The U.S. has the capability in theater now to conduct a retaliatory strike, likely against the air defense battery that shot down the drone. According to the New York Times, an attack on Iranian radar and missile batteries was prepared for Thursday, but the operation was cancelled. Strikes could also be directed against Iranian naval capabilities that might have carried out the tanker attacks. The U.S. does not have enough assets in theater to conduct an extended air-naval campaign, even with the additional thousand troops being sent. It certainly does not have the capability to conduct any ground campaign against Iran.
More likely, however, is something non-kinetic. The president is reluctant to get into a shooting war, having campaigned against such involvements. Instead, the United States might take some covert action like the cyber-attack that was allegedly recently conducted against Russia. It might start escorting ships and aircraft through the Straits of Hormuz. The NATO allies and Japan might be willing to support such an action.
Unfortunately, the situation is not stable. Most likely, there will be additional incidents within a week with each carrying the risk of escalation. Last August, I wrote a piece looking at indicators of a possible conflict (Is The US Going To War With Iran? Five Indicators To Watch For). Three have occurred (“increased naval activity,” “Iranian complaints about reconnaissance flights,” and “increased security at regional U.S. bases”).
What is the DOJ, the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, the Intel Community, the Department of State, and Congress hiding?
SUA has proprietary intel concerning the greatest crimes ever committed against the American people.
The “Deep State”
Paul E. Vallely, MG US Army (Ret)
Released by the Stand Up America US Foundation and the Citizen’s Commission on National Security.
June 22, 2019
President Trump is fully engaged in draining the corrupted swamp in Washington!
Who is really assisting the President in this monumental task? Certainly not the Democrats and it appears that most of the Rinos and other Republicans are not as well. We the people must support the President in this brave action.
In the United States the term “deep state” is often used to describe influential decision-making bodies believed to be within the government who are relatively permanent and whose policies and long-term plans are unaffected by changing administrations. The term is typically used in a critical sense to refer to the lack of influence popular democracy has on these institutions and the decisions they make as a shadow government. The term was originally coined in a somewhat pejorative sense to refer to a similar relatively invisible state apparatus in Turkey and post-Soviet Russia. When I was on active duty and three tours in DC, I called “The Deep State” the Bureaucracy. The bureaucracy has metastasized into a four-level deep state!
Anyone who has spent time on Capitol Hill will get the feeling when watching debates in the House or Senate chambers that he or she is seeing a kind of marionette theater, with members of Congress reading carefully vetted talking points about prefabricated issues. While the public is now aware of the disproportionate influence of powerful corporations over Washington, few fully appreciate that the United States has in the last several decades gradually undergone a process first identified by Aristotle. This process, which the journalist Lawrence Peter Garrett described in the 1930s as a “revolution within the form,” was later championed by Machiavelli. Our venerable institutions of government have outwardly remained the same, but they have grown more and more resistant to the popular will as they have become hardwired into a corporate and private influence network with almost unlimited cash to enforce its will.
Even as commentators decry a broken Congress that cannot marshal the money to secure our borders, the will, or the competence to repair our roads and bridges, heal our war veterans, or even roll out a health care website seems beyond their reach. There is always enough money and will, and maybe just enough competence, to overthrow foreign governments, and to fight the longest wars in the Middle East and Afghanistan in U.S. history.
These paradoxes, both within the government and within the ostensibly private economy, are related. They are symptoms of a shadow government ruling the United States pays little heed to the plain words of the Constitution. Its governing philosophy profoundly influences foreign and national security policy and such domestic matters as spending priorities, trade, investment, income inequality, privatization of government services, media presentation of news, and the whole meaning and worth of citizens’ participation in their government. We have come to call this shadow government the Deep State. We use the term to mean a hybrid association of key elements of government and parts of top-level finance and industry that are effectively able to govern the United States with only limited reference to the consent of the governed as normally expressed through elections.
The Deep State is the big story of our time. It is the red thread that runs through the war on terrorism and the militarization of our foreign policy, the CIA and DOJ. But these isolated cases have not provided a framework for understanding the extent of the shadow government, how it arose, the interactions of its various parts, and the extent to which it influences and controls the leaders whom we think we choose in elections.
