Other Threats

If  you follow this blog you are probably well aware that it covers a wide range of topics (some might say it’s all over the place) including a span of history of some sixty years.  Generally it has to do with issues of national security, from the assassinations of the sixties across to covert and deniable warfare and more conventional aspects of military security.  I work with my friend Stu Wexler on a variety of research and book projects but each of us also focus on some of our special interests as well.  In his most recent work Stu has been very focused on the threat of the ultra right in America, something he and I explored in The Awful Grace of God and which he has pursued into more contemporary times in his most recent book.

This last week the Washington Post asked him for some insight into certain of the potential threats related to today’s race issues and increasingly militant confrontations.  I helped him a bit during the preparation of the article, offered some comments and made sure he didn’t take any wording (little humor here) from anywhere for it without using quotation marks or a citation.

The article is strictly his though and I encourage everyone to give it a read and comment to him on Facebook if you find it worthwhile….following Stu gives you a good dose of sports talk as well, something totally missing from anything I write.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/07/20/no-the-united-states-is-not-headed-toward-a-race-war/

 

 

 

Saudi’s and 9/11

 

The recent release of 28 pages of 9/11 investigative material has been praised by some for highlighting the degree of Saudi obstructionism which undermined American efforts against jihadi elements – al Qaeda in particular –  prior to 9/11.  It was downplayed by others who complained that it contained nothing particularly new. After no more than a day of news stories the dialog has all but disappeared, overwhelmed by the news of the next hour and the next day.  If you didn’t see the stories, you can make your own judgement:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/15/politics/congress-releases-28-pages-saudis-9-11/

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/16/us/28-pages-saudi-arabia-september-11.html

Short attention spans are a curse of contemporary news, there really is no such thing as analysis any longer – discussions of political relevance, yes, but otherwise the news has become important only in context of what it means for a campaign, for political figures or political parties. The real story of the Saudi pages would have led back through the Saudi government (which is actually a Royal family primarily concerned with remaining in power and acting in accordance with that focus). Up to 9/11 that meant pushing threats out of the Kingdom, just as Pakistan originally had tried to deal with the jihadi threat by pushing it all into Afghanistan.  There is absolutely no doubt that the Saudi government obstructed American investigation of attacks tied to Saudi nationals prior to 9/11, to what extent they have done so since is another story completely – and of course it’s complicated by the fact that there are factions within that government and its intelligence agencies.

The real story that the 28 pages should have triggered would have been a retrospective on the current state of jihadi terrorism, one going all the way back to the Reagan administration and the William Casey’s covert agreements with the Saudi’s and Pakistani’s to “bleed” the Soviets in Afghanistan. That will go down as one of the most horrendous moves in recorded history, one which allowed the Saudi’s to channel huge funds into the jihadi movement, and in particular the madrasas (religious schools) that were built up in western Pakistan.  An extension of the radical Wahhabi sect schools in Saudi Arabia, the schools in those two nations have now fueled the world wide violence which created the international terror complex that has evolved over the past several decades.  For those that recall 9/11 one of the first post attack tapes obtained of Osama bin Laden involved his covert  meeting in Afghanistan with an associate who had traveled from Saudi.  Bin Laden’s first concern was how the attack had been received in the “schools”; he was assured it had been hugely inspirational.   For further background on contemporary schools, check the following from PBS.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saudi/analyses/madrassas.html

The impact of the Saudi religious schools in generating radical violence is actually nothing new, in the late 1800’s the Dutch colonies in the western Pacific were largely Muslim and the religious practices there were both inclusive and tolerant.  However beginning in the late 1880’s numbers of students who had traveled for schooling in the Arabian Peninsula arrived back in the islands and “extreme religious zeal” began to appear, with totally unanticipated and brutal murders and fanatic attacks. That provided the context for a much more widespread “peasant revolt” in the Dutch East Indies. Details are available in The Peasants Revolt of Bantan in 1888 by Sartono Kartodirjo, 1966. It was bloody and ultimately its roots were traced back to the religious murders associated with students coming back from the radical schools in Arabia.

