Page 28 of 28 FirstFirst ... 18262728
Results 271 to 273 of 273

Thread: Mcclatchy: amabasador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security

  1. #271
    Traveler

    Jack Hays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Williamsburg, Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,753
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Mcclatchy: amabasador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security

    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    The Chief of Station is the senior CIA representative, and he directs the activities of the intelligence personnel. His direct line of command is to the CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia—not to the State Department—and that is the relationship that provides him with his authority. Normally, the ambassador has little desire to learn what the CIA is doing because he has no real need to know about the details of operations and is only interested in oversight relating to situations that might cause serious damage to Washington’s relationship with the local authorities. Apart from that, the CIA operates independently and only shares partial information on what it is doing if the ambassador seems interested and there is a good reason to do so.

    To cite one example from my own experience, the agency had a hidden microphone in the office of a top Italian Communist official in the 1970s, which enabled Washington to know exactly what the Partito Communista Italiano was planning. The information obtained was shared through an unsourced “eyes only” memo to the ambassador, who assumed the source was a CIA agent present at the Communist meeting and asked how accurate the person’s recollection was. The Chief of Station answered that the information was completely reliable but there was no one else in the room—avoiding having to say that it was a highly sensitive technical intrusion and letting the ambassador work out the meaning of the reply.

    Benghazi has been described as a U.S. consulate, but it was not. It was an information office that had no diplomatic status. There was a small staff of actual State Department information officers plus local translators. The much larger CIA base was located in a separate building a mile away. It was protected by a not completely reliable local militia. Base management would have no say in the movement of the ambassador and would not be party to his plans, nor would it clear its own operations with the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli. In Benghazi, the CIA’s operating directive would have been focused on two objectives: monitoring the local al-Qaeda affiliate group, Ansar al-Sharia, and tracking down weapons liberated from Colonel Gaddafi’s arsenal. Staff consisted of CIA paramilitaries who were working in cooperation with the local militia. The ambassador would not be privy to operational details and would only know in general what the agency was up to. When the ambassador’s party was attacked, the paramilitaries at the CIA base came to the rescue before being driven back into their own compound, where two officers were subsequently killed in a mortar attack.

    Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, is executive director of the Council for the National Interest.

    CIA’s Benghazi Role | The American Conservative
    For the third time, the Chief of Mission represents the President, not the Department of State. All agencies of course have their own chains of command back to Washington to conduct their own affairs, but all are also subordinate to the Chief of Mission, as their agencies are subordinate to the President. Mr. Giraldi is mostly correct, although his presentation seems a bit dated. My own experience in these matters is both more recent and significantly larger than his.
    "It's always reassuring to find you've made the right enemies." -- William J. Donovan

  2. #272
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: Mcclatchy: amabasador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hays View Post
    For the third time, the Chief of Mission represents the President, not the Department of State. All agencies of course have their own chains of command back to Washington to conduct their own affairs, but all are also subordinate to the Chief of Mission, as their agencies are subordinate to the President. Mr. Giraldi is mostly correct, although his presentation seems a bit dated. My own experience in these matters is both more recent and significantly larger than his.
    Uh..huh...

    Aristotle-like, I'm sure...a legend in your...mind.
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  3. #273
    Traveler

    Jack Hays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Williamsburg, Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,753
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Mcclatchy: amabasador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security

    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    Uh..huh...

    Aristotle-like, I'm sure...a legend in your...mind.
    1976-2009
    "It's always reassuring to find you've made the right enemies." -- William J. Donovan

Page 28 of 28 FirstFirst ... 18262728

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •