Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Obama: Benghazi Debacle Just Gets Worse


Below are the contents of an email I received from another blogger, Jason, in whose integrity and veracity I have full confidence.  However, Jason was forwarding an email he received, so I can only say that the contents appear plausible given the other information available on this subject.  If there is even partial truth to the allegations contained therein, it is a damning indictment of a sitting president.

This tragedy regarding Benghazi gets uglier by the hour. There is one thing I can assure you because I’ve been in a similar situation as the Benghazi attack when bullets were fired at my office at a U.S. Embassy. In my case the attacks continued not for 7 hours, as in the case of Benghazi, but for almost 48 hours. What always happens during such an attack is that reporting on the ground from Embassy officials continues with messages being transmitted to Washington DC in what is known as CRITIC format. That is the highest level precedence for any type of official communication from a military or government facility. When an official government officer prepares such a message in CRITIC format it automatically goes to NSOC (National Security Operations Center) at NSA where it then is automatically reviewed and immediately distributed to military command and control centers and senior government watch offices throughout the U.S. government worldwide. First on that CRITIC list for distribution is the White House Operations Center. I generated about 10 to 15 of these critic messages during my 33 year career during world crisis situations. Many senior officers have never even seen a critic message and certainly never generated one. You don’t generate or transmit a CRITIC message lightly. Sending one turns on bells and whistles all over Washington DC and major military command centers around the globe. Generally only the senior officer at a facility is authorized to permit sending such a message. There is no doubt that the Benghazi Consulate must have sent several of these CRITIC messages when they were being overrun by Al Qaeda terrorists on 9/11 2012.
Having said that I think it’s important to understand that there is literally no way the president or vice president of the United States did not know all that was happening in Benghazi, Libya as it was happening. Every aspect of that attack which killed four Americans, including the Ambassador, would have been related to the president in real time. If it was not, then there has been a very serious break down in the way our American government has functioned from the time I began working in 1964 right up to the present. There is no way that the president did not know everything that was going on during this attach. While I now feel reasonable certain that president Obama will lose in the upcoming election, I also feel that there is sufficient evidence to bring serious charges against him, including impeachment for dereliction of duty for not authorizing aid and assistance to the three requests made by the Benghazi Consulate for military support.  Again I want to stress that the CRITIC message reporting format has been around since about 1948 following the Bogotazo Affair (
 when a U.S. Secretary of State came under attack in Bogota, Colombia. The reporting of the incident was delayed or inappropriately handled. So during the cold war and presumably right up to the present, the CRITIC reporting procedure worked exceptionally well. A CRITIC message is supposed to reach the White House within two minutes from the time it is first transmitted by the originating officer or Agency. The surest way to be fired from federal government service is not to understand CRITIC reporting procedures or fail to report to provide timely reporting on a CRITIC situation.
So did the president know everything there was to know about the Benghazi attack on 9/11?  You can be 100% assured Obama was informed of every single detail in the greatest minutiae. HE KNEW IT ALL and he knew it in real time! He and his administrative staff invented out of whole cloth the notion that this preplanned attack was a popular spontaneous demonstration against a 7-minute anti-Muslim video. The attack began at 9:30 PM at night, never the usual time for a demonstration. The American people were lied to and the print and TV media are not covering this story in order to protect the president. You also know that and so does every other right thinking American.
HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS (Dereliction of duties)
Impeachment in the United States is an expressed power of the legislature
 that allows for formal charges against a civil officer of government for crimes committed in office. The  actual trial on those charges, and subsequent removal of an official on conviction on those charges, is separate from the act of impeachment itself. 
Impeachment is analogous to indictment in regular court proceedings, while trial by the  other house is analogous to the trial before judge and jury in regular courts. Typically,  the lower house of the legislature will impeach the official and the upper house will conduct the trial. 
At the federal level Article II of the United States Constitution (Section 4) states that "The PresidentVice President, and all civil Officers of the United States shall be removed  from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, TreasonBribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors." The House of Representatives has the sole power of  impeaching, while the United States Senate has the sole power to try all impeachments.  The removal of impeached officials is automatic upon conviction in the Senate. In Nixon v. United States (1993), the Supreme Court determined that the federal judiciary cannot review such proceedings.

CIA Diector General Petraeus Throws president Obama Under the Bus
6:05 PM, Oct 26, 2012 • By WILLIAM KRISTOL
Breaking news on Benghazi: the CIA spokesman, presumably at the direction of CIA director David Petraeus, has put out this statement: "No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. ”
Barack Obama  
So who in the government did tell “anybody” not to help those in need? Someone decided not to send in military assets to help those Agency operators. Would the secretary of defense make such a decision on his own? No!
It would have been a presidential decision. There was presumably a rationale for such a decision. What was it? When and why—and based on whose counsel obtained in what meetings or conversations—did President Obama decide against sending in military assets to help the Americans in need?

2012 IS HERE


Can"t Find It?

Use the SEARCH BLOG feature at the upper left. For example, try "Global Warming".