My reflection on our “shadow of government” has come only after my retirement in 1993 and my departure from Washington, D.C. proper and the institutions located there to the State of Montana. Unlike the clear majority of Capitol Hill strivers who leave the place for greener pastures, I had no desire to join a lobbying shop, trade association, or think tank. But I did have a need to put the events I had witnessed in perspective, and I came to realize that the nation’s capital, where I lived and worked for many years, has its own peculiar ecology.
To look upon Washington once again with fresh eyes, I sometimes feel as Darwin must have when he first set foot on the Galapagos Islands. From the Pentagon to K Street, and from the contractor cube farms in Crystal City to the public policy foundations along Massachusetts Avenue, the terrain and its people are exotic and well worth examining in a rational and common-sense manner. The United States has its capital there, and so does our Deep State. To describe them in the language of physics, they coexist in the same way it is possible for two subatomic particles to coexist in an entangled quantum state. The characteristics of each particle, or each governmental structure, cannot fully be described independently; instead, we must find a way to describe the system. The Deep State also extends to many States and local governments.,
If you don’t know what the Deep State is then, perhaps you are part of it. We know, of course, that the liberal Deep State that lurks within our government is and always has been hellbent on destroying President Trump and preventing him from making America great again. And we know for certain that Deep State weasels fabricated the whole Russia HOAX and myth. But the raids on Michael Cohen’s Manhattan office and hotel room confirm one of my long-held suspicions: The Democratic Deep State has sunk to an even more insidious level and is now targeting a president in the sneakiest and most deceitful way possible. Roger Stone’s arrest using early morning Gestapo tactics by the FBI is deplorable.
Let us start with Robert Mueller ( the rogue special counsel) who completed his investigation with No Collusion and Obstruction of Justice. As Trump has said, the whole thing was a big witch hunt, and that makes Mueller the lead witch hunter and his minions in the FBI and Department of Justice. Well, Mueller who is a registered Republican and was first appointed head of the FBI by President George W. Bush, who is also a Republican. (I’m telling you, this conspiracy goes DEEP!). The raid on Trump’s lawyer began with a referral from the Mueller investigation to the U.S. attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York. That stinks to high heaven of Deep State involvement.
We will terminate and destroy the Deep State. WE must! America’s future as a secure Nation that is of the people, for the people and by the people and not governed by partisan political hacks!
MG Paul Vallely is Chairman of Stand Up America US.
Stand Up America U.S. Foundation and The Scott Vallely Soldiers Memorial Fund are now supporting The Valor Equine Therapy Service Herd 2 Human Program for our veterans and first responders.
Equine Assisted Therapy has shown to be very effective in treating patients, including combat veterans and first responders, with PTSD, depression, anxiety, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, as well as behavior disorders.
Valor Equine Therapy Services, Inc. (V.E.T.S.) is a Montana based 501(c)(3) not-for-profit corporation established to help veterans and first responders suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and/or traumatic brain injury (TBI).
Statistics show that horses calm the nerves, lower blood pressure and, in general, relieve stress. Our veterans and first responders will be under the watchful eyes of trained equine professionals.
The goal for VETS is to establish a peaceful, serene atmosphere on a bucolic ranch situated in Northwestern Montana. This will enable the veterans and first responders to “get away from it all” and relax in a rural setting, enjoying the benefits of a one-on-one relationship with a special horse. Veterans and first responders will be housed on the ranch for a period of time to allow them to “de-stress” from all of life’s challenges. VETS will offer programs such as, but not limited to, woodworking, furniture making, ornamental welding, photography, gardening, cooking, and financial counseling.
To provide a resource for the ever-growing demand for professional assistance in mitigating the damaging effects of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and/or traumatic brain injury (TBI) suffered by military veterans, law enforcers, firefighters and EMT responders. Equine Therapeutic Programs (ETPs) are supervised by professional equestrian instructors who teach wounded veterans and first responders how to interact, react, and care for a horse.
NONPROFIT TAPS INTO HEALING POWER OF HORSES
November 14, 2018 at 5:00 am | By KIANNA GARDNER Daily Inter Lake
For more than five years, Valor Equine Therapy Service Inc., a nonprofit based in Columbia Falls, has used the healing power of horses to help active duty members, veterans and first-responders manage and mitigate the side effects of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), a condition that occurs when someone struggles to recover mentally from a traumatic experience.
Some estimate more 13 million people in the United States struggle with PTSD and among the most susceptible are veterans and first-responders.
The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs estimates that PTSD affects about 30 percent of Vietnam veterans during their lifetimes, about 12 percent from the Gulf War and about 15 percent from operations in Iraq.
Valor’s founder, Lynn Murray, said that although she is not a veteran herself, her countless friends who served in Desert Storm and Vietnam inspired her to start the organization.
“I wanted to try and help my friends who seemed to not be receiving any help from the VA,” Murray said. “I noticed other animals like dogs were being used to heal people so I thought, why not horses?”
Those who choose to go through Valor’s program participate in various “talking circles” with mental-health professionals and are individually paired with a horse to interact with and care for alongside staff. Considering experiences with PTSD are often difficult to discuss openly, groups usually don’t consist of more than six participants at a time, Murray said.
To describe the benefits of human and horse interaction, Jeff Patterson, co-founder of Herd 2 Human, often turns to a tried-and-true Winston Churchill adage: “There is something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man.”
According to Patterson, interacting with horses can lower blood pressure and slow heart rates. Horses also read and often mirror the emotions and behaviors of their owners and caretakers.
Common side-effects of PTSD include bouts of anxiety and mood swings — emotions that, should they arise, are difficult for those who are suffering to notice. So when the horse begins mirroring their behaviors, participants are then able to recognize and monitor their side-effects, said Valor’s operations manager, Wayne Appl.
“Horses are like a 1,200-pound lie detector,” Appl said. “You can’t hide anything from them.”
And program participants are not the only ones to benefit from equine therapy.
Some of the horses used in Valor’s program are rescues brought in from the Hiatt Equestrian Rescue and Recreation center in Bigfork. The horses are sometimes saved from slaughterhouses and abusive living conditions and are fighting mental problems of their own.
“Those horses need human touch as much as the humans need to touch them,” Murray said. “The animals sometimes finish the program just as healed as the people are.”
Murray said Valor has grown significantly over the years and she hopes to expand their facilities soon. In February, Skijor USA is coming to Columbia Falls and will donate a portion of proceeds from the event to Valor.
Reporter Kianna Gardner may be reached at 758-4439 or email@example.com.
A Message To President Trump from MG Paul Vallely, U.S. Army (ret.) with an Update on Murder and the Benghazi Cover Up!
Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely (U.S. Army, Ret.) was recently on Conservative Commandos Radio Show to discuss new information he has on Benghazi. Was there a stand-down order while the Special Mission Compound and CIA Annex were under attack that night in 2012? Why didn’t the military send forces to attempt to help those Americans attack in Benghazi that night?
What is the DOJ, the FBI, the CIA, the Intel Community, the Department of State, and Congress hiding?
SUA has proprietary intel concerning the greatest crimes ever committed against the American people.
Important information on “Secretary of State” Hillary Clinton and the Department of State:
More VIP Revealing Facts on Benghazi! White House notified immediately! Assets available were told to stand down!
MG Paul Vallely and American patriots involved in communications during the Benghazi murders by omission and crime scene staging and the 13 hours and a Training Mission at the time are interviewed by Audrey Russo.
Diplomatic cables and much more were exposed for years prior!
EU Investigating Report of Massive Hacking on Diplomatic Cables
By Natalia Drozdiak
The European Union is investigating “a potential leak of sensitive information” following a report that hackers breached the bloc’s diplomatic communications network.
Using techniques similar to those used by an elite unit of China’s People’s Liberation Army, hackers downloaded cables over a period of three years, according to the report by the New York Times published late Tuesday.
In response, a spokeswoman for the European Council said Wednesday they were “aware of the allegations” and “actively investigating the issue.”
China hacked US Army transport orgs TWENTY TIMES in ONE YEAR
FBI et al knew of nine hacks – but didn’t tell TRANSCOM
By Darren Pauli 18 Sep 2014
Sophisticated Beijing-backed hackers raided civilian organisations responsible for the movements of US troops and equipment 20 times in one year of which only two were detected by the responsible agency, an audit report has found.
Contractors underneath the US Transportation Command (TRANSCOM) agency were hacked a total of 50 times, which included less sophisticated attacks made by actors not identified by the US Government as being on China’s payroll.
The audit was conducted in the 12 months to June 2013 based on information provided by the Federal Bureau of Investigations, Defense Security Services, Defense Cyber Crime Centre, and the US Air Force and 11 contractors.
