White House Contacted YouTube During Benghazi Attack, Darrell Issa Says

[Markinsa]

White House Contacted YouTube During Benghazi Attack, Darrell Issa Says



By Jonathan Karl May 22, 2014 4:42 PM
 

http://news.yahoo.com/white-house-contacted-youtube-during-benghazi-attack-darrell-175322823--abc-news-politics.html

NOW WATCHING

Rand Paul on WH contacting YouTube during Benghazi attack
 
A still-classified State Department e-mail says that one of the first responses from the White House to the Benghazi attack was to contact YouTube to warn of the "ramifications" of allowing the posting of an anti-Islamic video, according to Rep. Darrell Issa, the Republican chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
 
The memo suggests that even as the attack was still underway - and before the CIA began the process of compiling talking points on its analysis of what happened - the White House believed it was in retaliation for a controversial video.
 
MORE: The Benghazi Emails: Talking Points Changed at State Dept.'s Request
 
The subject line of the e-mail, which was sent at 9:11 p.m. Eastern Time on the night of the attack, is "Update on Response to actions - Libya." The e-mail was written hours before the attack was over.
 
Issa has asked the White House to declassify and release the document. In the meantime he has inserted a sentence from the e-mail in the Congressional Record.
 
"White House is reaching out to U-Tube [sic] to advice ramification of the posting of the Pastor Jon video," the e-mail reads, according to Issa.


 
View gallery
 
 
White House Contacted YouTube During Benghazi Attack, Darrell Issa Says (ABC News)

 
Issa's full statement can be read here.
 
Asked about the document, a senior White House official told ABC News it demonstrates that the White House genuinely believed the video sparked the attack all along, a belief that turned out to be incorrect.
 
MORE: White House Defends New Benghazi Email
 
"We actually think this proves what we've said. We were concerned about the video, given all the protests in region," the official said. And the intelligence community "was also concerned about the video."
 
Issa has an entirely different view. He contends the document contradicts the White House assertion that it was the CIA who first pinned blame for the attack on protests in response to the anti-Islamic video.


Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., speaks during the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Co …

 
MORE: Exclusive: Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror Reference
 
"The e-mail shows the White House had hurried to settle on a false narrative - one at odds with the conclusions reached by those on the ground - before Americans were even out of harm's way or the intelligence community had made an impartial examination of available evidence," Issa said.
 
Issa is calling on the White House to release an unclassified version of the document.
 
"While the information I have cited from this e-mail is clearly unclassified, the State Department has attempted to obstruct its disclosure by not providing Congress with an unclassified copy of this document," Issa said.
 
Another State Department document, this one labeled "sensitive but unclassified" and dated Sept. 12, also refers both to the video and to a group linked to al Qaeda in explaining the cause of the attack.
 
"At least 20 armed extremists, members of Ansar al-Sharia, set fire to the Principal's office, allegedly retaliating for videos posted on the internet of a film deemed insulting to Islam," the memo reads, providing an early State Department summary of what happened.

[Rayzur]

Interesting.... I know we've talked this one to death through different threads with some from the intelligence community right here on DV weighing in on the whole issue..... Course those threads with those folks usually ended with concerns about saying too much..... though there did seem to be clear consensus among those with actual intelligence experience...

 

So apart from that, there's another angle on this I don't know that anyone has looked at....as topic... Meaning questioning the whole process of questioning..... It seems to me, there are some key factors we "forget" in the analysis... at least from my perspective from within this world...

I don't know that "they" will ever be able to drill down precisely as to what went down at that time, in those moments, as they happened in real time... . I think there is some stuff "they" are ignoring in asking the current questions... so thought I'd toss out some things for consideration....

 

This is, (in my recollection), the first covert operation that has been "tried" in the public forum... Why? People forget that the internet and the real time access to information, is not at all that old... Its become so much a part of our lives, we forget that a decade ago, it was just gearing up and blossoming into this explosion of information......We used to rely on newsprint or various media to eventually give us the scoop, when they figured it out and spun it in a way that made sense to them... With this event, it was the first time that the public had access to info almost as soon as the government did, and thereafter the public came to its own conclusions, with the limited though fairly real time info they had..... 

 

I don't recall an event prior to this one in which the public had pieces of a covert operation, and so much so, that the government was now in a place of having to manage the presentation of that information while almost at the same time, managing the actual unfolding of the covert event....I don't believe the government was prepared for this.... The US is running a covert operation, it blows up, the public gets details of the blow up almost as quickly as the government infrastructure (GI)  managing it gets the information.... and now the GI has to manage the event, the information out in the public arena, and the after effects of both..... and was I believe completely unprepared to have to reconcile both in a plausible way.... I don't know that ever before was there a public expectation that they should be debriefed about the intimate details of a covert US operation.......

