Breaking: Fox News reports CIA command refused to help Benghazi consulate during attack

posted at 12:01 pm on October 26, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Yesterday, Leon Panetta told reporters that the US military didn’t intervene to assist our consulate in Benghazi during the attack because of a lack of real-time intelligence.  Fox News’ Jennifer Griffin now reports that the CIA got at least three requests for support from the annex in the city to help fend off the attack — and that the chain of command not only refused the requests, but ordered its personnel to “stand down.”  Two of the Americans killed in the terrorist attack disobeyed orders and attempted to rescue their fellow Americans:

Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that three urgent requests from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. Consulate and subsequent attack nearly seven hours later were denied by officials in the CIA chain of command — who also told the CIA operators to “stand down” rather than help the ambassador’s team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.

Former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were part of a small team who were at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. Consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When they heard the shots fired, they radioed to inform their higher-ups to tell them what they were hearing. They were told to “stand down,” according to sources familiar with the exchange. An hour later, they called again to headquarters and were again told to “stand down.”

Woods, Doherty and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the Consulate which at that point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The quick reaction force from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the Consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight.

At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Specter gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights. The fighting at the CIA annex went on for more than four hours — enough time for any planes based in Sigonella Air base, just 480 miles away, to arrive. Fox News has also learned that two separate Tier One Special operations forces were told to wait, among them Delta Force operators.

It’s not as if there was no resources to respond, either:

A Special Operations team, or CIF which stands for Commanders in Extremis Force, operating in Central Europe had been moved to Sigonella, Italy, but they too were told to stand down. A second force that specializes in counterterrorism rescues was on hand at Sigonella, according to senior military and intelligence sources. According to those sources, they could have flown to Benghazi in less than two hours. They were the same distance to Benghazi as those that were sent from Tripoli. Specter gunships are commonly used by the Special Operations community to provide close air support.

Griffin’s sources tell her that the annex had painted a laser target at a terrorist mortar position and had called for an air strike.  I’m not sure what that looks like in Panetta’s world, but it at least sounds like real-time intelligence on the attack, as well as a clear target, if this report is correct.

Saxby Chambliss is right — this gets uglier every day.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 9

Anyone want to know what they’re talking about elsewhere:

Why is ABC News ignoring emails related Obama’s Libya scandal?
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/10/26/why-is-abc-news-shielding-obama-over-benghazi-attack/

Wednesday, ABC “World News” gave a dismissive 20 seconds of lip service to a blockbuster report that revealed State Department emails showing that the White House knew on September 11 that the assault on the Benghazi consulate was a terrorist attack. The emails documented that within two hours of the attack, the State Department had told the Obama administration that an Islamic militant group had claimed credit for this terrorist attack.

Psychics Call It for Obama
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/10/blue-aura-psychics-call-it-for-obama/264010/

Important stuff I’d say.

Galt2009 on October 26, 2012 at 12:36 PM

God bless his family, and let all hell rain down on those who turned their backs on all who died in Benghazi. I am red with anger over this and I suspect I am not alone.

TXUS on October 26, 2012 at 12:27 PM

No, you are not….I’m literally choking back the tears. I can’t read anymore right now.

lynncgb on October 26, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Anyone here have a loved one at an embassy or consulate? Do you feel this administration has their back, if things go sideways?

Christien on October 26, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Eff that! If this administration treats ambassadors like this, what about the GI yomping over the hills of Afghanistan?

cozmo on October 26, 2012 at 12:36 PM

In these last days before the election it is going to become clearer and clearer to voters that if Zero wins, he will be impeached at some time in 2013. Why put the country through that? Just vote for Romney. That’s what they’ll be telling themselves.

Rational Thought on October 26, 2012 at 12:36 PM

At this point, we need to start the impeachment proceedings, as well as prosecute Hillary.

jediwebdude on October 26, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Did Obama watch as they fought for their lives?

idesign on October 26, 2012 at 12:33 PM

This is likely what it looked like inside the War Room during the attack.

faraway on October 26, 2012 at 12:37 PM

For their own safety, I hope Jennifer Griffin’s CIA sources soon make themselves known publically.

Droopy on October 26, 2012 at 12:37 PM

SWalker on October 26, 2012 at 12:09 PM

I would only disagree with that last statement, he was supposed to be killed. He was the link to WH for Al Qaeda gun running.

riddick on October 26, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Nope, dead he is of no value as a trade for the Blind Sheik.

SWalker on October 26, 2012 at 12:12 PM

..allow me to loosen the hat band on MY tin foil chapeau and speculate that maybe THIS is why the [un]artful dodging and perhaps Stevens being offered up as a sacrifice? Perhaps they believed that Stevens as the centerpiece in a protracted hostage situation might be too reminiscent of 1979-1980?

The War Planner on October 26, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Try this one on for size, I think you’ll find it fit’s without you having to fiddle with the headband…

SWalker on October 26, 2012 at 12:12 PM

You’re not seeing the picture. We are SUPPLYING AL QAEDA, same terrorist group that Hussein deemed on the run and done with. We are spending OUR TAX DOLLARS to arm them now, with sophisticated weapons to boot.