For a full understanding of where we are today, and how the Saudi schools became so influential, you have to go back to National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski who began the Saudi/Pakistan entanglement (targeting the Russians in Afghanistan) under President Carter. However it was with the next administration,  under Ronald Reagan and his “push-back” policies, that William Casey exponentially deepened the relationship, while allowing the full American financial involvement to be placed under the control of Saudi Arabia and Pakistani intelligence.  All this has been well researched and written about, I deal with it in Shadow Warfare, beginning in chapter 18.  That history is critical to understanding the total jihadi threat and to what extent it has compromised both Saudi and Pakistan…and is in the process of doing the same to Bangladesh and very possibly Turkey.  It’s a matter of politicians acting strictly into survival mode, allowing private elements ranging from financial contributors, charities and radical social networks to function in support of jihadi oriented Islamist’s.  To be clear, as detailed in some degree of the 9/11 incidents outlined in the newly released 28 pages, that support may  sometimes unknowing. Given the cultural nature of the nations involved, charities and religious schooling have always been heavily supported, and frequently compromised;  I outline that story in Shadow Warfare as well.

Of course all this is well known and well documented – it’s a shame nobody really wants to talk about it or more importantly to deal with it.  It will be even more a shame if Saudi, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Turkey remain in what appears to be a state of denial.  There are signs Saudi understands the situation, even if they cannot admit it openly.  There are no signs that the current leadership in Turkey and Bangladesh understand or wants to deal with the true threat to their nations. To date their covert dealings (Turkey) and total denial (Bangladesh) with ISIS have all the look and feel of the way Pakistan approached the jihadi threat, up to the point it subsumed them.

Sources

One of the most challenging tasks in dealing with historical subjects, even more contemporary ones, is evaluating individuals who claim to be primary sources – but whose remarks and observations are not part of the record created at the time of an event. I’ve posted before on the issues of memory in regard to “retroactive” source information, more could be said on that and its pretty obvious that a very large body of information comes to exist based on source statements months, years or even decades after the fact – statements which are almost certainly contaminated to some extent by memory issues, regardless of the sincerity of the source.  You have to pause when you find experiment after experiment demonstrating that witnesses will challenge even their own written or recorded statements prepared within minutes or hours of an event when interviewed at a later date.  Their current “memories” simply override even their own earlier records.

That’s one issue, but there are a variety of others.  All of them are important to me because I frequently do turn to individuals as sources – and have learned the risks of that the hard way over a couple of decades.  Yet on a recent online forum post, I read an individual remarking that they had seen a name mentioned, did a Google search, and began to insert the information they found into the dialog, taking it quite literally.  It had taken me some three years to parse that particular source in regard to whether they were credible or not, or to what extent – in that particular case my conclusion was not at all.

Which raises the point that sources may be credible, partially credible or not at all credible – in some instances certain things they say can be verified, while others prove to be extremely questionable.  And there is the issue of “situational” sources, who provide information over a long period of time and filter it according to personal circumstances.  That is one of the things that makes Richard Case Nagell such a challenging source – he did filter his story over time, in regard to both legal issues and personal ones involving custody battles over his children. Taking any single remark from him, without understanding the chronology and context of his remarks would be a mistake. He is a perfect example of what turns out to be a credible but extremely challenging source.

Some of the other challenging sources that I’ve crossed paths with are people like Fred Crisman, Thomas Beckham and Gene Wheaton.  Each required years to evaluate – especially since the first two can demonstrably be shown to be both con men at certain points, to have used fake religious credentials and in Crisman’s case to have carried out a significant UFO hoax along with forging a document outlining has career as a CIA “asset”.  Not to mention anonymously inserting himself into the Garrison investigation with a letter identifying himself as a suspect – and  yes, the man had some serious problem while being totally sincere and personally convincing.  There is no doubt that some sources are so sincere that they convince themselves of their own alternative history.