 

I don't know how many of the people asking questions have ever been in an actual command center, managing a real event as it was happening.... I can only imagine the cluster that transpired during this one.... Its always a cluster to some extent and you have to know and anticipate that... nothing specific to this.... Its just an amazing amount of juggling massive bits of information, which you have to determine if real or not, right there on the spot and then make a decision of response, over and over and over again to the details you are getting, the moment you are getting them... Even deciding not to respond is a decision... You can't slow it down, it goes down at its own pace, and you're playing the telephone game in getting information hoping to catch up so you can get ahead...... And I'm no way saying I have been there on that scale... but I have been there, and  people died, and sometimes more were killed than we lost in Benghazi...... I watched a friend executed at point blank, and there was nothing we could do to stop it even as it was happening, and we were right there...And we could not stop it....  In a tight situation... in covert, personal, face to face when it goes sideways, the fog of war hits warp drive on steroids. I can't even imagine, what it would be like to have the public  getting the same kinds of info real time, or having to debrief the public afterward, regarding the response to an event...... Especially within hours of the event.... It sometimes takes weeks to get all the pieces assembled in order to really understand what happened... To think there would be the expectation that somehow info could be assembled with any kind of credibility such that a statement could be made within hours.... is ludacris.... And frankly, its my personal opinion that any senator who demanded that is either  jack azzzz stupid, or jack azzzz posturing for his/her personal gain...

 

Further and objectively speaking, I don't think the administration even realized the potential train wreck in the  "sharing as we go " kind of approach... In many ways, its too bad someone didn't say, we're doing the analysis right now, and we will share that with you the moment we have it assembled in a meaningful briefing.... [NO that is not buying time to cover,... it is responsibly sorting the massive amount of variables/info coming in at once, at the same time, in massive chunks, and the many responses moment to moment, and breaking that out, in a way you can actually talk about it] You simply can not slam dunk talk off the cuff in this type of thing ......

 

Its not television, things are not neatly laid out in chronological order, or logical order, or any order.....Its not like in the movies... , there aren't huge computer boards spitting out accurate information, there is not some glorified computer giant screen coordinating all the info and funneling it down into one concise statement ... nor is information  standing politely in line waiting to be heard and then analyzed..... And in the case of Benghazi, I can't even fathom the number of agencies, thousands of mile apart, each with their own data points spewing in, accurate or not... that had to be coordinated... enough to even be analyzed... , ... and that's just the US players... There was a whole other layer of international players and the information that had to be relayed and received from them.....

 

AND while it was happening... WHO anticipated that the public would have the expectation they should be debriefed about a US covert operation.... such that the administration would have the presence of mind to record information for public release.... The administration had to be about responding, not figuring out how they were going to discuss their response in this new expectation they do so...

.

In the commentary of the public, there were actually people who believed that the US gov't was watching this event live as it was happening... There were people who believe that one layer of concise data points  of information was relayed, somehow verified as accurate, and then ignored....or that every agency involved had the exact same data points or there was only one set of data points, or one stream of information and on and on.....Some seemed to believe that the US gov't had a playbook with all the plays spelled out, including the intentions and motivations of all players in every country and every faction of that country therein..... Still others didn't understand what act of war on sovereign soil meant.

 

Other people seem to forget that Libya is a sovereign nation. Embassies in sovereign nations when not protected by the US military, (o rah Marines), are protected by that country... Outposts even more so.... So if a Libyan outpost here in the US comes under attack, the US (those US peeps hired) will go in and protect the Libyan outpost on US soil... I can't imagine anyone thinking it even remotely okay that the Libyan gov't and joint military of Libya, should cross US sovereign borders with a military response and bomb the snot out of US soil in protecting their Libyan staff members... No permission requested, considered or joint effort, just a unilateral Libyan decision to deploy Libyan soldiers onto US soil, to wage armed conflict in defending their Embassy outpost.... The diplomatic and international consequence of doing so would be astronomical....

 

Every government of every country with players in the game, understood long ago, that good men serving their country, would give their lives in fulfilling the unspoken missions of that country.... It is a rule of engagement.... IF the US should decide to break that rule, and openly transgress sovereign soil engaging warfare to support an unspoken mission, .... wow, I can't even imagine the international consequence.... People seem to forget this...  .

.  .