Stevens is way more “valuable” to Hussein dead rather than negotiations chip. There is no other explanation. Look at my posts right after this happened, I was asking “What did Stevens know and when did he know it?” right there and then. Well, now we know, don’t we?

riddick on October 26, 2012 at 12:16 PM

Oh, I am seeing the Big Picture alright, and the supplying Al Qaeda with weapons isn’t it. This is the BIG PICTURE…

If that was where it stopped, it would be bad enough for the Obama Administration, but tragically it appears that that is not where it stops. It now seems incontrovertible that Ambassador Steven’s was playing a role that even he was not aware of. The Obama Administration and the Clinton State Department have clearly chosen the Muslim Brotherhood as the heir designate to the New Islamic Caliphate.

Al Qaeda is JUST the Militant Arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, nothing more and nothing less. The New Islamic Caliphate, run by the Muslim Brotherhood will be Run out of Cairo Egypt. Cairo wanted the Blind Sheik. Ambassador Steven’s was not suppose to die, he was suppose to be kidnapped and exchanged for the Blind Sheik.

SWalker on October 26, 2012 at 12:23 PM

SWalker on October 26, 2012 at 12:38 PM

This is criminal negligence.

p0s3r on October 26, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Our President was notified of an attack on our consolate, was informed we had Americans in danger, and he went to bed so he could be ready for his trip to Vegas the next day, which he still went on after learning ambassador Stevens was murdered.

If this is not enough for this “man” to lose the election (never mind that he should be facing a gallows in my opinion) than I’m ashamed to consider myself American.

KMC1 on October 26, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Good thing for obama this won’t get reported anywhere else.

Of course, the United States Armed Forces probably know about it.
I bet they’re talking about it all up and down the chain of command.

Seems like a Commander in Chief might not want to irritate his troops like that.

Demonized on October 26, 2012 at 12:38 PM

wow! That link from SWalker @ 12:09 is incredible! Yesterday me and buddy were in our usual drivetime chat after work and we hit every inch of that doriengrey piece except the prisoner swap part.

I’m thinking if a couple of rubes in Houston on cell phones that are speculating about what appears to be emerging reality are on to this mess, then it must be spreading like wildfire.

There better be talk of impeachment going on.

DanMan on October 26, 2012 at 12:38 PM

The “white house insider” was talking about the kidnap plan last week. Google “white house insider”

I know some people here dismiss White House Insider on Ulsterman’s site as a hoax, but way, way too many WHI reports have presaged actual events to be dismissed.

Right Mover on October 26, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Griffin’s sources tell her that the annex had painted a laser target at a terrorist mortar position and had called for an air strike. I’m not sure what that looks like in Panetta’s world, but it at least sounds like real-time intelligence on the attack, as well as a clear target, if this report is correct.

Sounds right to me.

Colonel Hunt was Right.

Fleuries on October 26, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Barack “Wrecking Ball” Obama’s campaign theme song: “We Take Care Of Our Own.”

Christien on October 26, 2012 at 12:39 PM

Remember Doherty was someone that Romney personally met years ago.

txmomof6 on October 26, 2012 at 12:39 PM

My anger over this is simmering, getting hotter. The more sorrow I feel for loss of my fellow countrymen when it could have been prevented, the more my rage grows.

All I have is a vote, and that doesn’t seem quite enough for me at the moment. But Obama can be damned sure I’m going to use that vote. Against him and the entire Democrat Party.

Liam on October 26, 2012 at 12:40 PM

No, he’s unfit to reside within this country.

TXUS on October 26, 2012 at 12:30 PM

My only disagreement is that I WANT him to reside here, for a long time, in hard labor camp. If that cannot be arranged, ship him to his brothers in Libya.

riddick on October 26, 2012 at 12:40 PM

wtf

equanimous on October 26, 2012 at 12:40 PM

God bless his family, and let all hell rain down on those who turned their backs on all who died in Benghazi. I am red with anger over this and I suspect I am not alone.

TXUS on October 26, 2012 at 12:27 PM

No, you are not….I’m literally choking back the tears. I can’t read anymore right now.

lynncgb on October 26, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Yes. Heartaching, horribly devastating news. My heart is crushed for these men and their families.

herm2416 on October 26, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Obama let them die. The New York Times and the Washington Post then buried them.

pat on October 26, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Father of Slain SEAL: Who Made the Decision Not to Save My Son?

The question that seals BHOs legacy.

This is the question that we, as Americans, need to demand an answer to. General strikes, protests, “get up in their faces”.

I am the father of a 17 yr old son. Please, lets help this father get his question.

Flood the phone system at the Capitol and local offices of your Senators and Representatives, your governor, state assemblies, the frigging local Postmaster.

Turn the damn government inside out until that question is answered.

BobMbx on October 26, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Good to know that it’s not just our side who has the Consipiracy Theorist.

I remember during the aftermath of 9-11 a lot of people on my side were pointing to reports that show that the airforce was asked to stand down while planes were being hijacked and assumed that President Bush planned 9-11 to go to war.

I see other hair brained schemes here as well. Such as,

Stevens was involed in Fast and Furious and had some damaging information so Obama wanted him killed.

The CIA was told to stand down on orders from Obama because of a blind sheik or something

etc etc

I think I now know how the right felt when President Obama won. Me personally, Im looking foward to an Romney President. There will be no wars, no terrorist attacks, gas will be 2.25, no povery, no homeforeclosures and every body in America will have a job.

Politricks on October 26, 2012 at 12:41 PM

This is criminal negligence.

p0s3r on October 26, 2012 at 12:38 PM

No it’s not, it’s straight up TREASON…

SWalker on October 26, 2012 at 12:41 PM

So…
Our men were intentionally sacrificed?

