Don's Tuesday Column

THE WAY I SEE IT   by Don Polson  Red Bluff Daily News   1/26/2016

      Benghazi heroes—political liars

You will find your entertainment time and money is well spent if you go to see “13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi,” still playing in Red Bluff. My only caveat is that some folks can be emotionally overwhelmed by such realistic, intense, heart-pounding and sound-enhanced portrayals of combat. If you found “Saving Private Ryan,” “Act of Valor,” “We Were Soldiers, Once” or “American Sniper” uncomfortably graphic or violent, skip “13 Hours.”

Like “Soldiers” and “Sniper,” this movie has the advantage of being true; you’ll have a deep sense of admiration for the heroism and sheer tactical abilities of the former Marines and special operations fighters. It accurately follows the events from the disarmingly quiet beginning of the day on September 11, 2012, through the overnight assaults.

It is factually based on the book, “13 Hours: The Inside Account of What Really Happened In Benghazi,” by Mitchell Zuckoff with the Annex Security Team. It takes understandable dramatic license in compacting what transpired literally over 13 hours that night into a movie-length feature.

Many have, from that date forward, taken positions over the attacks. Political overtones, responsibility, even culpability, have accrued to Barack Obama and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for their roles and decisions before, during and after the attacks.

What has now been established, at least if one believes the military contractors that were on the ground (with substantial additional corroboration), who contributed to the accuracy of the book and movie, is that 1) there were no protests over an anti-Islam video that then morphed into coordinated military-style assaults on the diplomatic facility, 2) the Benghazi CIA annex station chief, his denials aside, delayed allowing the military response by the contractors under his command, whether framed by a “stand down” order or not;

3) American military and armed contractors in Tripoli were delayed and held back from going to Benghazi to assist in defending the CIA outpost, and 4) repeated calls and requests for assistance were made to elements of the U.S. government and military from the beginning—calls left unresponded to and unanswered.

It is also undeniable that an unarmed drone provided real time over-flight observation and that F-16 assets were within hours of Benghazi at Aviano Air Force Base and Naval Air Station Sigonella (Italy). If you doubt that, please look up “Benghazi-The Mystery of the Missing Air Support,” at passionforliberty.com, from June 16, 2013. Permission to use Italian and Libyan air space would have been routine and granted immediately upon request given the military attack on American soil at Benghazi. Not a limiting factor. Refueling F-16s from Aviano should also not have been a limiting factor due to the 4000 sorties recently flown out of NAS Sigonella for Libyan “liberation” operations.

If you read that article and the comments following, as I have, you can readily understand why conflicting testimony before Congressional committees must be decided in favor of (Deputy Chief of Mission) Gregory Hicks’ insistence that 1) “a fast mover flying over Benghazi at some point…might very well have prevented some of the bad things that happened that night”, 2) “had we been able to scramble a fighter or aircraft or two over Benghazi…there would not have been a mortar attack on the Annex in the morning because the Libyans would have split” and 3) “the Defense Attaché said to me that fighter aircraft in Aviano…would not be able to be over Benghazi before two to three hours.”

“Did we ever ask for permission to fly anything other than an unarmed drone over Libya during the attack?” (Rep. Jason Chaffetz, House Oversight Committee) Hicks: “No.” Chaffetz: “Would you have known that?” Hicks: “Yes.”

I want to quote Rep. Chaffetz from a radio interview. Hugh Hewitt: “Why do you think we had proximity and capability?” Chaffetz: “Because days after the attack, I was the first member of Congress to get my butt on a plane. I went with General Ham to Stuttgart. I flew with him in his plane into Tripoli. I met with the people that were on the ground. I spent time with General Ham, who was the four-star general in charge. He was there with the President when they made that decision. And he was unequivocal in telling me that they had capability, proximity, and they were not ordered to go in.”

Chaffetz went on to cite Secretary Leon Panetta’s initial comments on Oct. 26 when he admitted to having a ship off the coast but hesitated due to lack of intelligence. “He said that they could have done it…They said it at the time. Now, they’re changing their story.”

Hewitt: "Has the question been asked and answered why fighter pilots were not dispatched to fly low over the terrorists…even without armaments over bad guys in order to scare them. And clearly we could have sent a fighter pilot or two from Aviano, couldn’t we?”

Chaffetz: “We had assets and NATO allies that were less than an hour away. You fly an F-16…you’re going to scatter people…With all the assets we have, the $600 billion dollars a year, and in 12 hours, we can’t get a plane over Northern Africa? Bull crap. I don’t buy it. They’re lying about that, and that’s why Trey Gowdy and what they’re doing is the right thing, and why I feel so passionately about it.”

Go to donpolson.blogspot.com; open the “Libya” tab for 179 articles, 10 since December.