I know there must be at least one other military person here who knows about one or several people dying in the line of duty, on behalf of the US, and their death was reported as having occurred some place else, doing something else, other than what they were actually doing... Thanks to the internet, this method of covering covert operations may no longer be an option....

 

If the new expectation of the gov't is that all covert ops henceforth be debriefed with the US public, that will be a game changer... and Benghazi represents the game board upon which those rules of engagement changed.....

 

 

 

With regard to the specific content of this post....

I believe without a doubt that there was someone in some agency who believed the movie may have engendered this event.... and they had enough clout as a person or agency to put this forward as a possibility.... It was likely quickly discarded straight away.... but somewhere did take on life...I can tell you in my own experience, some of the theories I've heard to explain events as they were unfolding until we could a handle on the reality, were so flippin bizarre, they came straight out of the Twilight Zone.... so much so, sometimes I thought the person posing them was off planet.. . and some of the bizarre were followed as real possibilities... (by people other than me in charge) ... I can't even imagine how I would have explained either the thinking.... or the responsive action because of that thinking, had there been some demand from the public for an explanation.... 

 

Because this was new territory (having to debrief the public about a covert operation), I don't believe the administration understood well enough the implications to anticipate the need for an explanation.... (if they were  actuality that sophisticated, they would have played it differently)... Specifically, I don't think they had the sophisticated understanding necessary to anticipate and therefor invent or cover by putting out a fake email, about a fake reason for the event.. On this specific issue, I think Issa is off base......

 

And, is it just me, or does anyone else wish that congress would get this worked up about denying access to information for things like the TPP... that isn't supposed to be a covert operation.... so why is congress okay with letting this one slide, in order to focus upon something that actually is supposed to be covert?!?!..

[George Hayduke]

Interesting view.  I'd add that this administration is simply a bunch of incompetent rookies with a childish ideology that the wolf is just a dog... Place a bunch of political cronies as department heads, rewrite RUF and ROE and everything will turn out peachy... 

[jonjon]

The truth has never requires more than a few words to be disclosed.  To keep it from ever being disclosed the words must be carefully generated, lead in all directions, shift the primary focus, and capitalize on planted diversions.  Politics is the art of lying refined to enable a few men to rule over the masses.  

[jonjon]

"COLONEL PHIL HANDLEY - 'BETRAYAL IN BENGHAZI' "

The combat code of the US Military is that we don’t abandon our dead or wounded on the battlefield. In US Air Force lingo, fighter pilots don’t run off and leave their wingmen. If one of our own is shot down, still alive and not yet in enemy captivity, we will either come to get him or die trying. Among America’s fighting forces, the calm, sure knowledge that such an irrevocable bond exists is priceless. Along with individual faith and personal grit, it is a sacred trust that has often sustained hope in the face of terribly long odds.

The disgraceful abandonment of our Ambassador and those brave ex-SEALs who fought to their deaths to save others in that compound is nothing short of dereliction-of-duty. Additionally, the patently absurd cover-up scenario that was fabricated in the aftermath was an outright lie in attempt to shield the President and the Secretary of State from responsibility.

It has been over eight months since the attack on our compound in Benghazi. The White House strategy, with the aid of a “lap dog press” has been to run out the clock before the truth is forthcoming. The recent testimonies of the three “whistle blowers” have reopened the subject and hopefully will lead to exposure and disgrace of those responsible for this embarrassing debacle.

It would appear that the most recent firewall which the Administration is counting on is the contention that there were simply no military assets that could be brought to bear in time to make a difference… mainly due to the unavailability of tanker support for fighter aircraft. This is simply BS, regardless how many supposed “experts” the Administration trot out to make such an assertion. The bottom line is that even if the closest asset capable of response was half-way around the world, you don’t just sit on your penguin *** and do nothing. The fact is that the closest asset was not half-way around the world, but as near as Aviano Air Base, Italy where two squadrons of F-16Cs are based.

Consider the following scenario (all times Benghazi local):
When Hicks in Tripoli receives a call at 9:40 PM from Ambassador Stevens informing him “Greg, we are under attack!” (his last words), he immediately notifies all agencies and prepares for the immediate initiation of an existing “Emergency Response Plan.” At AFRICON, General Carter Ham attempts to mount a rescue effort, but is told to “stand down.” By 10:30 PM an unarmed drone is overhead the compound and streaming live feed to various Command and Control Agencies… and everyone watching that feed knew damn well what was going on. At 11:30 PM Woods, Doherty and five others leave Tripoli, arriving in Benghazi at 1:30 AM on Wednesday morning, where they hold off the attacking mob from the roof of the compound until they are killed by a mortar direct hit at 4:00 AM.
So nothing could have been done, eh? Nonsense. If one assumes that tanker support really was not available… what about this:

· When at 10:00 PM AFRICON alerts the 31st TFW Command Post in Aviano Air Base, Italy of the attack, the Wing Commander orders preparation for the launch of two F-16s and advises the Command Post at NAS Sigonella to prepare for hot pit refueling and quick turn of the jets.