Senate Armed Services Committee members said the intrusions were unacceptable and a sign of aggression on the part of Beijing.
“These peacetime intrusions into the networks of key defense contractors are more evidence of China’s aggressive actions in cyberspace,” committee chairman Senator Carl Levin said.
“Our findings are a warning that we must do much more to protect strategically significant systems from attack and to share information about intrusions when they do occur.”
Ranking member Senator Jim Inhofe called for a “central clearinghouse” for critical contractors to report possible hacks.
The audit found intrusions including the compromise or theft of email accounts, documents, passwords and code.
It also revealed a Civil Reserve Air Fleet contractor lost flight details, credentials and its email encryption key while systems on a TRANSCOM contractor ship were hacked multiple times.
The committee behind the report said TRANSCOM and its contractors lack a universal definition of what constituted a compromise.
It further criticised the reporting structure and said the FBI and Department of Defence knew but did not tell the Pentagon of nine separate intrusions of TRANSCOM contractors.
The committee updated its version of the National Defense Authorisation Act for Fiscal Year 2015 to direct the Secretary of Defense to designate operationally critical contractors and impose tighter reporting requirements for breaches suspected to be pulled off by nation-states.
The audit findings follow the naming by the US Government of five members of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army it claimed were behind an eight-year hacking campaign against some American companies to steal commercially sensitive information. ®
“Chinese military cyber attacks revealed in the report included a contractor who was compromised between 2009 and 2010 and lost emails, documents, user accounts, passwords and source code, indicating the penetration gain broad access. ”
“From June 1, 2012 to May 30, 2013, 50 successful intrusions were made into contractors’ systems, and of those, 20 were attributed to an advanced persistent threat (APT). But that wasn’t the most disconcerting finding, according to the report’s executive summary.
“Of those APT-linked intrusions, TRANSCOM was made aware of only two, a troubling finding given the potential impact of cyber intrusions on defense information and operations,” the report said.”
‘We could have been there’: Squadron member speaks out on stalled Benghazi response
By Fox News
May 12, 2016
His squadron got the alert: a “real world mission was going down.”
The team – at Aviano Air Base in northeastern Italy – raced to the field and was briefed, as planes were armed and prepared to launch. Hundreds of miles away, fellow Americans were under attack in Benghazi.
“There were people everywhere,” said the witness, who was on the ground that night but wished to remain anonymous. “That flight line was full of people, and we were all ready to go” to Benghazi.
Only they were waiting for the order. It never came.
“The whole night we were told that we are waiting on a call,” he told Fox News.
This account is from a squadron member at Aviano the night of the Sept. 11, 2012, terror attack in Benghazi. The source, the first in his squadron to speak out publicly since that attack, is going public to explain – in his view – that more could have been done to save Americans under attack that night.
He asked that his identity be protected for fear of retribution. He says others in his squadron also have wanted to talk about Benghazi from the beginning, but no others have been interviewed and all are afraid of the potential backlash from speaking out.
“I’m not trying to give away any type of [information] that could ever harm the military,” the source told Fox News. “That is never my plan. I feel that some things need to come to light.”
Namely, he said, that a team was ready to go that night to help protect Americans under fire in Benghazi – an account that runs counter to multiple official reports, including from a House committee, a timeline provided by the military and the controversial State Department Accountability Review Board investigation, which concluded the interagency response to Benghazi was “timely and appropriate.”
The source said: “I definitely believe that our aircraft could have taken off and gotten there in a timely manner, maybe three hours at the most, in order to at least stop that second mortar attack … and basically save lives that day.”
Former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were killed in that second wave. Ambassador Chris Stevens and information officer Sean Smith were killed in the initial attack on the main compound.
“We could have been there. That’s the worst part,” the source said.
The source who spoke with Fox News challenged the military claim that a re-fueling tanker wasn’t available. He said American jets routinely refuel by using what’s called a “hot pit maneuver,” which allows the jets to land and then get fuel without shutting off the engines.
Multiple sources say there were multiple locations available the night of the attack.
He said they were waiting on the call, though, through the night. The men say they didn’t truly learn about the mission they had missed until they returned home the next day from the airfield and saw the reports about the Benghazi attack on the news.
Many still don’t talk about the subject and some insist it has hurt morale within the squadron because “people know we were stationed there and didn’t respond.”