Beckham on the other hand proved to be an entirely different story, as he did indeed have certain limited but verifiable personal experiences in New Orleans and could offer some insights into both Guy Bannister and Lee Oswald.  Yet being the kind of guy he was, that grew like Topsy, reinforced by his contact with Crisman, and became yet one more alternative reality. For those of you interested in either man, I have provided Debra Conway with my extensive research files on both of them and hopefully at some point they will be available on CD; I don’t think there is a body of information about them that comes close to that collection which had the benefit of work by a variety of others including people who had been personally scammed by Crisman.

Then you have a source like Gene Wheaton, who has the right credentials, was in the right places to hear and know what he claimed and shared it with the ARRB – yet the ARRB showed not the least interest in him and the staff member who worked with him for over a year eventually told my friend Stu Wexler she did not even remember his file, without doubt the most sensational she would have had go past her during her tenure there.    Stu and I will be talking about that at the Lancer conference this fall and showing an interview with Wheaton – that will give those in attendance a chance to personally evaluate him as a source.  And of course, as I write in SWHT, if you decide Wheaton is telling the truth, then you have a very strong insight into the people who went from Florida to Dallas to kill the President.

 

Archives Searching

One of the best places to gain insight into how agencies such as the CIA actually work in real life is to take a close look at their documents.  Of course it would be naive to think that certain things are put on paper or that national security restrictions are going to allow you to see everything.  However the CIA is still a government agency and has to conduct day to day business as any other institution or large business does – which means regulations, directives, memorandum and reports.  It also means personnel files which you won’t see under normal circumstances and certain areas of operational files which cross over that line, including expense reports, travel authorizations etc.  Of course from time to time things do get filed in strange places, pulled when they really should not be and intermixed with reports and communications.  Rules are great but things happen, its similar to the use of crypts which became so extensive over time that people had to make notes on documents to keep track of who or what was being talked about – then those pages got filed and sometimes get released.

When there are Congressional or other major investigations, lots of documents get flushed out that the CIA and other agencies would prefer didn’t, and end up in collections such as the JFK records collection, which covers area far beyond what you might assume – the same is true for the HSCA collection.  Most of those documents end up at the National Archives, as do a certain level of documents from Agencies, those that are not destroyed under document retention guidelines.  There doe have to be some rules for records destitution, the continent would sink if all the pieces of paper generated by every agency had to be retained forever.

To assist in determining what is and what is not at NARA in regard to the JFK records, NARA fielded a search tool some years ago.  It didn’t cover everything there but it did allow you to search by some fairly high level criteria such as name and see some of what was in the collection, get a document number (RIF) and some basic header information on each document.  Then you could try to get the actual document from NARA or if you were lucky go search another source like the Mary Ferrell Foundation using the RIF and come up with the document online.

The good news is that process is now significantly improved thorough the work of Rex Bradford at the Foundation.  Rex, had developed a new search tool which in conjunction with a sweep of the NARA search data by Ramon Herrera allows you to search NARA, find a document and then immediately to to it if its available at the MFF database of over a million pages. It also allows you to do much more sophisticated searches than the original NARA tool.   This is a really significant advance in document access and you can read all about it at:

https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Featured_JFK_Database_Explorer.html

 

In addition, that page will provide you with some further insights into what actually is at NARA and what is going to appear during the much anticipated 2017 JFK records release.  This took should be very valuable in terms of what is upcoming, and even gives you some specifics on exactly what documents are anticipated to be released.  Hopefully you will check it out and give it a try; its the sort of thing that takes data mining to a whole new level.

 

 

RFK Interview Part 2

As with the other political assassinations of the 1960’s, there are a number of reasons why the murder of Robert Kennedy – and the conspiracy associated with it – are still relevant.  In this interview we begin by exploring those reasons and then move on to more specific subjects.  The first interview dealt with the indications of conspiracy, and the premise that Sirhan Sirhan was associated with other parties, and other shooters. In part 2 we begin with the fact that the attack at the Ambassador followed the stalking of RFK, and very possibly other attempts to kill him. However all indications are that the individuals involved were anything but experienced assassins, no more than Sirhan himself.  We proceed with that line of thought, discussing points of leverage over Sirhan and the question of his own knowledge – both before and during the shooting.  Finally we circle back to the polka dot dress girl, and the importance of her identification in confirming the motives behind the conspiracy. We do have a third RFK interview scheduled at the end of June, in it we will examine the question of motive and the possibility that both the LAPD and the FBI actually were on the trail of key suspects, at least for a time.