· By 11:30 PM, two F-16Cs with drop tanks and each armed with five hundred 20 MM rounds are airborne. Flying at 0.92 mach they will cover the 522 nautical miles directly to NAS Sigonella in 1.08 hours.
· While in-route, the flight lead is informed of the tactical situation, rules of engagement, and radio frequencies to use.

· The jets depart Sigonella at 1:10 AM with full fuel load and cover the 377 nautical miles directly to Benghazi in 0.8 hours, arriving at 1:50 AM… which would be 20 minutes after the arrival of Woods, Doherty and their team.
· Providing that the two F-16s initial pass over the mob, in full afterburner at 200 feet and 550 knots did not stop the attack in its tracks, only a few well placed strafing runs on targets of opportunity would assuredly do the trick.

· Were the F-16s fuel state insufficient to recover at Sigonelli after jettisoning their external drop tanks, they could easily do so at Tripoli International Airport, only one-half hour away.

· As for those hand-wringing naysayers who would worry about IFR clearances, border crossing authority, collateral damage, landing rights, political correctness and dozens of other reasons not to act… screw them. It is high time that our “leadership” get their priorities straight and put America’s interests first.

The end result would be that Woods and Doherty would be alive.
Dozens in the attacking rabble would be rendezvousing with “72 virgins”… and a clear message would have been sent to the next worthless POS terrorist contemplating an attack on Americans that it is not really a good idea to “tug on Superman’s cape.”

Of course all this would depend upon a Commander In Chief who was more concerned with saving the lives of those he put in harm’s way than getting his crew rest for a campaign fund raising event in Las Vegas the next day. As well as a Secretary of State that actually understood “What difference did it make?”, or a Secretary of Defense whose immediate response was not to the effect that “One of the military tenants is that you don’t commit assets until you fully understand the tactical situation.” Was he not watching a live feed from the unarmed drone… and he didn’t understand the tactical situation? YGBSM!

Ultimately it comes down to the question of who gave that order to “stand down?” Whoever that coward turns out to be should be exposed, removed from office, and face criminal charges for dereliction of duty. The combat forces of the United States of America deserve leadership that really does “have their back” when the chips are down.

Colonel Phil “Hands” Handley, USAF (Ret.) is credited with the highest speed air-to-air gun kill in the history of aerial combat. He flew operationally for all but 11 months of a 26-year career, in aircraft such as the F-86 Sabre, F-15 Eagle, and the C-130A Hercules. Additionally, he flew 275 combat missions during two tours in Southeast Asia in the F-4D and F-4E. His awards include 21 Air Medals, 3 Distinguished Flying Crosses, and the Silver Star.

[divemaster5734]

 

This is, (in my recollection), the first covert operation that has been "tried" in the public forum..

 

 

Interesting view.  I'd add that this administration is simply a bunch of incompetent rookies with a childish ideology that the wolf is just a dog... Place a bunch of political cronies as department heads, rewrite RUF and ROE and everything will turn out peachy... 

 

 

The truth

 

 

Here's the thing.

 

When was it, 1995, when the CFR gave the NY Times and 2 other newspaper "awards" for intentionally withholding information from Americans?

 

At the presentation wasn't it one of the stinking Rockefellers that said something like "If it wasn't for the cooperation of the editors of these papers, if they had not helped keep the public from knowing our motives, we couldn't have advanced our cause so far"

 

And they were given a freaking plaque.

 

Let us NEVER  forget that.

 

It is only because of the alternate media we have any idea whats going on.

 

 

Major editor error.. bummer

Sorry, new keyboard, it has a mind of it's own...

Edited May 26, 2014 by divemaster5734

[Rayzur]

Thanks guys for the interesting perspective and thoughts..... I need to drill down more, and just haven't had time..... My concern being of course the future impact of this endeavor on future convert engagement (If any impact at all... this might just be nothing more than a political stick dance and things will proceed as they always have).. and my greater concern is that military leadership goes unconscious, joins the dance and the subtly of conclusions shifts the playing field and no one notices......

