WhatFinger


One of the secrets many have wondered about that pertains to both theories is an alleged stand down order

Stand down:  Two Theories About the Incident at Benghazi



With the recent news there were dozens of CIA employees at Benghazi when the attack took place, the mystery of what they were doing continues. Furthermore, “CNN has learned the CIA is involved in what one source calls an unprecedented attempt to keep the spy agency's Benghazi secrets from ever leaking out.”
Based on what has been made public, there are at least two competing theories about the Incident at Benghazi: The State Department Theory and the CIA Theory. Both theories have merit because they show us the administration's explanation of what happened at Benghazi is a lie, a lie told not only at the United Nations, but also to the families of four dead Americans. The State Department Theory sees the attack from the point of view of the globalist conflict between Russia and the USA with its British and Saudi allies. Russia sent a warning by killing ambassador Stevens. This is an attractive theory and will rise or fall once we know more about the arms dealing going on at Benghazi. If the CIA was involved in channeling arms to Syrian rebels, then Russia and its cronies who support Assad may have attacked the compound to stop that arms transfer.

Support Canada Free Press


Doug Hagmann looks to be a proponent of the State Department Theory. The details of Mr. Hagmann’s arguments are found in a series of insightful articles appearing at CanadaFreePress.com, especially, “Unmasking the Embassy Threat.” The CIA Theory supposes more was going on at Benghazi besides an arms transfer. We know there were at least 30 CIA agents at Benghazi. They could have easily fended off a Russian backed attack. The men at Benghazi were allegedly told, however, to stand down. Something else was going on. A foiled kidnapping plot of our ambassador is a possibility. This article will explore the CIA Theory and argue it is not beyond the CIA, on orders from the administration, to attempt something like a kidnapping. Spooks like to do spooky things. One of the secrets many have wondered about that pertains to both theories is an alleged stand down order. This order prevented aide from reaching those fighting off the attack. In this regard, many news outlets are missing an important point about these alleged orders given at Benghazi. To be clear, it was former Navy Seals Ty Woods and Glen Doherty who were ordered to stand down three times during the attack, not Col. Gibson and probably not General Ham. “According to a Fox News report by Jennifer Griffin, former Navy Seals Ty Woods and Glen Doherty...were ordered to stand down three times following calls during the attack. The first two times occurred soon after they heard initial shots fired...and (they) requested permission to go to the consulate to help out…” The Examiner.com claims "...former House speaker Newt Gingrich...was informed by a U. S. senator that at least two media networks have recently been given...evidence about the Sept. 11 Benghazi attacks that killed four Americans...” “The networks obtained e-mail evidence from...the office of National Security Advisor James Jones...ordering a counterterrorism team to cancel a rescue mission at the U. S. consulate and CIA annex in Libya. According to Gingrich...they were told explicitly by the White House 'stand down and do nothing. This is not a terrorist action.'” Dave Hodges adds to the Gingrich statements about an order to stand down at Benghazi. Hodges claims on his radio show, "There is now proof that Obama was warned in advance of the coming attack in which Stevens begged for more protection and his impassioned plea was denied by Clinton.” So far, neither Gingrich nor Hodges have been called to testify before Congress about their Benghazi statements. Nevertheless, Jeffery Kuhner writes in WorldTribune.com, “Two hours after the assault began the State Department sent an e-mail to numerous agencies--including the White House Situation Room--that Ansar al-Sharia, a terror group affiliated with Al Qaida, had claimed responsibility.” “The e-mail went directly to the White House’s Executive Office--the president’s inner circle...from nearly the beginning Mr. Obama knew that Benghazi was a terrorist atrocity.” Almost a year after the Incident at Benghazi, General Ham told the Aspen Security Forum that "...it quickly became clear the assault on the American consulate in Benghazi last year was a terrorist attack and not a spontaneous demonstration." At the time of the attack, General Ham was in Washington D. C. for a routine meeting on September 11, 2012 with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Martin Dempsey. General Ham went on to say that a quick response to the attack was not possible. “It was perfectly understandable to me why people would say you should have done that (but) in my military judgment, there was not a necessity and there was not a clear purpose in doing so." According to Rep. Frank Wolf (R., Va.), "The CIA 'repeatedly blocked' the departure of a security team that was ready 'within minutes' to respond to the Sept. 11, 2012, terror attacks in Benghazi, Libya that claimed the lives of four Americans." If there is a cover-up about what happened at Benghazi, then the cover-up is not about inadequate security but about covering up why no one in the White House helped while Americans fought for their lives. We know now there was ample time to send help to save ambassador Stevens, if a decision was made to do so. In spite of the smoke screen that covers the Incident at Benghazi, one truth is taking shape. The attack at Benghazi was not a spontaneous demonstration in protest over an insulting video. This explanation told up and down by members of the current administration is a lie. Why was this lie told again and again? An answer to that question seems clear: There is something to hide. Could the smoke screen at Benghazi hide a