Electrongod on October 26, 2012 at 12:04 PM

More like “expended”. “Under the bus”. “Kicked to the curb”.

BobMbx on October 26, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Cold-blooded murder.

The President of the United States is guilty of cold-blooded murder.

davidk on October 26, 2012 at 12:28 PM

There is nothing new under the sun. Uriah the Hittite writ large

chemman on October 26, 2012 at 12:41 PM

……The, freaking heck!?!?

How could anybody, anywhere, at any time, be this incredibly INCOMPETENT! It almost feels like they meant to get our diplomats killed, the ONLY thing missing is a motive!

Sorry, again, usually I try to maintain clinical detachment, but this is just absurd!

WolvenOne on October 26, 2012 at 12:41 PM

I have never hated an opposing politician. Disagree vehemently sure, but not hate. When Clinton denied tanks to Mogadishu, I was very angry especially after the Black Hawk down disaster. Still I did not hate because the catastrophe of Mogadishu didn’t appear malignant just inept.

This Benghazi disaster is taking on the smell of something sinister. At the least the ineptitude here makes Mogadishu look like Alexander the Great was in charge. At worst a set up with American citizens, and some of the finest, as pawns in some political gamesmanship. This makes me sick. The thought of those brave men asking for help only to be denied, can you imagine! Barack and his minions deserve to be on my hate list.

filetandrelease on October 26, 2012 at 12:41 PM

…no wonder JugEars wants everyone to vote early…more is coming out daily…if he loses the DOJ can’t protect him…and he can’t pardon himself.

KOOLAID2 on October 26, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Mike Baker, former CIA just said the administration’s actions are “pathetic.” They always move on incomplete data…our guys were ready. The fact they weren’t allowed to move in to help is unconscionable. Panetta involved but certainly the WH was in it.

Lt. Tony Shaffer
Doherty and Woods were calling for help and knew what assets were available.They can and do adapt to whatever faces them.Laser pointers would have pinpointed the bad guys and lesson collateral damage. He is putting holes in everything this admin has stated.

CoffeeLover on October 26, 2012 at 12:42 PM

One thought- If there was vital intelligence information or materiel at risk AT THE ANNEX, and leaving the annex to aid the Ambassador would have placed that materiel or information at an appreciable risk, then its possible the initial decision to not send those assets to the Consulate compound is defensible. And that decision would likely have come from someone at CIA with intimate knowledge of said materiel. One would also have to assume that the CIA was aware of the particulars involving Amb Stevens PSD and the security level at the compound.

However, if there was, in fact, information or materiel of such an important nature, and it was gathered prior to that date, then the Annex should have been sufficiently hardened and secured to house it. And it seems abundantly clear that was not the case.

My guess is that there was a standing order at State, set by the agenda of the president, that under all emergency situations, the president Valerie Jarrett must be notified before any action is to take place. I suspect it was followed to the letter. Then, given how this administration reacts to grave challenges, further requests were met with presidential paralysis. (Libs like to call it pragmatism, though what it really is, is the inability to make crucial “3am” decisions without first analyzing how it might effect his political career.)

And then it was too late. That’s why they changed their story and blamed it on the video. Reacting to a mob of unhinged YouTube watchers is much more difficult diplomatically than responding to a military attack. Americans, they calculated, would understand that they couldn’t just send in Apaches to strafe Libyan citizens who felt their religion was criminally mocked. But, when the dust settled, the White House knew they had a real mess on their hands, two short months before the election.

Obama’s initial instinct was to pray for sympathy; that’s why he mentioned “acts of terror” in the rose garden. But the campaign was formulating another plan, that took off once they saw how the media was attacking Romney. They took the video idea from the Cairo tweets that Romney initially responded to, and was vilified for. Make it about Islam, continue the attack on Romney. That was the plan.

Eli Lake and Jennifer Griffin destroyed that plan.

BKeyser on October 26, 2012 at 12:42 PM

President Romney should declare a national day of mourning for these brave heroes at Arlington.

And will someone please LOWER OUR FLAGS AT HALF MAST FOR THEM?

itsspideyman on October 26, 2012 at 12:42 PM

In a sane America, reporters would be swarming the White House and demanding answers. The Congress would be issuing warrants. Instead these traitors get to come out, make their statements, blame conservatives for even asking, and walk away with their noses in the air! They don’t even take follow up questions, for goodness sakes! This is treason and murder! They all, Obama, Jarrett, Hillary, Panetta, Petraeus, deserve a trip to Gitmo!

texgal on October 26, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Politricks on October 26, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Are you blind or just Liberal?

kingsjester on October 26, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Remember Doherty was someone that Romney personally met years ago.

txmomof6 on October 26, 2012 at 12:39 PM

Yes, and by god we will certainly find out what kind of man Romney is mighty damned fast if he wins election by how he reacts to the death of a man he knew personally.

SWalker on October 26, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Good thing for obama this won’t get reported anywhere else.

Demonized on October 26, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Why isn’t Crossroads PAC running 5 minutes ads on this in top markets? Once they run, communist media will have to react.

YouTube works as well. There are ways to do this. Romney is speaking on TV today, why not spend a few minutes to point out the timeline Fox just reported on?

Where there is a will, there is a way. That is if GOP wants it out there.

riddick on October 26, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Bill Maher still doesn’t care.

DeathtotheSwiss on October 26, 2012 at 12:43 PM

THIS MAKES ME WANT TO VOMIT

disa on October 26, 2012 at 12:14 PM

Me too.