 

JJ frankly I'm having a hard time believing that a Colonel would make such incredibly naive, slogan driven statements, that from a command perspective would in turn engender the potential to put even more lives in harms way..... And I would have no problem laying down my medals against his and tell him that to his face.... I mean I believe you found an article and posted what it said... I just can't believe a full bull or even a lite would go off on such an irresponsible rant, relative to command responsibility......nor can I figure out why he would dismiss critical points in order to make his... 

 

  In senior officer lingo (she said snidely) .... the US was NOT in a declared war with Libya... therein, there is NO declared battlefield... To be sure, there was engagement with Libyan nationals resulting in the loss of US life, which again was not a result of an act of declared war.... (in any sense on behalf of either nation) .... The Colonel's slogan driven analogy does NOT work.... IF a US military aircraft is shot down, that would be an act of war, (declared either before or after said event) and hellll yes, in a declared war, gloves are off, and no one is left behind....We cowboy up and go in balls to the wall, and every person sitting in a cockpit knows... depends and as you said Colonel... trusts no one is ever left behind...  . Yet Colonel, with respect, that is not the ROE of a covert operation... and you day'um well know it.... So why are you ignoring that?.....

I'm not even going to bother running down the Colonel's proposed scenario.... of course that would work... Great desktop exercise....That and several other scenarios would have worked perfectly... wonderfully,... exceptionally....  IF we were in a declared war with Libya...

And Colonel, with respect, how dare you so wrecklessly and irresponsibly put potentially hundreds if not thousands of US lives at risk by suggesting that "worrying" about sovereign borders is nothing more than essentially neurotic hand wringing! You are not Gene Hackman going after Owen Wilson behind Iraqi enemy lines  in some war movie!!!! What in the name of leadership are you thinking in suggesting that the US can, will and should exercise  military action up to and including acts of war, against sovereign nations, in breaching their borders at will?!?!? Are you suggesting we simply put the world on notice??? And, is there anywhere in your brain you have calculated the consequence, the risk, the immediate harms way you have just created for every person wearing the US military uniform on foreign soil??? Are you nuts?!?!?

Apparently you missed all the classes and discussion at War College about the responsibility of leadership.... And what that means... to the full extent, in protecting this country and those serving under you.... This is the time for cooler heads to prevail.... It is not your place to jump into a political cluster dance and make slogan driven proclamations... The minute you allow a breach in  the integrity of your leadership, you are no good to those you command....And you allowed breach of your position the minute you step away from your responsibility to insist, to demand adherence to ROE as a commander and start acting like its a simple and individual RUF decision of a soldier/airman/sailor..... 

 

I get your anger, and will to protect our own... and that is not a luxury you can afford as a commander, who must think about hundreds and thousands of lives beyond the immediate moment in the decisions and implications of decisions you make.... With respect Colonel... perhaps it is good you have decided to retire, at least from a Wing Command perspective, and having said that, I would say with equal conviction... I would be proud to have you on my six any day of the week... and obviously, you were one hellva great eagle driver with exceptional combat accomplishments of  great pride and honor... and nothing I have said herein would take away from that and your contribution to our country, our branch and our service... . 

[George Hayduke]

Razur - if you haven't read "Structured Analytic Techniques for Intelligence Analysis" by Heuer and Pherson or, helped ghost write it... you may find it a valuable tool to add to your library.

[Rayzur]

Exceptional call George!!! I vote you get the "Analytical Brain" icon here on DV....you certainly have it in my book..... how cool you went to that one...

 

Metacognition, or "thinking about thinking as you note, is an essential element to intelligence analysis, in mitigating the flaws of our own cognitive pitfalls, which we all exhibit at some point... I don't know about you, but sometimes to me it seems critical analytical thinking continues to sustain death blows from a dumbed down media reporting nothing more than the rendering of  a system that increasingly encourages people learn what to think and not HOW to think...

Your suggestion is especially significant to this event specifically ......as the decision making process relied on a distributed  intelligence community, which in turn relied on the collaboration of analysis from disparate organizations--geographically separated  and dependent upon a shared understanding of the thinking process employed (which maybe happened or more likely did not happen)...  as well as the shared or mutual understanding of the event as a result...

And frankly, I do not believe that the general public will ever be presented with those basic set of assumptions.... if for no other reason... than I'm not so sure they were analyzed and fully understood in implication by the shot callers (retrospectively or otherwise)..... AND, in any case, that understanding sure as helllll did not happen within hours of the event conclusion.....

Great call George, you get the Brainiac Award .... .... and if not currently,  you must be USAF somewhere in your life.....