The same frustrations have compelled Mike, a former team sergeant for a military anti-terror quick reaction force, once known as the CIF, to talk.
“For some reason they were all shut down, and I think it leads back to a policymaker somewhere because nobody in the military is going to shut down an operation,” he said. On the night of the attack, Mike was at Delta Force headquarters in the U.S. monitoring the events as they happened.
“We had hours and hours and hours to do something … and we did nothing,” he said.
Despite the claim by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the State Department that nothing more could have been done, a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit recently revealed that Department of Defense Chief of Staff Jeremy Bash immediately offered assistance to the State Department on the night of Sept. 11, saying forces could move to Benghazi and “they are spinning up as we speak.”
Mike echoed that: “I know everything was spun up and nothing was done.”
He added: “At our level, we were doing everything we were supposed to be doing. At everybody else’s level above us, it was political.”
In June 2014, Delta Forces captured Abu Khattala, a man now charged in the attack.
Mike, though, said Khattala is a low-level operative and not one of the terror cell leaders. He said the U.S. could have collected intelligence leading to “bigger fish” had the U.S. acted sooner following the attack.
Meanwhile, while Democrats have called the House investigation into the Benghazi attacks a waste of time and money, committee Chairman Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., says his committee has uncovered new facts – but does admit they still are having issues finding witnesses.
“It’s been very frustrating,” Gowdy told Fox News.
In response to Fox News’ reporting, he also issued a statement saying it is “deeply troubling there are individuals who would like to share their stories, but have not because they are afraid of retaliation from their superiors.”
The two men who spoke with Fox News have not spoken with the committee.
Crime Scene Staging 101 : LYONS: Benghazi was a planned tragedy
Editor’s Note: From our great friend Adm. James “Ace” Lyons, USN (ret) and our friends at WND.com (from 2014). With special thanks to The Citizens Committee on Benghazi and The Legacy National Security Group.
James A. Lyons, U.S. Navy retired Admiral, was commander-in-chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet and senior U.S. military representative to the United Nations.
The road to Benghazi = time and distance. En route. What to wear when visiting each city.
LYONS: Benghazi was a planned tragedy
The event was no surprise, and the massive cover-up appalls
By James A. Lyons – – Monday, March 3, 2014
The recent reports by the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee and the House Armed Services Committee make clear that no organization in the chain of command, including the White House, should have been surprised by the tragic events that occurred at our Benghazi Special Mission Compound (SMC) on Sept. 11, 2012.
Clearly, there was both strategic and tactical warnings.
The security situation in eastern Libya, particularly Benghazi, was out of control. Trying to explain our failure to protect the SMC as a lack of appreciation of the seriousness of the deteriorating security situation or incompetence does not pass muster. This was a planned event and explains the massive cover-up.
There were numerous hostile acts leading up to the attack on the compound. For example, on April 6, 2012, an attack with improvised explosive devices was conducted on the outer wall of the compound.
On May 22, the Benghazi International Red Cross office was hit by two rocket-propelled grenades. On June 1, a car bomb exploded outside the Benghazi hotel where the British ambassador was staying. On June 6, an IED blew a hole in the compound’s perimeter wall. On June 7, Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens requested two mobile security teams for his protection but was denied by the State Department.
On June 11, the British ambassador’s convoy was hit by RPGs. On June 17, the U.K. closes its Benghazi consulate, and the International Red Cross closes its office. On June 19, the Tunisian Consulate is stormed by the rebel group Ansar al Shariah.
Then on July 9, the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli requests continued security support for an additional 60 days, but receives no answer from the State Department.
On Aug. 2, Stevens requests 11 additional personal-security bodyguards. He calls the security situation unpredictable and violent, but his requests are turned down by State. Stevens sent a cable to State on Aug, 16 stating that the compound cannot withstand a coordinated attack.
The State Department’s reaction was to withdraw the three Quick Reaction Units at our embassy in Tripoli under the command of Col. Andy Wood over the objection of the embassy and Col. Wood.
At this point, AFRICOM offers to provide additional security, but Stevens feels compelled to turn down the offer owing to State denying all his requests for increased security.
The State Department turning down all of Stevens‘ requests for increased security as well as drawing down security assets in country is more than puzzling, particularly since an internal State Department analysis completed two months after the compound opened stated that unless security was increased, the compound should be closed. This assessment is buried in the Accountability Review Board (ARB) report.