Wow.
If this proves out, there will be absolute hell to pay.
They are desparately trying to keep something from coming out.

Jabberwock on October 26, 2012 at 12:14 PM

I no longer believe that anyone will be held responsible for this.

P.S. Is anyone hearing what Biden said to one of the dead mens’ father? What a disgusting pig.

Night Owl on October 26, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Politricks on October 26, 2012 at 12:41 PM

I dont remember Bush blaming 911 on a youtube video.

the_nile on October 26, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Murder.

DrMagnolias on October 26, 2012 at 12:44 PM

I’m ashamed to consider myself American.

KMC1 on October 26, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Don’t be. Obama is not America. Never was.

davidk on October 26, 2012 at 12:44 PM

Treason.

NerwenAldarion on October 26, 2012 at 12:44 PM

Eff that! If this administration treats ambassadors like this, what about the GI yomping over the hills of Afghanistan?

cozmo on October 26, 2012 at 12:36 PM

We’ve already seen time and again that this administration doesn’t have their back. I’m asking posters with family serving at embassies or consulates, as this is terra nova.

Christien on October 26, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Panetta was former CIA head. Where he goes, he leaves a trail of stupid behind.

It is so easy for Letterman to get a response from yapping Dems.

It is impossible to grant protection permission?

seven on October 26, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Politricks on October 26, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Your comments here where the lives of two heroes were thrown away by a cowardly administration are scummy.

Go play with yourself while the adults talk about this.

itsspideyman on October 26, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Politricks on October 26, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Is that you Axelrod?

SWalker on October 26, 2012 at 12:45 PM

and he can’t pardon himself.

KOOLAID2 on October 26, 2012 at 12:42 PM

But he can resign a day early and let new Resident Biden issue such pardon. No?

riddick on October 26, 2012 at 12:45 PM

This is sickening. I cannot imagine what those guys went through when they realized there were left without any help.

maables on October 26, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Win or lose, this isn’t going away for Obama…not by a long shot. And I’ve never been prone to buying into conspiracy theories, but none of this passes the smell test.

Erich66 on October 26, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Geez, who would have thunk it….a party that as their platform kills children in the womb without flinching…why would or should we be surprised…….

crosshugger on October 26, 2012 at 12:46 PM

It’s time to start drafting articles of impeachment TODAY. This is appalling. The attack lasted for hours with Tier One operators an hour a way?! Those guys are effing ninjas, this tragedy could have been prevented at so many different points. This is a travesty

Smoochy32 on October 26, 2012 at 12:46 PM

As I let this all sink in… I want to say this makes those that died and those that helped even bigger heroes in my eyes. Putting their lives on the line with this known makes them MOH worthy. Knowing that help was not on the way and to do this… wow. What selfless act on their part.

watertown on October 26, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Politricks on October 26, 2012 at 12:41 PM

STFU and GFY

Aviator on October 26, 2012 at 12:47 PM

How could anybody, anywhere, at any time, be this incredibly INCOMPETENT! It almost feels like they meant to get our diplomats killed, the ONLY thing missing is a motive!

Sorry, again, usually I try to maintain clinical detachment, but this is just absurd!

WolvenOne on October 26, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Not incompetence.

Murder. Calculated.

davidk on October 26, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Obama: Gutsy call
Two real American heroes: Crickets

DrStock on October 26, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Abe Lincoln fired his cowardly Generals. Obama not so much.

Article 99—Misbehavior before the enemy

Text. “Any member of the armed forces who before or in the presence of the enemy—

(1) runs away;

(2) shamefully abandons, surrenders, or delivers up any command, unit, place, or military property which it is his duty to defend;

(3) through disobedience, neglect, or intentional misconduct endangers the safety of any such command, unit, place, or military property;

(4) casts away his arms or ammunition;

(5) is guilty of cowardly conduct;

(6) quits his place of duty to plunder or pillage;

(7) causes false alarms in any command, unit, or place under control of the armed forces;

(8) willfully fails to do his utmost to encounter, engage, capture, or destroy any enemy troops, combatants, vessels, aircraft, or any other thing, which it is his duty so to encounter, engage, capture, or destroy; or

(9) does not afford all practicable relief and assistance to any troops, combatants, vessels, or aircraft of the armed forces belonging to the United States or their allies when engaged in battle; shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.”

Elements.

(1) Running away.

(a) That the accused was before or in the presence of the enemy;

(b) That the accused misbehaved by running away; and

(c) That the accused intended to avoid actual or impending combat with the enemy by running away.

(2) Shamefully abandoning, surrendering, or delivering up command.

(a) That the accused was charged by orders or circumstances with the duty to defend a certain command, unit, place, ship, or military property;

(b) That, without justification, the accused shamefully abandoned, surrendered, or delivered up that command, unit, place, ship, or military property; and

(c) That this act occurred while the accused was before or in the presence of the enemy.

(3) Endangering safety of a command, unit, place, ship, or military property.

(a) That it was the duty of the accused to de-fend a certain command, unit, place, ship, or certain military property;

(b) That the accused committed certain disobedience, neglect, or intentional misconduct;

(c) That the accused thereby endangered the safety of the command, unit, place, ship, or military property; and

(d) That this act occurred while the accused was before or in the presence of the enemy.

(4) Casting away arms or ammunition.

(a) That the accused was before or in the presence of the enemy; and

(b) That the accused cast away certain arms or ammunition.

(5) Cowardly conduct.

