Hiding the witnesses

| December 13, 2012

I’ve said before that I know someone who is stationed at Landstuhl Hospital in Germany and was in the operation room when casualties from the attack on the consulate in Benghazi arrived there from Libya. This person told me that there were more than 30 casualties that day and the staff at the hospital was pretty busy.

Now, according to Breitbart, Utah Congressman Jason Chaffetz claims that the Obama Administration is hiding those folks;

…he has been “thwarted” by the State Department from seeing any Americans who survived the deadly attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi. Many people forget that there were Americans who survived the Benghazi attack, some of whom were badly injured and are still recovering.

“My understanding is that we still have some people in the hospital. I’d like to visit with them and wish them nothing but the best but the State Department has seen it unfit for me to know who those people are—or even how many there are,” Rep. Chaffetz said. “I don’t know who they are. I don’t know where they live. I don’t know what state they’re from. I don’t even know how many there are. It doesn’t seem right to me.”

It seems to me that some of those folks would have some insight into the events of that day which we haven’t heard yet.

Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Terror War

Comments (37)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. DefendUSA says:

    Every week I write the WH about Benghazi and the answers we have not seen in 12 weeks. WTF…Double Standard and Three times the Damned hypocrisy. I’m fucking over it, I tell you.

  2. Nik says:

    If there’s nothing to hide, they wouldn’t have to worry about the truth.

    “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.”

    There’s something seriously infected in our government. No wonder they don’t want those who know the truth to be found.

  3. Steadfast&Loyal says:

    Its BS. It hardly came up during the election and it floors me.

    I am so tired of the over-fetish-ization of the US Military. We have been turned into a fad, a cause, a byline in a newspaper.

    Its real out there. If any thinks we have beaten everyone or have no enemies look at this link:


    Its a russian version of Modern Weapons…this is about the T90 tank. Its in russian, but the point is they clearly don’t see things our way. You’ll see the scene I’m talking about.

  4. Chip@NASA says:

    4 killed in Benghazi attack.
    Where did they bury the survivors?

  5. 2-17 Air Cav says:

    The reason why the investigation remains open is to keep the lid on the survivors. I am confident each has been informed of the ongoing nature of the investigation and that the status mmeans none may speak with anyone about the attack, under penalty of prosecution and in accordance with whatever secrecy agreements they previously signed.

  6. USMCE8Ret says:

    Romney had his chance to pull Barry’s punk card during the debate, in spite of how Candy Crowley fended him off, to get some real answers about Benghazi. Clearly there is protocol in handling such things, but Romney – much like the rest of the GOP – is silent TO THIS DAY about what really happened. We’ll never get the answers. Hillary is supposed to testify next week, but she’ll give vague answers for sure… just to cover her own ass.

  7. OldSoldier54 says:

    “… those folks would have some insight into the events of that day…”

    Which is exactly why they are being buried. This administration should be ashamed, and every officer complicit should be dismissed in disgrace from whichever branch he or she is serving in.

  8. USMCE8Ret says:

    @5 – Leads me to believe that the investigation will NEVER be finalized and closed, lest those who survived will EVER get an opportunity to share what actually happened – or at least provide some insight on how to reconstruct the events as they happened.

  9. Common Sense says:

    Our Federal Government, sans a few good guys in Congress, makes me sick.

    But the people of this country would rather have President Give-Me-Stuff.

  10. DefendUSA says:

    I’ve been thinking that in 12 weeks of those 30+ people who were injured–surely ONE of them is alert and healed enough to talk…yet…nothing. Who is authorizing the drugged stupors? Who can access that prescription database to make sure they are reporting Rx’s for said patients? 500 percent not acceptable that we know nothing more. I get the sense that they would have preferred them all to die rather than own the truth.

  11. OWB says:

    Disgusting doesn’t even begin to describe it all. Yes, the thugs can exert more intimidation than most of us can imagine, but one of these days, among that many folks and folks they have spoken with, someone will let something slip somewhere. Just too many people involved for a lid to be kept on it forever.

  12. FatCircles0311 says:


    The most transparent administration in U.S. history!