The question that needs to be answered is, with the out-of-control security situation in eastern Libya, why were there no contingency plans or forces pre-positioned ready to respond to potential attacks on the anniversary of 9/11?
According to one report, the administration was focused on Tunisia, not Libya. Mind-boggling. Nonetheless, if that were the case, where were the forces positioned to respond to an attack on Tunisia?
On the day of the attack, according to a report in The Guardian, the readiness of the ambassador’s five-member security detail raises questions. Three of the four agents with Stevens, according to the report, left their rifles, helmets and body armor in another area under orders by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, which was confirmed by the ARB report.
This makes no sense, given that standard operating procedures in a hostile environment require that weapon be kept at the ready all times. Another question that needs to be answered: Why would the secretary of state give such an order?
Based on numerous reports, the Obama administration and every organization in the chain of command knew almost instantly that this was a terrorist attack on the SMC.
Within hours, it was known that the attack was executed by Ansar al Shariah, which is a coalition of Islamic and Salafist rebel groups linked to al Qaeda, al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, Libyan Islamic Fighting Group and the February 17th Martyrs Brigade.
It should not be overlooked that the February 17th Martyrs Brigade was tasked with supporting the U.K.-based Blue Mountain Security Group that had the contract from our State Department to provide security for the compound.
According to my source, who is a confidential informant for the FBI, the Blue Mountain Security Group is a cover company for MI-6. My source also told me that the February 17 Martyrs Brigade contract personnel were positioned near the compound the day of the attack and were ready to respond but never received orders to execute. Interesting.
My FBI confidential informant has also confirmed my assessment on the Lou Dobbs TV show in October 2012; namely, that this was an operation that went terribly wrong.
According to my source’s in-country contacts, there never was any intention to kill Stevens. He was supposed to be kidnapped and held as a hostage in exchange for the release of the blind sheik, Omar Abdel Rahman. It should be recalled that this was the No. 1 objective of then-Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi in his Washington visit in 2012.
All the unanswered questions and the truth of what actually took place at our Benghazi compound that cost the lives of four Americans can only be resolved by the formation of a special committee with subpoena powers.
House Speaker John A. Boehner, appoint such a committee as called for by Resolution 36 put forth by Rep. Frank R. Wolf, Virginia Republican, and restore integrity to the office of the speaker.
James A. Lyons, U.S. Navy retired Admiral, was commander-in-chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet and senior U.S. military representative to the United Nations.
Editor’s Note: Weapons to the wrong groups, ISIS and Al-Qaeda, fore a reason…to keep it going…and…
China to deploy troops to fight alongside Assad in Syria
By: The Middle East Monitor
China is planning to send troops to Syria to aid President Bashar Al-Assad’s forces, according to the New Khaleej.
According to informed sources, the move comes as China becomes increasingly concerned with the presence of Islamic militants in the East Turkestan region, who have been sighted aiding opposition groups in Syria.
Last week, during a meeting with Syrian Presidential Advisor Bouthaina Shaaban, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi praised the regime’s efforts at tackling the fighters from the Islamic East Turkistan Movement.
The Syrian regime has also claimed that some 5,000 fighters of Uyghur origin, an ethnic Muslim minority that Chinese authorities regularly accuse of terrorism, have arrived in Syria, illegally passing through Southeast Asia and Turkey.
The sources said that the Chinese Ministry of Defence intends to send two units known as the “Tigers of Siberia” and the “Night Tigers” from the Special Operations Forces to aid Syrian government troops.
This is not the first time Chinese troops have crossed into Syria; in 2015 the Syrian regime permitted some 5,000 soldiers to enter its territory as allied forces and stationed them in the Western region of Latakia. Chinese military advisors were also among the deployment, as well as naval and aerial assets.
China is one of the five veto-wielding powers of the UN Security Council and, along with Russia, has used its power on more than one occasion to protect the interests of the Syrian regime.
Russian support has given the government an upper hand in the six year-long civil war, especially as the battle against Daesh comes to an end.
More than half a million people are believed to have been killed since 2011, the vast majority by the Assad government and allied forces. The regime has also used chemical weapons against civilians and prevented aid from reaching those affected on the ground. UN officials further estimate that some ten million people have been displaced as a result of the fighting.
‘Dignity intact’: Mexico celebrates deal in Tijuana rally
By Christopher Sherman – Associated Press – Sunday, June 9, 2019
TIJUANA, Mexico — Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador said he was reluctantly prepared to slap retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods if negotiators in Washington had failed to strike a deal, addressing a boisterous celebratory rally Saturday in the border city of Tijuana.
The president’s comments came shortly after his foreign minister and chief negotiator, Marcelo Ebrard, told the rally the country had emerged from the high-stakes talks that avoided U.S. tariffs on Mexico’s exports with its “dignity intact.”
López Obrador said that as an admirer of Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela, he opposes retaliation but had been prepared to impose tariffs on U.S. goods. “As chief representative of the Mexican state I cannot permit that anyone attacks our economy or accept an unjust asymmetry unworthy of our government.”
The rally in Tijuana, a short walk from the border, was originally scheduled as an act of solidarity in the face of President Donald Trump’s threat to impose a 5% tariff on Mexico’s exports if it did not stem the flow of Central American migrants crossing its territory toward the U.S.
But after Mexican and U.S. officials reached an accord late Friday that calls on Mexico to crackdown on migrants in exchange for Trump backing off his threat, officials here converted the rally into a celebration.
brard, who helped negotiate the deal, said when he gave the president his report, he told López Obrador: “There are no tariffs, Mr. President, we emerged with our dignity intact.”
López Obrador has said consistently that Mexico’s immigration policy will be guided by respect for
human rights. How that is integrated with the more proactive enforcement Mexico has promised Trump is yet to be seen.
“We take advantage of being here in Tijuana to say to the people of the United States once more that we do not harbor any intention nor will we harbor any intention to harm them, and we are resolved to collaborate with them in all areas, especially on the concern spurred by the growth of the migratory flow to their country,” he said.
“At the same time, we ask for their understanding because the migratory phenomenon doesn’t come from nowhere, it comes from the material needs and the insecurity in the Central American countries and in marginalized sectors and regions of Mexico, where there are human beings who need to set out on a pilgrimage to mitigate their hunger and their poverty or to save their lives.”
A series of speakers at the government-organized gathering spoke of the importance of the U.S.-Mexico relationship and applauded Mexico’s negotiating team. The rally had the feeling of a campaign event with paraphernalia from López Obrador’s ruling Morena party spread throughout the crowd.
The event was held in an intersection of Tijuana’s gritty downtown surrounded by pharmacies and currency exchange shops. Prostitutes lined the street a block away from the stage filled with dignitaries.
Lopez Obrador spoke of the long and intertwined histories of the two countries, noting that they “are protagonists in the largest demographic exchange in the world.”
Tijuana residents at the rally said they supported the terms of the agreement. But residents just a block away expressed concern the deal could mean more asylum seekers having to wait in Tijuana and other Mexican border cities for the resolution of their cases in the U.S. That process can take months or even years.
Angelica López, 41, has worked at a U.S. assembly plant in Tijuana that makes motors of all kinds for more than 20 years. The threatened tariffs would have directly impacted her family’s well-being, she said.
“Honestly, we were worried,” she said. “That’s how we eat, how we provide for the family, our home.”
As for the possibility that it means more Central American migrants have to wait out their asylum process in Tijuana, López noted that she had arrived in Tijuana as an economic migrant from another part of Mexico.
“The opportunities are for everyone, we simply support one another as human beings.”
But a block away, masseuse Omar Luna, said he believed many of the Central American migrants waiting in Tijuana were not there to work and were causing problems.
“This part affects us a little,” he said. “A lot of them don’t come to work, they’re criminals, (but) not all of them.”
Critics of the deal in Mexico say that other than a vague reiteration of a joint commitment to promote development, security and growth in Central America, the agreement focuses almost exclusively on enforcement and says little about the root causes driving the surge in migrants seen in recent months.
The deployment of 6,000 National Guard troops appears to be the key commitment in what was described as “unprecedented steps” by Mexico to ramp up enforcement, though Interior Secretary Olga Sánchez Cordero said that had already been planned and was not a result of external pressure.
Another key element of the deal is that the United States will expand a program known as the Migrant Protection Protocol, or MPP. According to Mexican immigration authorities, since January there have been 10,393 returns by migrants to Mexico while their cases wend their way through U.S. courts.
Observers said a concern is that if the MPP rolls out on a mass scale along the United States’ entire southern border, it could overwhelm Mexican border cities.