(a) That the accused committed an act of cowardice;

(b) That this conduct occurred while the accused was before or in the presence of the enemy; and

(c) That this conduct was the result of fear.

(6) Quitting place of duty to plunder or pillage.

(a) That the accused was before or in the presence of the enemy;

(b) That the accused quit the accused’s place of duty; and

(c) That the accused’s intention in quitting was to plunder or pillage public or private property.

(7) Causing false alarms.

(a) That an alarm was caused in a certain command, unit, or place under control of the armed forces of the United States;

(b) That the accused caused the alarm;

(c) That the alarm was caused without any reasonable or sufficient justification or excuse; and

(d) That this act occurred while the accused was before or in the presence of the enemy.

(8) Willfully failing to do utmost to encounter enemy.

(a) That the accused was serving before or in the presence of the enemy;

(b) That the accused had a duty to encounter, engage, capture, or destroy certain enemy troops, combatants, vessels, aircraft, or a certain other thing; and

(c) That the accused willfully failed to do the utmost to perform that duty.

(9) Failing to afford relief and assistance.

(a) That certain troops, combatants, vessels, or aircraft of the armed forces belonging to the United States or an ally of the United States were engaged in battle and required relief and assistance;

(b) That the accused was in a position and able to render relief and assistance to these troops, combatants, vessels, or aircraft, without jeopardy to the accused’s mission;

(c) That the accused failed to afford all practicable relief and assistance; and

(d) That, at the time, the accused was before or in the presence of the enemy.

Explanation.

(1) Running away.

(a) Running away. “Running away” means an unauthorized departure to avoid actual or impending combat. It need not, however, be the result of fear, and there is no requirement that the accused literally run.

(b) Enemy. “Enemy” includes organized forces of the enemy in time of war, any hostile body that our forces may be opposing, such as a rebellious mob or a band of renegades, and includes civilians as well as members of military organizations. “Enemy” is not restricted to the enemy government or its armed forces. All the citizens of one belligerent are enemies of the government and all the citizens of the other.

(c) Before the enemy. Whether a person is “before the enemy” is a question of tactical relation, not distance. For example, a member of an antiaircraft gun crew charged with opposing anticipated attack from the air, or a member of a unit about to move into combat may be before the enemy although miles from the enemy lines. On the other hand, an organization some distance from the front or immediate area of combat which is not a part of a tactical operation then going on or in immediate prospect is not “before or in the presence of the enemy” within the meaning of this article.

(2) Shamefully abandoning, surrendering, or delivering up of command.

(a) Scope. This provision concerns primarily commanders chargeable with responsibility for defending a command, unit, place, ship or military property. Abandonment by a subordinate would ordinarily be charged as running away.

(b) Shameful. Surrender or abandonment with-out justification is shameful within the meaning of this article.

(c) Surrender; deliverup. “Surrender” and “deliver up” are synonymous for the purposes of this article.

(d) Justification. Surrender or abandonment of a command, unit, place, ship, or military property by a person charged with its can be justified only by the utmost necessity or extremity.

(3) Endangering safety of a command, unit, place, ship, or military property.

(a) Neglect. “Neglect” is the absence of conduct which would have been taken by a reasonably careful person in the same or similar circumstances.

(b) Intentional misconduct. “Intentional misconduct” does not include a mere error in judgment.

(4) Casting away arms or ammunition. Self-explanatory.

(5) Cowardly conduct.

(a) Cowardice. “Cowardice” is misbehavior motivated by fear.

(b) Fear. Fear is a natural feeling of apprehension when going into battle. The mere display of apprehension does not constitute this offense.

(c) Nature of offense. Refusal or abandonment of a performance of duty before or in the presence of the enemy as a result of fear constitutes this offense.

(d) Defense. Genuine and extreme illness, not generated by cowardice, is a defense.

(6) Quitting place of duty to plunder or pillage.

(a) Place of duty. “Place of duty” includes any place of duty, whether permanent or temporary, fixed or mobile.

(b) Plunder or pillage. “Plunder or pillage” means to seize or appropriate public or private property unlawfully.

(c) Nature of offense. The essence of this offense is quitting the place of duty with intent to plunder or pillage. Merely quitting with that purpose is sufficient, even if the intended misconduct is not done.

(7) Causing false alarms. This provision covers spreading of false or disturbing rumors or reports, as well as the false giving of established alarm signals.

(8) Willfully failing to do utmost to encounter enemy. Willfully refusing a lawful order to go on a combat patrol may violate this provision.

(9) Failing to afford relief and assistance.

(a) All practicable relief and assistance. “All practicable relief and assistance” means all relief and assistance which should be afforded within the limitations imposed upon a person by reason of that person’s own specific tasks or mission.

(b) Nature of offense. This offense is limited to a failure to afford relief and assistance to forces “engaged in battle.”

Lesser included offenses.

(1) Running away.

(a) Article 85—desertion with intent to avoid hazardous or important service

(b) Article 86—absence without authority; going from appointed place of duty

(c) Article 80—attempts

(2) Shamefully abandoning, surrendering, or delivering up command. Article 80—attempts

(3) Endangering safety of a command, unit, place, ship, or military property.

(a) Through disobedience of order . Article 92—failure to obey lawful order

(b) Article 80—attempts

(4) Casting away arms or ammunition.

(a) Article 108—military property of the United States—loss, damage, destruction, or wrongful disposition.

(b) Article 80—attempts

(5) Cowardly conduct.