 

http://www.blackkatenterprises.com/archives/Ochelli-Effect-32k-060916.mp3

 

 

Book Update

 

SOMEONE WOULD HAVE TALKED KINDLE VERSION:

There has been a good bit of interest in a Kindle version of Someone Would Have Talked.  We initially had a digital version available but certain formatting issues required it to be replaced – with Amazon that can be a protracted process.  After much work the publisher has now made a new and updated Kindle version available through Amazon:

https://www.amazon.com/Someone-Would-Have-Talked-Assassination-ebook/dp/B01GGJHSR6?ie=UTF8&ref_=asap_bc

…for reference in purchasing, the 2010 paperback version of Someone Would Have Talked is the most current and did have a good deal of new material added.  The new Kindle version is of the 2010 edition.

SURPRISE ATTACK ERRATA:

For those who have purchased – or may purchase – a copy of Surprise Attack, an abbreviated errata listing for the book is now available.  It seems that no matter how many editors are originally involved, a number of both factual and usage errors get into any work, especially ones over 500 pages long.  To my chagrin, Surprise Attack contains a couple of truly egregious errors such as an incredible (and wrong) speed for the V-2.  There are also issues of certain military ranks and command structures for a given time and date, acronyms and the standard punctuation, tense and other grammatical blunders. I can honestly say that when you are writing about 60 years of history it’s possible to lose track of what rank was held by an officer at a certain point in time or what specific name and acronym was applicable to a unit – it seems units change designations at least as quickly as officer change rank.

Thanks to the diligent work of a reader, Bob Wanderer, an extended errata listing has been done for the book and will be provided to the editor.  An abbreviated version which also contains a few elaborations, answers some questions and hopefully will be handy to readers. is provided below.  Bob was a great help, I’ve already recommended him to one of my publishers for a future project.

MAD = Mutual Assured Destruction

VLF =   Very Low Frequency signals; used in submarine communications

EMP =  Electro Magnetic Pulse.  Given that lightening and other sources can produce such effects, the EMP referred to in the context of atomic detonations should be Nuclear EMP or NEMP

Page 1 – Japan invaded and annexed Manchuria from Korea in 1931, after its prior invasion and occupation of Korea in 1910

Page 47 – both references to aircraft should be to a C-47

Page 54 – the correct ballistic flight speed for a V-2 is 3,580 mph (5,760 km/h)

Page 81 – Atomic Energy Commissions on line 22 should be Commission’s

Page 121 –   on line 27 “rout“ is correct, not routed

Page 125 – President Truman, not Eisenhower, was advised of the suspected attack

Page 126 – The commander in Korea was General Matthew Ridgeway

Page 140 –  line  13 “absolute” authority rather than absolutely

 

Page 151 –  line 15 “burst” rather than bust

 

Page 164 – paragraph 2, Eisenhower was president in 1953, not Truman

 

Page 168 – up to five hundred in 1961, at the latest 1962

 

Page 168 – the bomber gap “had been essentially disproved” by U- 2 reconnaissance

 

Page 187 – paragraph 3, “posed” a decapitation threat, not posted

 

Page 201 – paragraph 2, “and determined that one pair”…

 

Page 205 – the U-2 targeted by radar was destroyed by a SAM missile, the pilot was killed

 

Page 210 – the acronym should be CINCSAC not CINSAC

 

Page 233 –  “existing guidelines were dangerous”

 

Page 237 – Hanford, Washington not Oregon

 

Page 248 –  A total exchange would have involved over 50,000 atomic weapons, however a

preemptive strike would likely have limited the exchange to something much less

since preemption would have targeted nuclear weapons systems

 