You can also use the "LABELS" below or at the end of each post to find related posts.

Blog Archive

Cost of Gasoline - Enter Your Zipcode or Click on Map

CO2 Cap and Trade

There is always an easy solution to every human problem—neat, plausible, and wrong.
Henry Louis Mencken (1880–1956)
“The Divine Afflatus,” A Mencken Chrestomathy, chapter 25, p. 443 (1949)
... and one could add "not all human problems really are."
It was beautiful and simple, as truly great swindles are.
- O. Henry
... The Government is on course for an embarrassing showdown with the European Union, business groups and environmental charities after refusing to guarantee that billions of pounds of revenue it stands to earn from carbon-permit trading will be spent on combating climate change.
The Independent (UK)

Tracking Interest Rates

Tracking Interest Rates


SEARCH BLOG: FEDERAL RESERVE for full versions... or use the Blog Archive pulldown menu.

February 3, 2006
Go back to 1999-2000 and see what the Fed did. They are following the same pattern for 2005-06. If it ain't broke, the Fed will fix it... and good!
August 29, 2006 The Federal Reserve always acts on old information... and is the only cause of U.S. recessions.
December 5, 2006 Last spring I wrote about what I saw to be a sharp downturn in the economy in the "rustbelt" states, particularly Michigan.
March 28, 2007
The Federal Reserve sees no need to cut interest rates in the light of adverse recent economic data, Ben Bernanke said on Wednesday.
The Fed chairman said ”to date, the incoming data have supported the view that the current stance of policy is likely to foster sustainable economic growth and a gradual ebbing in core inflation”.

July 21, 2007 My guess is that if there is an interest rate change, a cut is more likely than an increase. The key variables to be watching at this point are real estate prices and the inventory of unsold homes.
August 11, 2007 I suspect that within 6 months the Federal Reserve will be forced to lower interest rates before housing becomes a black hole.
September 11, 2007 It only means that the overall process has flaws guaranteeing it will be slow in responding to changes in the economy... and tend to over-react as a result.
September 18, 2007 I think a 4% rate is really what is needed to turn the economy back on the right course. The rate may not get there, but more cuts will be needed with employment rates down and foreclosure rates up.
October 25, 2007 How long will it be before I will be able to write: "The Federal Reserve lowered its lending rate to 4% in response to the collapse of the U.S. housing market and massive numbers of foreclosures that threaten the banking and mortgage sectors."
"Should the elevated turbulence persist, it would increase the possibility of further tightening in financial conditions for households and businesses," he said.

"Uncertainties about the economic outlook are unusually high right now," he said. "These uncertainties require flexible and pragmatic policymaking -- nimble is the adjective I used a few weeks ago."

December 11, 2007 Somehow the Fed misses the obvious.
[Image from:]
December 13, 2007 [from The Christian Science Monitor]
"The odds of a recession are now above 50 percent," says Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's "We are right on the edge of a recession in part because of the Fed's reluctance to reduce interest rates more aggressively." [see my comments of September 11]
January 7, 2008 The real problem now is that consumers can't rescue the economy and manufacturing, which is already weakening, will continue to weaken. We've gutted the forces that could avoid a downturn. The question is not whether there will be a recession, but can it be dampened sufficiently so that it is very short.
January 11, 2008 This is death by a thousand cuts.
January 13, 2008 [N.Y. Times]
“The question is not whether we will have a recession, but how deep and prolonged it will be,” said David Rosenberg, the chief North American economist at Merrill Lynch. “Even if the Fed’s moves are going to work, it will not show up until the later part of 2008 or 2009.
January 17, 2008 A few days ago, Anna Schwartz, nonagenarian economist, implicated the Federal Reserve as the cause of the present lending crisis [from the Telegraph - UK]:
The high priestess of US monetarism - a revered figure at the Fed - says the central bank is itself the chief cause of the credit bubble, and now seems stunned as the consequences of its own actions engulf the financial system. "The new group at the Fed is not equal to the problem that faces it," she says, daring to utter a thought that fellow critics mostly utter sotto voce.
January 22, 2008 The cut has become infected and a limb is in danger. Ben Bernanke is panicking and the Fed has its emergency triage team cutting rates... this time by 3/4%. ...

What should the Federal Reserve do now? Step back... and don't be so anxious to raise rates at the first sign of economic improvement.
Individuals and businesses need stability in their financial cost structures so that they can plan effectively and keep their ships afloat. Wildly fluctuating rates... regardless of what the absolute levels are... create problems. Either too much spending or too much fear. It's just not that difficult to comprehend. Why has it been so difficult for the Fed?

About Me

My photo
Michigan, United States
Air Force (SAC) captain 1968-72. Retired after 35 years of business and logistical planning, including running a small business. Two sons with advanced degrees; one with a business and pre-law degree. Beautiful wife who has put up with me for 4 decades. Education: B.A. (Sociology major; minors in philosopy, English literature, and German) M.S. Operations Management (like a mixture of an MBA with logistical planning)