(a) Article 85—desertion with intent to avoid hazardous duty or important service

(b) Article 86—absence without authority

(c) Article 99—running away

(d) Article 80—attempts

(6) Quitting place of duty to plunder or pillage.

(a) Article 86(2)—going from appointed place of duty

(b) Article 80—attempts

(7) Causing false alarms. Article 80—attempts

(8) Willfully failing to do utmost to encounter enemy. Article 80—attempts

(9) Failing to afford relief and assistance. Article 80—attempts

Maximum punishment. All offenses under Article 99. Death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.

meci on October 26, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Current headline at CBSNEWS.com

Will white men sink Obama?

BobMbx on October 26, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Is this not grounds for impeachment?

There Goes The Neighborhood on October 26, 2012 at 12:47 PM

I said earlier, nothing will be done. The only way we can ensure somthing is done is to write email and call our respective Senators and Reps…

Put on the pressure to ouster this this… man from hell…

I am outraged…

How could this happen here?

There are not words enough to express how I feel…

What is happening to America?

Do the dems and libs not freaking CARE!!!

This is a country divided…

Gobsmacked I tells ya…

F**K!!

Scrumpy on October 26, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Time to charge Barry Hussein Obama with MURDER!
He left 4 Americans to DIE based on his quest to win an election and keep the image that Al Queda was dead and gone.

Now our Ambassador is dead and Barry Hussein needs to be held accountable.

SDarchitect on October 26, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Heard Rush going off on this while I was out picking up lunch and came back to work to read it here….words escape me. I have to believe the teflon like qualities of this murderous regime will fail them this time but in my heart I know it wont…so horrifically sad.

NY Conservative on October 26, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Lambs to the slaughter on the altar of multicultural outreach. Disgusting and infuriating. I don’t think I’ve had this kind of visceral reaction to a news event since I was watching the Twin Towers fall 11 years ago. I hope this proves to be the nail in the coffin of this miserable administration. This is Blackhawk Down all over again.

Dudley Smith on October 26, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Why in the hell would they do this???

I just don’t get it.

BigWyo on October 26, 2012 at 12:03 PM

The ‘optics’ of Americans being killed by protestors outraged by an outrageous film were deemed preferable to the ‘optics’ of having a Specter gunship shooting up a bunch of terrorists (that were supposed to be on the run after Bin Laden was killed). i.e. they were sacrificed to preserve the image that the One’s foreign policy was successful. Protecting them would have been too risky to the One’s re-election bid.

dont taze me bro on October 26, 2012 at 12:49 PM

I can not for the life on me understand why any American who is serving or has loved ones serving under this cic could vote for him is beyond me! bho doesn’t give a flit about America or those serving in our military.

I ha!e this anti-American bho with all my heart!

God please be with our military and their famlies.
L

letget on October 26, 2012 at 12:49 PM

No mention of Petraeus in the article even though he is the head of the CIA and told the House Intelligent Committee the attack was because of the video. Why no criticism of him in any hotair article? Is he hotair’s Mohammad? Petraeus is probably the biggest son of a #itch in all of this, yet he skates again.

Yet a congressional source told Fox News that CIA Director David Petraeus, during a briefing with members of the House Intelligence Committee three days after the attack, also espoused the view that Benghazi was an out-of-control demonstration prompted by the YouTube video. According to the source, this was “shocking” to some members who were present and saw the same intelligence pointing toward a terrorist attack.

VorDaj on October 26, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Is this not grounds for impeachment?

There Goes The Neighborhood on October 26, 2012 at 12:47 PM

His impeachment will occur in less than two weeks. And he is not man enough to resign before his term ends.

BobMbx on October 26, 2012 at 12:49 PM

This is a huge story, but I just checked and of the major “news” outlets on Fox is covering, at least online. The fact that the leftist media is aiding in this cover up by not reporting it is almost as much of a scandal as the actual events that left 4 Americans dead. Disgusting all the way around.

Ellis on October 26, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Father of Slain SEAL: Who Made the Decision Not to Save My Son?

The question that seals BHOs legacy.

This is the question that we, as Americans, need to demand an answer to. General strikes, protests, “get up in their faces”.

I am the father of a 17 yr old son. Please, lets help this father get his question.

Flood the phone system at the Capitol and local offices of your Senators and Representatives, your governor, state assemblies, the frigging local Postmaster.

Turn the damn government inside out until that question is answered.

BobMbx on October 26, 2012 at 12:40 PM

thanks for that link! i noticed something interesting:

His face was looking at me, but his eyes were looking over my shoulder like he could not look me in the eye. And it was not a sincere, ‘I’m really sorry, you know, that your son died,’ but it was totally insincere, more of whining type, ‘I’m sorry.’”

Woods says that shaking President Obama’s hands at his son’s memorial service was “like shaking hands with a dead fish.”

remember that video of that woman whose son (was it chris stevens? can’t remember) was killed in the attack? anyway, she was being interviewed and she said “i cried on obama’s shoulder and he stared off into the distance.”

isn’t it interesting that this happened twice now.

this goes straight to the top- obama is guilty.

Sachiko on October 26, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Is this not grounds for impeachment?

There Goes The Neighborhood on October 26, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Yes – this is flat-out TREASON! This goes beyond impeachable – obama, Clinton and Panetta need to be arrested and charged with TREASON immediately!