Page 262 – paragraph 2, preparations for the exercises had NOT been detected or reported

 

Page 295 – paragraph 1, presidents through Carter and Reagan (correct chronological order)

 

Page 304 – paragraph 1, National Security advisor Clarke (not Clark)

 

Page 306 – paragraph 3,  Ohio “Class” nuclear submarines

 

Page 378 – FEMA should be the Federal Emergency Management Agency

 

Page 382 – The UN building is near the location of the World Trade Center Towers,   some two

miles distant, rather than a few city blocks.  The October exercise referred to was in

October, 2000, prior to the 2001 attacks of the following year.

 

Page 408      The squawking assumed in the exercise was at a minimum the routine signal which

would have allowed tracking the aircraft; we have insufficient detail on the exercise

know if the “emergency” squawk pattern was assumed (transponder code 7777) but

it appears that the exercise assumed a “substantial” time to respond it seems likely

that the response was to some form of voice or electronic alert from the aircraft.

 

 

Page 436     Flight 62 was an American Airlines flight, from Paris to Miami – it made an

emergency landing in Boston after the abortive bombing incident.

 

Page 459     The Iran hostage crisis began in 1979 and ended on January, 1981

 

Page 472      The CIA military contract employees used M-4 assault weapons but according to

available information they were allowed to select their own personal type so what

mix of semi-automatic and fully automatic weapons was in use is unclear.

 

Page 484      Marine Corps Embassy Security Group (MCESG)

http://www.mcesg.marines.mil/

 

Page 484     The tankers were Marine Corps KC130J Super Hercules aircraft

http://www.marines.com/operating-forces/equipment/aircraft/kc-130j-super-hercules

RFK and Conspiracy

Many readers may have already seen my posts and essays on the murder of Robert Kennedy.  If so, you are familiar with my view that there is absolutely no doubt that there was a conspiracy involved with his death.  My conclusion comes from a considerable amount of time spent not only with the research of others but my own time in the LAPD and FBI files as well a other original materials in key archives. It includes issues ranging from the weaknesses in the LAPD investigation to the evidence for far too many shots to be from a single gun.  Once you get through all that, and become deeply familiar with the evidence, the witnesses and the chronology of events, you know there was conspiracy in play.  At that point, matters begin to hinge around a number of key witnesses to other parties than Sirhan – and the importance of the Polka Dot Dress girl.  Over the last few years Stu Wexler and I have spent a fair amount of time on a  search for that young women and continue to pursue confirmation of our identification.

Stu and I had the opportunity to talk with Chuck Ochelli about all this last week for some two hours.  That conversation would be a good introduction for anyone not familiar with the subject.  We hope to continue the discussion this week, with particular attention to the girl and her two young male companions.

If you are new to the subject or want a refresher,  you might want to check out the recent interview:

 

 

Roy Hargraves and Dallas in Nov 63

Over the decades we have come to learn a good deal about the actual conspiracy that murdered President Kennedy.  We have very credible information on the people who went to Dallas in November, 1963, who those individuals were personally connected to in independent anti-Castro operations and we know a great deal about their hatred for the President and their view that he was both a traitor and an ongoing national security risk.  Yet over 50 years later there is still broad debate about the conspiracy and a lack of focus on those most directly involved.

I suspect part of the reason for that lack of focus is a failure to truly appreciate what we have learned, and to grasp its internal consistency and independent corroboration.  That understanding takes a great amount of study. And it involves a considerable understanding context, of fully knowing the related social networks – all in all what might simply be dismissed as minutia.  It is an effort which involves slogging – and that is clearly not as much fun as internet browsing  (sorry, sarcasm disclosure).  And its not a grand story of a terrible, complex conspiracy.

Instead its a story of a relatively small group of individuals, almost all of whom considered themselves to be patriots acting in the best interest of their native country, whether it was Cuba or the United States.  It’s  a scenario I lay out in obnoxious detail in Someone Would Have Talked and in a much more focused fashion in NEXUS.  But for those who have not read those works, or who might not feel like digging into them without some incentive, I offer you Roy Hargraves.