  13. streetsweeper says:

    @# 11 -Oh hell yes. Sooner or later…Imagine how much hell would be being raised right now if it was a Republican Administration.

  14. Anonymous says:

    @10: I’ll keep an open mind about this, but I don’t see ‘evil administration drugs survivors to keep them quiet’ as a plausible explanation. Unless the proverbial black helicopters swept in to take them all to some off-the-books site staffed by people with no conscience and whose loyalty to dubious orders is unquestionable, there’s just too many ordinary people -with ordinary differences of opinion, politics, and battles of conscience- to keep something like what you’re saying quiet. What of their families? Friends? Surely some would be speaking up.

    It is, and I don’t say this as way of an insult but more of a comparison, a bit like the 9/11 ‘truthers’ – such a large and nefarious plan would be a tad difficult to keep secret. Same goes for Benghazi. Were mistakes made? Absolutely. Is there an attempt to downplay that? Oh, most likely. But large-scale conspiracy? Unlikely, in my opinion.

  15. oldsoldiersdaughter says:

    Respectfully, “I know someone” doesn’t cut it as a bonafide source on Benghazi for me, opsec notwithstanding.
    So many rumors about Benghazi have gotten circulated as fact already in the past couple months that this one here strikes me as just the latest operatic howl from the pack.
    Why are there no apologies among you Pulitzer-prize-worthy journalist/bloggers for other past false information? Why no regret for the thousands of blood pressure readings elevated among us, your audience, for no good reason?
    I am a fan of yours, albeit an occasionally jaundiced one: If this charge doesn’t hold up, I expect a full mea maxima culpa from you on this page.
    If it does, I’ll give you mine.

    • Jonn Lilyea says:

      Old Daughter, I’m guessing you came over here on B5’s link. B5 knows who my source at Landstuhl is. Most of my regular readers can probably guess who I would know at Landstuhl hospital. I don’t want to get that person in trouble, just like all of the other people who give us information here that no one else reports. Like when I was saying that the troops weren’t being allowed to arm themselves in Afghanistan during the green-on-blue attacks. Like when I was saying (I’m still saying) that the number of green-on-blue attacks that are being reported in the media are only the tip of the iceberg. Like when I was reporting on the bogus stuff that was going on in Karl Eikenberry’s embassy in Kabul. I’m not looking for a Pulitzer here, I only want to inform my readers. Lots of people don’t believe me…until the truth comes out. But information has to come from somewhere, right? Whether you believe me or not probably won’t interfere with my sleep, but you disregard what I write here at your own peril.

  16. 2-17 Air Cav says:

    @14. And what of the outright lies delivered by the administration regarding the spontaneous protests regarding a film no one has seen? Those weren’t mistakes. A mistake is my saying that today is November 13. If, I think that you are unable to challenge me on that and I have my emissaries tell the world that indeed, today is November 13, that’s no longer a mistake.

  17. 2-17 Air Cav says:

    @15. Keep yours. This isn’t a contest or a game.

  18. DaveO says:

    That our government sequesters its secret squirrels from the general population isn’t an issue with me. Lord knows taht under a Republican President, the New York Times would have already published Top Secret reports, the agents’ names, Facebook pages and so on with 20 hours. And all the scandal and embarrassment and tertiary loss of life that goes with it.

    But a sitting Congressman performing Oversight, a principle duty of Congress over Executives agencies, gets denied – this isn’t your run of the mill WikiLeaks kerfuffle, or Abu Ghraib irritant.

  19. MAJMike says:

    Reminds me of the old “Nacht und Nebel” Laws in Germany. Inconvenient people would disappear into the “Night and Fog.” Every day in every way we are living in a suspense novel.

  20. Anonymous says:

    @16: I don’t view the ‘spontaneous protest’ answer as an outright lie; that was happening in other cities, so our intelligence community could very well have made (reasonable) initial guesses that that was what had been happening in Benghazi, too. And the film? Well, it’s entirely plausible that WAS what was stoking the fires in other protests – not the video itself, which I agree few if any had seen, but talk ABOUT the video.

    Basically, I’m not surprised that a reasonable initial guess about a rapidly developing situation on the ground which had similarities to other events on that day was categorized incorrectly as more of the same. And, following on from further developments that showed that MIGHT NOT BE the case, the IC decided to take its time with its analysis and not change their position immediately. Getting things wrong once is bad enough, getting them wrong twice is worse. Also, it’s possible -though perhaps not likely- that even when additional information became available, it was decided not to let our enemies know that we knew this wasn’t an attack. Let them know we’re after them, they go to ground. Let them think a fast one was pulled, their guard won’t be up.

    To me, it’s just more likely that the situation developed quickly and we didn’t have a clear picture than the idea that there’s a grand conspiracy here.

  21. OldSoldier54 says:

    @21 Anon

    Fog of war? When “they” were watching in real time, from a drone, as the CIA safe house fight developed? When two weeks later, IIRC, Rice and Obama both were still trying to play the movie card?

    Believe as you wish. I believe this stinks to high heaven. Not for a second do I believe that four Americans were let die. I suspect it’s all about plausible deniability. Keepin’ the mighty O looking good to the brainless masses so he gets that all important second term.

  22. Smorgasbord says:

    Why aren’t the republicans on this issue? Wait a minute………………………….. I forgot: There is no republican party any more. They have merged with the democratic party and become the republicratic party.

  23. Smorgasbord says:

    obama would only be hiding the people if he had something to hide. Does him hiding them mean he has something to hide?

  24. Scubasteve says:

    Maybe he doesn’t have anything to hide, maybe he just has things that he doesn’t think we, the people should know about…. Semantics. It’s all in the spin.

  25. Old Trooper says:

    I have given my theory, before, and this story solidifies it. Obama and crew don’t want anyone to know what really happened and why. Watergate and Iran/Contra are a walk in the park compared to this, but because it’s a democrat, the propaganda wing won’t allow it to be covered. If this were Bush, it would be headline news 24/7.

  26. 2-17 Air Cav says:

    @21. Well, if a conspiracy of silence doesn’t explain the silence and disinformation for you, you must agree that utter incompetence does. How else other than those two could a reasonable person comprehend the persitent assertions by Rice on Sunday news shows and at the UN of the protest explanation offered by her on behalf of the administration. Why else would the administration involve itself so quickly and publicly in a probation violation allegedly committed by the film maker? Then there’s the Dept of State and the mantra of religious intolerance that ‘abused’ the 1st amendment. How about the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs calling upon that minister to disavow the film? How about the real-time video that showed the attack and the absence of protesters? How about the date, 9/11, of the attack and the security issues that were raised as that date neared? And, now, why is a US congressman unable to identify, let alone speak with, those who survived the attack? Heck, it took a foreign head of state to come out and say flat out that this was no protest but a planned terrorsit attack. And, of course, there was CNN’s finding that diary while it took the FBI weeks to make their 45 minute site visit to the burned-out consulate. And today the investigation remains open. This isn’t tinfoil hat territory. Responsible people in responsible positions share these concerns and cannot get reasonable answers to reasonable questions.

  27. DefendUSA says:

    @14 My musing is extreme, I will give you that. But even you have mentioned the obvious. When The terror attack at Ft. Hood happened, not only did you know the names of those killed but also every injured person and the story of their lives. Where are the stories? And Susan Rice withdrawing is just another play in offering the protection to the President. They DO NOT want any focus on Benghazi.
    PS…The situation where Reagan was shot “developed quickly.” and no one had situation rooms to react.
    You are also in line with protecting the liar-in- chief and I just don’t agree.

  28. Ex-PH2 says:

    I love conspiracy theories. There’s always something that doesn’t quite add up.

    So here goes: If there are 30-some additional people who were witnesses to what really happened in Benghazi (and the videos shot by the insurgents can still be found online), then why keep them incarcerated/hidden away somewhere? Why not just shoot them? Just get rid of them. Take them for a ‘ride’ to an undisclosed location and bulldoze the dead bodies into a hole and cover it.

    In case you all have forgotten, Josef Stalin used to do this all the time. People disappeared in the middle of the night. The Party apartment building in Moscow, where rising Party members lived, was bugged and built with hidden tunnels, and the KGB literally came out of the wall in the middle of the night, in addition to knocking on the doors of people who did not live in that building.
    “In Kiev jail they are reported at this time [1929-30] shooting 70-120 men a night,” reports Robert Conquest; a typical story “is of the Ukrainian village of Velyki Solontsi where, after 52 men had been removed as kulaks, their women and children were taken, dumped on a sandy stretch along the Vorskla River and left there.” (Excerpts from Conquest, The Harvest of Sorrow.)
    Quote is from:

    Stalin’s mass graves have only been discovered and bodies exhumed since the end of the USSR. The estimated total of people who were killed and/or left to die of starvation from Ukraine to Yakutia is somewhere between 20 millioin and 43 million. The numbers aren’t complete, probably never will be.

    It’s so easy to get rid of people who are inconvenient to your plan. What if one of them escapes and gets to the media? Oh, okay, one can be dismissed as a looney, but what if several of them escape?

    No, if there are other witnesses, why not just get rid of them? In a true authoritarian state, you don’t want the inconvenient truth hanging around in the background. You kill it. Pol Pot did that through the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. Hitler did that by controlling the newspapers and magazines and the radio. The death camps and stalags that Speer constructed for him were right next door to villages, but hidden and guarded, and the German people did not know anything about them. They knew only about the Nazis.

    So again, if there are these extra witnesses hidden away somewhere, why not just get rid of them? They’re a liability.

    As I said, we have all seen the videos shot by the attackers because they were posted by Fox and online, where the entire world can see them. The uncomfortable truth of the attack was as visible as you can get.

    I agree that something does not seem quite right.

    Here is something from an article about the attack on the Benghazi consulate: The doctor who treated Stevens says he died of asphyxiation, and his heart had stopped by the time he reached the hospital.
    Where were the bodyguards? Bakkosh asks. There wasn’t even an ambulance, he says.
    Hours after the consulate attack, Libyan authorities sent security forces to the Benghazi airport to meet a U.S. team sent to evacuate the Americans.
    One of those Libyans, Fathi Obeidi, described the U.S. group as seven Marines in civilian clothes. Using a GPS, they went to a secret safe house inside a walled compound.
    There, they found three villas, one of which was occupied by more than 20 Americans who had fled the consulate, says Obeidi.
    Here’s the link: http://www.npr.org/2012/09/20/161491148/libyan-militiaman-says-he-warned-u-s-of-dangers

    OK, this accounts for 20, so those people are key witnesses to a serious, grave mistake by the US government, and they can testify to what was going on there. IF they have extremely damaging evidence, why keep them under lock and key, or drugged into oblivion? Just take them for a ride into the German countryside, shoot them and bury them. Then there are no witnesses, right?

    Here are some more links:



    Like I said, live witnesses are, as Stalin knew quite well, an inconvenient burden. You bury them if they can destroy you.

  29. Georg Felis says:

    Two good reasons why these people have not made statements:
    1) Any Federal Employee knows that to stick your head up during an investigation is to invite yourself into a game of Wack-a-Mole, with yourself in the role of the mole. Whistleblower laws are as thin as tissue paper, and retribution is both certain and exhaustive.
    2) Most if not all of the employees at the site were getting paid hazardous duty/bonus/overseas pay and most probably are keeping that high pay while being hidden. The moment they stick their heads up, all those positives will turn to negatives, AND get hit by legal fees on top. You sign that security form and you can be royally hosed if you do anything even close to breaking it.

  30. 2-17 Air Cav says:

    Well, here’s a shocker. Clinton won’t testify next week. It seems she fainted, struck her head and has a concussion. Of course, it happened in private but where and when they’re not saying.

  31. 2/17 Air Cav says:

    Hey, remember this topic, Benghazi? I just thought I’d remind everyone that the survivors are still inaccessible. That’s a great many golf rounds and mini vacations between December and today, isn’t it. And now we are looking at NCAA March Madness. “Gee, Mr. President, what’s your bracket looking like?” NOT “Gee, Mr. President, about Benghazi…”

  32. OWB says:

    Looks like things are beginning to leak out a bit? It has to happen eventually, of course. Just a matter of time. (Whether it is within our lifetimes remains to be seen.) Maybe sooner rather than later.