Pork-Chop on October 26, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Politricks on October 26, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Obvious government lies and coverups over terrorists murdering Americans prompts skepticism, suspicion, and even “conspiracy theories” about what really happened and why even amongst rational people, except at the NYT and in the MSM. Normally the NYT and the rest of the MSM are very, very skeptical and suspicious. But not now. Why is that?

farsighted on October 26, 2012 at 12:51 PM

So much for Obama’s “I killed Osama” victory tour. This is Barackhawk Down.

Christien on October 26, 2012 at 12:52 PM

It’s time to start drafting articles of impeachment TODAY.

Smoochy32 on October 26, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Surely you gest!

By whom? By Boehner, who we have not heard a whisper from on the subject? Those tanning booth appointments are hard tom come by.

We can all scream and b*tch all we want, until Congress starts doing something about this, not just talk but real action, NOTHING is going to happen.

riddick on October 26, 2012 at 12:53 PM

meci on October 26, 2012 at 12:47 PM

DUDE !!!

jake-the-goose on October 26, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Politricks on October 26, 2012 at 12:41 PM

You don’t even need a conspiracy theory to see the incompetence in this, Professor. Or be disgusted with it.

The fact is that this administration had a US Ambassador in a virtually unprotected consulate. The facts remain that the people on the ground asked for additional security prior to being attacked and were denied. The fact remains that the administration in the heat of battle were kept completely updated on the event and did nothing. The president evidently thought going to Las Vegas the next day was more important. The fact remains that they, through malice or incompetence (doesn’t matter), misinformed the American People to include relatives of the fallen for weeks after and to this day misinform what actually happened there. Facts, like this article, are beginning to surface that possibly survivors of the attacks might have been saved if actions had been taken. This reaches the highest levels of our intelligence communities and exective offices.

Facts we might never hear about because of a liberal media whose job one it is to protect this administration.

BTW, most liberal friends I have excuse their conspiracy theory nuts by saying the Bush Administration is at fault for not getting the information out. Sound familiar?

hawkdriver on October 26, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Of course they were told to ‘stand down’. Barry had a fund raiser to attend.

Priorities you know.

GarandFan on October 26, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Did Obama watch as they fought for their lives?

idesign on October 26, 2012 at 12:33 PM

He went to bed.

JPeterman on October 26, 2012 at 12:53 PM

So long as the Democrats hold the Senate, impeachment is impossible. Remember, the House just votes to indict; its the Senate that votes whether or not to convict.

Chuckg on October 26, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Regardless of election outcome, proceed with articles of impeachment/treason/arrest—something NOW! In the interim, since there is no more debates for the Imbecile to use for a rebuttal platform,fire up the ads–30 secs worth–showing each link, ending with Obama hitting the rack on a Vegas pillow…with statement of “While the Prezzy slept, 4 Americans’ calls for help went unanswered”…

Heart-breaking and maddening are understatements.

hillsoftx on October 26, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Now that everyone has vented, can we stop embarrassing ourselves with ‘treason!!!’ and ‘impeachment!!!’?

faraway on October 26, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Nothing short of a full fledged march on Washington by the people demanding answers will bring this to the forefront.

Someone contact Sean Hannity and let’s get this thing started.

wordsmithy2009 on October 26, 2012 at 12:54 PM

(1) Running away.

(a) Running away. “Running away” means an unauthorized departure to avoid actual or impending combat. It need not, however, be the result of fear, and there is no requirement that the accused literally run.

meci on October 26, 2012 at 12:47 PM

e. g. “running away” to Las Vega.

davidk on October 26, 2012 at 12:55 PM

The CIA is NOT Panetta; it’s ex-General Petraeus. Where the f#ck was he then and where is he now?

SDN on October 26, 2012 at 12:28 PM

He seems to have gone into deep hiding and he was never camera shy before. Maybe he is in a safe house in a Mosque praising the koran or as he calls it, the “Holy Qur’an”.

VorDaj on October 26, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Simply a cascading series of failures: Failure to recognize what was happening, the degree of peril our personnel faced. The failure to respond at key moments just kept multiplying and compounding previous error to take action. The last resort for those in command, was to roll over and pee on themselves – and so they did.

Never has the term REMF been more appropriate.

Our leadership failed. The wrong people were in charge.

The people of this nation should have a white hot rage at the way this crisis was handled.

Now, after a few platitudes in the Rose Garden, I’m jetting off to Vegas for a fundraiser! Ta ta!

juanito on October 26, 2012 at 12:55 PM

The CIA is NOT Panetta; it’s ex-General Petraeus. Where the “heck” was he then and where is he now?

SDN on October 26, 2012 at 12:28 PM

He seems to have gone into deep hiding and he was never camera shy before. Maybe he is in a safe house in a Mosque praising the koran or as he calls it, the “Holy Qur’an”.

VorDaj on October 26, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Think about all this in context. Here we have Americans killed by willful neglect on part of our government, and Gloria Alred is out to unseal court records from a 30-year-old divorce case in hope to embarrass Mitt Romney.

Something is very wrong with this picture, and especially those people.

Liam on October 26, 2012 at 12:56 PM

This is Barackhawk Down.

Christien on October 26, 2012 at 12:52 PM

I may steal that.

farsighted on October 26, 2012 at 12:56 PM

So long as the Democrats hold the Senate, impeachment is impossible. Remember, the House just votes to indict; its the Senate that votes whether or not to convict.