Roy Hargraves, a man who was independently reported to the FBI in early 1964 as a suspect in the attack on the President, a man who volunteered to help Jim Garrison and along with Bernardo de Torres helped poison Garrison’s investigation of the Cuban exile community. A man who, in the presence of his lawyer, years later admitted going to Dallas and building a bomb which did not have to be used.  He admitted to a great many other things as well, but cautiously, under guidance.  Among the things he acknowledged was the presence of his very good friend Felipe Vidal Santiago in Dallas – another fact which had first been registered in FBI reports back in 1963.

Hargraves represents a good entry point into understanding the actual nature of the conspiracy and the attack on JFK.  And for a brief introduction, I offer the following interview done a couple of days ago, I hope you find it interesting if you have the time to listen.

https://22novembernetwork.wordpress.com/2016/05/28/the-dallas-action-pt-87-the-gunboat-cowboys-roy-hargraves-with-larry-hancock/

 

Mary Ferrell Foundation Resources

Hopefully most readers are familiar with the Mary Ferrell Foundation – but perhaps only as a documents archive.  Certainly the foundation’s web site does contain over a million pages of actual documents relating to the assassinations and related investigations of the 1960’s and 1960’s.  It has an extremely good search function and as part of the search will show you not only documents and sources but related books and articles on your search item.  I suspect a number of folks think of it as totally focused on JFK but its far broader than that as you can quickly see by scanning the home page and finding the major areas include MLK, RFK and other major events of the period.

https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Main_Page.html

The home page also introduces you to a wealth of essays, articles and interviews on the site – including my own. and in particular my book length essays on the RFK assassination.

Currently and for the next year, a major focus of the Foundation and of the site is the exploration of what sets of documents have been released, where the holes are and what seems to have disappeared along the way. That applies not only to government agency documents but also to the work of the various investigations such as that of the Church Committee.  If you want to stay current on what is going to be released in 2017, what is being reclassified, denied or apparently been lost the site is not only a very good place to start but one you should visit periodically.

Beyond that, one of the major areas of Foundation research at the moment has to do with interpreting documents, in particular CIA documents.  A of individuals has been at work researching CIA cryptonyms and  publishing the results of that research.  You can find new releases and a guide to the entire set of research at:

https://www.maryferrell.org/php/cryptdb.php

If you really want to learn some American history, as well as how the CIA has actually carried out its missions, the way to jump head first into it is to begin wading through the cryptonyms, it will give you a true sense for the types of activities they have engaged in, who they work with and how they carry out that work.  And I assure  you its a lot different than you find represented in a great deal of popular fiction and action novels. There is a lot more bureaucracy, an obsessive concern over deniability, a constant concern over internal security and far more “political” action and manipulation than there is covert and paramilitary action.  That’s there too, enough for me to do over 400 pages in Shadow Warfare, but that’s only one branch of the Agency and only one area of their missions.  The crypts give you a much broader view.

If you have not visited the Mary Ferrell Foundation, take a look.  You can dig deeply into a great many areas and I can promise you it will be closer to reality than spending your time on YouTube…

 

 

Sources, News and Fact Checking

 

One of the ongoing problems we all face in dealing with contemporary history (where sources can come forward or be questioned years or decades after the fact) is the issue of memory vs. reality. I’ve posted about that issue and it’s a challenging one – especially when the sources start telling us things we really want to hear, things they did not say to anyone at the time, offer to official investigations (even anonymously) or record in any way prior appearing  with new and explosive information.

I noted a series of posts the other day in which the release of James Files was being discussed.  The most striking comment was one person saying that Files sounded sincere and they would believe him until it was conclusively proved he was making false statements. OK, but that is a matter of belief, of faith and a personal decision and needs to be accepted for what it is and no more.

What is becoming more of a concern to me is that more and more elements of the media are also sliding into news which either factually suspect or presented with little background or context. In some instances that appears to be just part of an overall trend in the news media, which has  re-positioned itself as a combination of “reality TV” and as entertainment (same thing with the Weather if you look closely).  I first sensed we were entering a sea change when CNN came up with the “Situation Room” format….essentially saying to the audience that this is not just news, its “participation” and anything and everything can be made into a crisis or situation.

Worse yet, the exponential increase in the number of news outlets on cable/satellite and on the internet has combined with talk radio and blogging to create a demand for content which is really not news, it’s simply grist for editorial, most often with a pretty obvious agenda. Those outlets are on the air so frequently that they constantly need new content and are constantly on the lookout for content that “fits”.  They want it so much that they increasingly accept it with no vetting of sources or any real fact checking – even to the extent of not vetting their own on screen analysts.  Fox got burned just last week for long term use of a military/national security specialist whose background was a good deal less than what Fox was touting –  and the discrepancies were not that hard to find.

The last couple of weeks brought us a dramatic example of this rush to news in the national story about Ted Cruz’s father being linked to Lee Oswald and the JFK assassination.  I’m not going into that here, it’s been widely deconstructed since it was based in nothing more than some highly problematic opinions by two facial recognition “specialists” who then became pretty defensive about even their own remarks on the identification.  It’s not clear how the story was generated, it is clear that it was promoted for political purposes.  And sadly one of the main bloggers promoting it appears to have committed suicide.

http://www.ibj.com/articles/58378-blogger-gary-welsh-dies-in-apparent-suicide

Of course if you follow his death down the right internet trails that in itself will reveal a conspiracy and actually verify the original Cruz story (uh, that was sarcasm, just to be clear).

And this week I ran across the following on Fox News:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/05/12/could-have-been-there-squadron-member-speaks-out-on-stalled-benghazi-response.html

The story first focuses on an unnamed source (we don’t know his unit, his rank or most important his career specialty or his base of assignment).  We are told his remarks are in regard to aircraft on the flight line at Aviano Air Base in Italy….

The source said: “I definitely believe that our aircraft could have taken off and gotten there in a timely manner, maybe three hours at the most, in order to at least stop that second mortar attack … and basically save lives that day.”

The story about a failure to deploy aircraft then transitions to Mike, described as a former team sergeant for a military anti-terror quick reaction force, once known as the CIF…

“For some reason they were all shut down, and I think it leads back to a policymaker somewhere because nobody in the military is going to shut down an operation,” he said. On the night of the attack, Mike was at Delta Force headquarters in the U.S. monitoring the events as they happened.

And if you can’t guess the political implications of the story – which appeared to gain little traction other than at Fox – you can read it for yourself.

The thing is that the average reader is simply presented with no context and no real facts which would allow them to evaluate either the man from Aviano or Mike as to their credibility, or perhaps most importantly for the value of their observations. Having researched Benghazi in considerable detail – and written about it in Surprise Attack – I can tell you that both the activities at Aviano and Special Forces headquarters were examined in great detail by lots of people including Congressional Committees desperately seeking evidence of exactly the sort of failure to respond that the Fox article pursues with these two new sources.

Those investigations left few stones un-turned, we have the details of the teams that were assembled and dispatched, we have the details of the air units and weaponry at Aviano and exactly why the decision was made not to send fighter bombers to Libya. We even know the command structure in that decision and the fact that for most of the night that command was aware of the embassy in Benghazi but not of the CIA operation being conducted out of the annex. If anyone is interested in all that it’s available in numerous sources and summarized in my chapter on Benghazi.  Email me if you want to chat about it. Perhaps the most discouraging fact is that there are some serious lessons to be learned from the attack and changes that were made afterwards – but since the media doesn’t cover those sorts of stories it’s hard to tell if those changes are still in effect, or have been funded in the current budgets.

Admittedly I’m rambling a bit, but my real message here is that everyone certainly will reach their own conclusions, opinions and beliefs on such events.  Fine.  But the media – well what at one time was called the news media, now it’s just the media – either needs to return to its roots in fact checking and true investigative journalism or we need to be a lot more cautious and critical about what it sends our way as news.