foiled kidnapping plot? As far fetched as it might seem, a kidnapping plot would have two goals. The plot could be used to help the President in his bid for reelection, and it could be used to trade ambassador Stevens for the release of Omar Abdel-Rahman, the Blind Sheik. One explanation to emerge is that the plan was to have Stevens kidnapped and in return for his release, the blind Sheik would be released and sent to Egypt. Among other things, this would make the US president look compassionate and guarantee his reelection. On October 11, 2012, the author of the blog The Last Refuge claims, "Benghazi was not an assassination attempt, it was a botched kidnapping." The kidnapping was botched when the two ex-Navy Seals, not aware of the plot, decided to offer resistance. "...The al-Qaeda goal was to kidnap Ambassador Chris Stevens and ransom him back to the U.S. in exchange for Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman.” Walid Shoebat gives credence to the kidnapping theory, and takes the theory a step further. He involves the president of Egypt in the plot to kidnap ambassador Stevens. Shoebat writes in his article, Hostage Crisis: The Blind Sheikh, Benghazi and Smoking Guns, "A Libyan intelligence document has been produced that directly implicates Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood president Mohammed Mursi in the attacks on American installations in Benghazi on 9/11/12." Shoebat continues, "Four-star Admiral James Lyons (Ret.) who on November 14, 2012, appeared on Fox Business Network with Lou Dobbs...During that interview, Lyons said he believed the only reason that made any sense relative to Ambassador Stevens being in Benghazi on 9/11 was a kidnapping operation in which Stevens could be traded for the 'Blind Sheikh.'" According to Debra Heine, “Bill Gertz is reporting at The Washington Times that a recent online post by an al Qaeda terrorist indicated that U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens was killed by lethal injection after plans to kidnap him (after) the Sept. 11 attacks in Benghazi went bad. According to the post on a prominent jihadist web forum, the plan was ‘based on the abduction and exchange of high-level prisoners.’” To further understand why the alleged kidnapping plot failed, we have to see where former Navy Seal Woods and Doherty were on the night and the subsequent morning of the attack. If Woods was not aware of the kidnapping plan that involved Stevens, then Woods' courage to defend the Americans may have thrown a monkey wrench into the attackers' plans. The actions taken by Woods and others were the reason "things went horribly wrong" at Benghazi. We do not know to what extent, if any, ambassador Stevens may have been involved in a kidnapping plot to further the President's reelection. Given Stevens' attachment to both the President and the Libyans who overthrew Gaddafi, and his interest in Islam, it is not unreasonable that Stevens could have entertained such an idea. Perhaps infatuated with Obama and believing in the liberal policies Obama promoted, Stevens was swept away by a sirocco he little expected or understood. We do know, however, according to an article by Terence P. Jeffrey, "...a security team left the CIA annex in Benghazi to go to the aid of the nearby consulate less than 25 minutes after the attack started at 9:40 p.m. Benghazi time (3:40 p.m. Washington time)." "This team included former Navy Seal Tyrone Woods...It rescued some people at the consulate, sending them back to the CIA annex." The team could not find ambassador Stevens, who by this time may have been in the hands of the attackers. The action taken by Woods may have foiled the kidnapping plans and had the consequence of the kidnappers killing Stevens, mutilating his corpse and planning another attack of revenge hours later. "By 11:30 p.m. this security team itself left the consulate to return--while being attacked--to the CIA annex. In the meantime, as the Los Angeles Times reported…“another security team came from Tripoli to Benghazi aboard a chartered airplane…this team included Glen Doherty, another former SEAL, who was later killed when attackers fired mortar rounds at the CIA Annex.” From this timeline, it is evident that Woods and Doherty were killed about seven hours after the first attack. Seven hours is enough time for the attackers to realize their kidnapping plans had been foiled, to kill Stevens, and then regroup and attack again intent on revenge. Seven hours is also more than enough time for a passenger jet to fly from London to Benghazi and back. Time will tell what theory discussed above will be true or false. In the mean time, those in positions of authority who have taken an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States must assess what has happened so far. They have a moral responsibility to live up to their oath. As of this writing we do not know who gave the alleged stand down orders to Ty Woods and Glen Doherty, or why those orders were given in the first place. Likewise, we do not know what the US President was doing or where he was during those seven hours. We do know there were dozens of Americans at Benghazi. They could tell us more about what happened the night of the attack, but the CIA does not want them to talk about it.


View Comments

Robert Klein Engler -- Bio and Archives

Robert Klein Engler lives in Omaha, Nebraska and sometimes New Orleans. Mr. Engler holds degrees from the University of Illinois in Urbana and The University of Chicago Divinity School. Many of Robert’s poems, stories, and paintings are set in the Crescent City. His long poem, “The Accomplishment of Metaphor and the Necessity of Suffering,” set partially in New Orleans, is published by Headwaters Press, Medusa, New York, 2004. He has received an Illinois Arts Council award for his “Three Poems for Kabbalah.” Link with him at Facebook.com to see examples of his recent work. Some of Mr. Engler’s books are available at amazon.com..


Sponsored