sunset from behind the wire

sunset from behind the wire

Friday, October 26, 2012

Obama's Central Intelligence Agency

The US Central Intelligence Agency finds and trains some of America's very best people to go out in harms way and do difficult things. The CIA brings very qualified people such as the former SEALs who were providing security at the CIA annex in Benghazi, Libya to work with them.

But when they were being over run by jihadi terrorists and are screaming for help -- Headquarters said "NO". Am I the only one who finds that mildly interesting?

When two CIA annuitants (working part time for the CIA) in Mexico City and one Mexican Navy captain were attacked between Mexico City and Cuernavaca two months ago, what message came from CIA Headquarters? "Stand Down - on any response to the cartels." (the Beltran Leyva Narcotics Cartel hired ten Mexican police officers to attack the CIA embassy vehicle) They eventually had Mexican Federal Police (SSP) descend on northern Sinaloa where they've done just about nothing to the Beltrans because the SSP's intelligence is faulty and CIA doesn't trust their proxies enough to give them the good stuff.

Is CIA Headquarters under Barack Obama 
a haven for burnt-out, risk-averse pension-seekers?

A casual outside observer might be inclined to think that is the case.


The Obama White House watched the real-time attack on the US Consulate and CIA Annex in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 and advised against a response. The motivation for that response has yet to be fully explained by Secretary Clinton and President Obama. President Obama would seem to have other things on his mind, like his second term in office (see right). 

The cynic in me feels that he might have been watching the attack real-time in the situation room, eating popcorn and drinking a beer - or smoking weed, since we know that calms the presidential nerves. (it's therapeutic pot) However the realist in me understands that he likely didn't care, explaining to his loyal cadres that they were all to lock step and declare that it was the response to a YouTube video that nobody saw.

The CIA will have classified it all in the interest of national security...

It's simply another day in the ObamaNation and one can not help but wonder what, if anything, a new president can or will do to change the culture of the risk-averse (I didn't say cowardly) Central Intelligence Agency. Your tax dollars at work.

16 comments:

  1. Over 3 hours since this broke yet I can find NOTHING on any of the so called major news sites including Google News or MSN! Just how far will this co-opted media go to protect their rancid Anti-American leader?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mr. Brandon, the nation has become toxic to the truth. And you're right, the mainstream media is far more interested in protecting the ObamaNation than they are in telling the American people the truth. Thus they have made themselves irrelevant. It's amazing how the 'newsies' hate blogs such as the one I have here. We wouldn't exist if they made even a small effort at telling the truth.

      Delete
  2. If President Obama is re-elected, all of this - the entire tragedy and cover up will be swept under the rug with MSNBC standing on the rug.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The perfect reason to vote for Romney/Ryan.

      Delete
  3. Obama won't be re-elected. Nobody has ever won with the numbers the way they are now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But NONE of them have been from Chicago...

      The Untouchables (1987)

      Mountie Captain: I do not approve of your methods!
      Ness: Yeah, well... You're not from Chicago.

      The dead vote early and often in Chicago and if Team Obama can arrange it, they'll do it all across this great nation.

      Delete
  4. LL, you and I both know the gutting of the CIA started with Bubba... And Obummer continued the trend by having his AG go after field agents for doing their jobs under the Bush administration (waterboarding). If "I" worked at the agency, I'd have retired long before now. But I believe there are good folks there, but scared shitless to stick their heads up and do the right thing for fear of ending up in front of a judge. ESPECIALLY if the op goes South like Benghazi did.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're on the money with that one (as usual).

      Delete
  5. I don't find it "mildly interesting". I find it EXTREMELY MADDENING.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that most Americans do, Odie. It's not what THEY want. But since when does what we want count in Washington DC?

      Delete
  6. Those guys were left alone, and they went anyway...and the Boss is worried about how it makes him look in polls. The worst of it is the probability that the ripple effect for State and the Agency will be (instead of sending in the AC-130s next time) will be to make it so guys like that are not even around to respond.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. make it so guys like that are not even around to respond.

      You have the Washington DC bureaucratic philosophy down pat.

      Delete
  7. When people vote in this country for the president, most only consider what damage he can do for four years. The past four years of bad economy are a drop in the bucket compared to the damage Obama and liberalism has done to our courts, to the bureaucracy, to welfare, and yes, to the CIA and our foreign policy. The CIA is only following policy, not making it.

    Can we survive another four years of Obama policy?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. America will survive. However it's a lot like cancer. If you catch it early enough, you don't have to cut as deep or administer as much chemo. There is a debt point of no return where we simply stop paying what we owe and essentially declare national bankruptcy and stop exchanging our worthless currency with other nations. Some nations (such as Greece) can pull it off. If the US does it, it essentially bankrupts the planet. Such is the impact of a continued ObamaNation in my opinion.

      Delete
  8. Has General Carter F. Ham, commander of U.S. Africa Command, been fired for defying Leon Panetta on Benghazi? Glenn Reynolds, the Instapundit, ran a piece Saturday afternoon titled "Interesting Rumor Concerning General Carter Ham and Stand Down Order." This piece is presented as a rumor. It suggests that General Ham was told to stand down from sending aid to Benghazi, that General Ham on his own decided to proceed, and that he was then relieved of his command on 18 October 2012, by Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta. Panetta should go sit in a corner and shut the hell up!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Navy relieved RADM Charles Gaouette from command of the Mideast Strike Group because of "inappropriate judgement - not related to personal conduct". We don't know if it's related to Benghazi, but maybe it is. The Navy denies it, but President Obama and Secretary Clinton denied that Benghazi had anything to do with terrorism for two weeks.

      On 18 October 2012, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta participated in a "DOD News Briefing on Efforts to Enhance the Financial Health of the Force." In his introductory remarks, Mr. Panetta said: "Today I am very pleased to announce that President Obama will nominate General David Rodriguez to succeed General Carter Ham as commander of U.S. Africa Command . . ." It has nothing to do with Benghazi -- if you believe the Pentagon. However when two theater commanders with responsibility over the Libya area within a week of the terrorist attack, one can only surmise that they didn't want to obey orders and stand down.

      Delete

It's virtual - it's a mirage - it's life