Gen Martin Dempsey: Obama Ties Hands of Military to Track Down Benghazi Murderers – al-Qaeda Thrives

By lying about the circumstances surrounding the Benghazi attacks and the deaths of four Americans, our military has been unable to track the killers. We’re splitting hairs. It’s time we admit that when Muslims attack us, it is a terrorist attack regardless of the splinter groups, or their names.



By refusing to acknowledge the role of al-Qaida-linked terrorists in the Benghazi attack, the administration has kept our military from hunting down and killing people responsible for the deadly 2012 attack.

As The Hill reports, it is the refusal by Obama and his administration to designate those responsible for the attack as members of al-Qaida or its affiliates that prevents the U.S. military from apprehending or targeting them under the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), which allows the military anywhere in the world to move against al-Qaida and “associated forces.”

It’s tantamount to letting the murderers of our State Department personnel and fellow citizens walk free.

As Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey told the House Armed Services Committee on Oct. 10 in newly declassified testimony, without that official presidential designation these groups and their members “don’t fall under the AUMF authorized by the Congress of the United States. So we would not have the capacity to simply find them and kill them either with a remotely piloted aircraft or with an assault on the ground.” Source: IBD


“In other words, they don’t fall under the AUMF authorized by the Congress of the United States. So we would not have the capacity to simply find them and kill them either with a remotely-piloted aircraft or with an assault on the ground,” [Gen. Martin] Dempsey said…

“I have heard from military and security officials in the administration the AUMF limits their ability to target terrorists because making that al Qaeda link is a challenge,” a GOP aide said Wednesday. “It would be useful for counterterrorism efforts if it was expanded.”

Rep. Pete King (R-N.Y.), a member of the House Intelligence Committee, said the AUMF should be expanded to include those involved in the Benghazi attack.

“If you ask me specifically about Benghazi, I say yes,” he said. Source: The Hill

The AUMF is the Authorization for Use of Military Force. Legislation has been introduced to repeal it, but look at this dichotomy:

Even some of the Senate’s leading hawks in the war on terror have voiced concerns over the breadth, if not the duration, of the war-making authority administration officials claim the president has under the AUMF. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said at a recent Senate Armed Services Committee hearing that the authority “has grown way out of proportion and is no longer applicable to the conditions that prevailed, that motivated the United States Congress to pass the resolution in the authorization for the use of military force that we did in 2001.”

“For you to come here and say we don’t need to change it or revise or update it, I think is, well, disturbing,” he told the four senior military officials testifying before the committee. “I don’t blame you because basically you’ve got carte blanche as to what you are doing around the world.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked if the AUMF gives the president the authority to put “boots on the ground” in Yemen or the Congo.

“Yes, as long as the purpose was targeting a group associated with al Qaeda that intended to harm the United States or its coalition partners,” responded Robert Taylor, acting general counsel for the Department of Defense.

“This is the most astounding and disturbing hearing that I’ve been to since I’ve been here,” said freshman Sen. Angus King (I-Maine). “You guys have essentially rewritten the Constitution today.” Source: The New American

McCain, vehemently against “enhanced interrogation,” which neither kills nor maims, introduced legislation allowing which was passed into law, for the holding of American citizens, indefinitely, and without trial (without due process) as an “Unprivileged Enemy Belligerent.” McCain coined the words “Unprivileged Enemy Belligerent or at least, brought it consciousness”, perhaps with the help of Sen. Lindsey Graham.

Here’s a problem, in The Hill article linked above, author Kristina Wong said this:

The question of whether the groups responsible for the attack are linked to al Qaeda has come under heavy debate in recent weeks, after The New York Times published a Dec. 29 report that said there was no evidence that “Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault.”

At this point, it is unthinkable that The Hill would even raise the question of the New York Times story as raising a legitimate “question.” The article has been thoroughly debunked. We can characterize it as nothing but Jurno-list-type junk.

Left out of the Times’s account are the many leads tying the attackers to al Qaeda’s international network.

For instance, there is no mention of Muhammad Jamal al Kashef, an Egyptian. This is odd, for many reasons.

On October 29, 2012 three other New York Times journalists reported that Jamal’s network, in addition to a known al Qaeda branch (al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb), was directly involved in the assault. The Times reported (emphasis added): “Three Congressional investigations and a State Department inquiry are now examining the attack, which American officials said included participants from Ansar al-Shariah, Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and the Muhammad Jamal network, a militant group in Egypt.” Source: Powerline Blog

The New York Times is trying to clean-up Hillary’s Killery mess and pave the way for the 2016 elections.

Obama can drone at will, but our military cannot assist in the hunt for murderers of Ambassador Chris Stevens, Intelligence Officer Sean Smith and former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty?

There is likely much more behind this story than just the AUMF. It’s obvious that Obama has no interest in recognizing the killers, and we must ask why. I mean why? Can you imagine why? Maybe he was engaged in a stunt to kidnap Ambassador Stevens, a way to exchange him for the Blind Sheikh and/or perhaps Mohamed Morsi was involved. Something reeks of aiding and abetting the enemy. Thanks to I Own the World for the graphic.

Linked at The Lonely Conservative with a graphic timeline of Obama’s schedule leading up to 9/11/12 – including all the security briefings he didn’t both to attend.

If you would like to receive Maggie’s Notebook daily posts direct to your inbox, no ads, no spam, EVER, enter your email address in the box below.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 957 other subscribers

2 Pingbacks/Trackbacks