Chuckg on October 26, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Principles matter and there are already a few Dem. senators wanting an answer, some who will be up for reelection next go around.

hillsoftx on October 26, 2012 at 12:56 PM

I am compelled to ask again:

Why would the Obama administration want Ambassador Stevens dead? If there’s an answer to that question, it would explain everything.

The Rogue Tomato on October 26, 2012 at 12:16 PM

Although the Blind Sheik-for-Stevens theory is compelling, I still have to wonder if they were trying to gin up support for the sitting president with a “rally round the flag” moment. An ambassador dead, everyone swings behind Teh Won to offer their support for another term. But it went horribly, horribly wrong. Check out this theory.

rah1420 on October 26, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Now that everyone has vented, can we stop embarrassing ourselves with ‘treason!!!’ and ‘impeachment!!!’?

faraway on October 26, 2012 at 12:54 PM

I am sorry that you are embarrassed, Ambassador Stevens and those brave men who died trying to protect him sadly are not available to share your embarrassment.

SWalker on October 26, 2012 at 12:56 PM

As I said in the Headline thread, but it bears repeating, either the White House was using Stevens as a pawn in some staged event, or Stevens had knowledge incriminating to the administration, which wanted him silenced.

Either possibility is nauseating, yet both are entirely plausible with these vile, contemptible occupiers of our White House.

Right Mover on October 26, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Let’s just avoid the wild speculating and conspiracy theories for now and focus on asking WHY security was neglected, WHY the calls for help were ignored, and WHO is ultimately responsible for all of this.

We can get to motive later.

Daemonocracy on October 26, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Insert the word you prefer.

hawkdriver on October 26, 2012 at 12:26 PM

I’d like to insert something all right. Perhaps one of those “obsolete” weapons…. sideways.

GWB on October 26, 2012 at 12:56 PM

I am compelled to ask again:

Why would the Obama administration want Ambassador Stevens dead? If there’s an answer to that question, it would explain everything.

The Rogue Tomato on October 26, 2012 at 12:16 PM

If Ambassador Stevens was Uriah the Hittite, then the question is, “Who (or what) was Bathsheba?” What was the secret that had to be kept?

Conspiracy theories are looking less fringe all the time.

Still, there is an alternative theory. It could be as simple as the fact that defending our people might have led to riots in the Middle East, but letting them die wouldn’t lead to riots.

There Goes The Neighborhood on October 26, 2012 at 12:56 PM

this goes straight to the top- obama is guilty.

Sachiko on October 26, 2012 at 12:50 PM

and i say the obvious only because, i know liberals would say i’m “politicizing the tragedy.” but i KNOW that obama is guilty, he is responsible. he’s not the only one, but still. it’s clear that this goes straight to the top and i don’t care if liberals say i’m “politicizing.”

This is a huge story, but I just checked and of the major “news” outlets on Fox is covering, at least online. The fact that the leftist media is aiding in this cover up by not reporting it is almost as much of a scandal as the actual events that left 4 Americans dead. Disgusting all the way around.

Ellis on October 26, 2012 at 12:50 PM

i’m seeing several comments on this thread like this. the msm doesn’t want to talk about this? okay then!! IT’S UP TO US!! we have to be the ones spreading the word about this. post on social networking sites and blogs. tell others to share the story with more people. if all of us do that, then this story will start to travel around and even reach the low-info voters. we need to keep pressing this issue. don’t let up. the media is not doing their job, so we have to do all we can.

Sachiko on October 26, 2012 at 12:56 PM

This is like something out of a movie that you wouldn’t believe. The evil leader tells his men to stand down and let people die.

Wigglesworth on October 26, 2012 at 12:57 PM

This is far worse than Watergate. It’s time for Milhous Obama to board the chopper.

Christien on October 26, 2012 at 12:57 PM

SWalker on October 26, 2012 at 12:23 PM

Why would a hostage situation be good for Obama? Even if the exchange with the Blind Sheik went smoothly, the fact that one of our ambassadors was captured would look really bad for Obama and remind everyone of Carter. Kidnapping someone carries far more risk than I think Obama would have taken. It’s far more plausible to me that the WH figured out they were arming AQ Syria instead of the rebels and needed to make sure the whole situation went away. So, they let Stevens die.

txhsmom on October 26, 2012 at 12:57 PM

Rush is saying there was a rumor that the Ambassador was supposed to be kidnapped and traded for the Blind Sheik.

Actually, maybe he was kidnapped.

faraway on October 26, 2012 at 12:57 PM

As someone currently in school for Arabic language, things like this really make me consider getting involved with private firms as opposed to getting involved with government intelligence agencies. Work for people that won’t have my back when things go wrong? No thanks.

blatantblue on October 26, 2012 at 12:24 PM

I said something like that in the other thread. Who would want to work for these people? For people who have family already at risk, I pray we get through the next few months without any more loss of life in sacrifice to Obama’s ego and career plans.

Night Owl on October 26, 2012 at 12:58 PM

I no longer believe that anyone will be held responsible for this.

Night Owl on October 26, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Keep the faith.
The secret intellegence folks do not like being played. And this Administration has played them to a disasterous end.

You may not like how they extract their pound of flesh, but extract it they will.

Jabberwock on October 26, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Now that everyone has vented, can we stop embarrassing ourselves with ‘treason!!!’ and ‘impeachment!!!’?

faraway on October 26, 2012 at 12:54 PM

http://writeortakeanap.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/bad-writing.jpg

davidk on October 26, 2012 at 12:58 PM

“Why acting? We already have a lock on dead men votes.”

Archivarix on October 26, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 9