Why the Recent Threats against US Embassies is BS

Updated: August 4, 2013


By Kerry Patton

How many US Embassies have closed for business over the years? How many all at once? Never have I heard of twenty plus Embassies and or Consulates shut down for business before all at once. But according to many, some cacamooca threat exists which has concerned the US State Department enough to shut down a plethora of overseas operations.

Let me be the first to say in no time has any Embassy or Consulate not been under some type of threat. Someone, somewhere, wishes to cause harm and mayhem to the United States and while a few may believe our Embassies and Consulates are secured facilities, they are not.

So, claiming some threat exists is a no brainer. Of course a threat exists. Threats always exist.

Now, to claim the United States has “actionable intelligence” which has authorized some decision maker at the highest of State Department echelons to shut down twenty-plus Embassies is nonsense. Let me explain.

First, all threats are tactical. This means that all threats come from a specific location on the ground. No threat, let me repeat that one, NO THREAT is strategic in nature. Why is this important to understand? Because if a threat truly existed, and “actionable intelligence” determined such a threat existed, we would know the approximate location of such a threat.

So why from West Africa, throughout the Maghreb, across the Middle East, through the Levant, and into Central Asia have we decided to close so many Embassies and Consulates?

Forget that for a second and let’s look more at “threat matrixes.”

Just for the record….I am not Edward Snowden nor am I Bradley Manning so if you’re looking for me to give away state secrets, forget about it….

As intelligence gets collected, analysts work diligently to find what are known as “gaps.” These gaps create what are known as Priority Intelligence Requirements (PIRs) which result in loads and loads of Requests for Information (RFI’s).

What are PIRs?

The identification, prioritization, and refinement of uncertainties concerning the threat and the battlefield environment that a command must resolve to accomplish its mission. What this means is very simple. If a threat is considered existent, people need to get off their asses and start doing a shitload of homework to better understand and formulate strategies to counter such.

This brings me to my next point—Courses of Action (COA) or Contingency Operation Plans (COOPs).

In no way in hell should anyone with any form of authority allow a primary mission to stop simply because the boogie man is knocking at your door. Such authorities need to create secondary missions to collect, understand, and destroy threats.

We don’t expect our military to simply shut down because a squad or platoon took a punch to the face resulting in some bloody noses. We wouldn’t expect our CIA to do the same. And, we sure as hell should not expect our State Department to act like a bunch of pansy ass cowards which completely negates our nation’s reputation as the world’s number one superpower by shutting down so many embassies.

Simply put, if a threat truly does exist which is a credible threat coming from actionable intelligence (mind you, I obviously believe none of the sort exists right now per the claims being made by our State Department), we need to find that threat and eliminate it! Acting like a bunch of scared ostriches is no way to do business but that is exactly what we are doing as a nation when it comes to US National Security and Foreign Policy.

Now you watch, within 24 hours, Al Qaeda will attack a US Embassy or Consulate just to prove me wrong….Bastards!

Kerry Patton is the author of Contracted: America’s Secret Warriors.

embassy map




  1. Melissa

    August 4, 2013 at 10:24 am

    My thought: who’s entering our Consulates & Embassies & what are they looking for or planning to do?

    • Chris Debello

      August 4, 2013 at 11:55 am

      Very true Melissa. This is the first intelligent comment I see of the three on here so far. Likely, they are entering the Consulate in an attempt to fraudulently gain a U.S. Visa for them and their family. And they will probably get it.

  2. Jyrell D. Shedd Sr.

    August 4, 2013 at 10:27 am

    There is a threat. It was paid for lock, stock and barrel by the Federal Reserve and the Obama Administration via the Operation in Benghazi Libya, whereby Manpower, Guns, Equipment and Money were being funneled to Al Qaeda through Turkey.
    They need this to propel their agenda to the next level and obfuscate the truth.

    • Paul Blart

      August 4, 2013 at 11:53 am

      Thank God your beloved Ron Paullie lost miserably. You are a bunch of nutbags.

      • Mike Martinez

        August 4, 2013 at 3:52 pm

        Blart, go back to the mall and leave this “thinking” stuff to the adults.

  3. David M. Ward

    August 4, 2013 at 11:11 am

    Smoke and mirrors, or a fundamental see-change in U.S. policy regarding threats. I vote for the former. Look at the middle and back pages of the newspapers. I’ll just bet the real reason for this diversion will reveal itself. Or, perhaps, it already has with this revelation about the CIA’s presence during the Benghazi debacle. There is something that the Administration doesn’t want us to be looking at. That’s my guess.

  4. Okay, Tough Guy

    August 4, 2013 at 11:47 am

    You cry and complain that the tragedy in Benghazi was avoidable. Yet, you want to put American workers and locally employed staff unnecessarily at risk when direct intelligence of attacks are received? All in the name of being a tough guy? Your immaturity shines via your opinion.

    • Joe

      August 4, 2013 at 11:36 pm

      The appropriate response is to provide an adequate defense, not to run away like a pussy you fucking moron.

  5. Trayvon Wilkes

    August 4, 2013 at 11:52 am

    Wow, you’re stipid. It’s a good thing MARINES and DSS protect our Embassies and Consulates, and not you.

    • Chris Morris

      August 4, 2013 at 3:58 pm

      What the author is getting at is that even with the security we have at embassies (and even consulates), which is actually very minimal in comparison to the potential size of a threat, it’s not going to act as a foolproof deterrent to threats. For example, 1979 Iran, 1983 Beirut, 1998 Kenya & Tanzania, 2004 Saudi Arabia, 2008 Serbia & Yemen, and 2011 Afghanistan. A lot good “MARINES and DSS” did in preventing and stopping those attacks. Furthermore, there’s only 6-11 Marines stationed at embassies at a time. So most of the security falls on contractors and the host nation, both of which are not very reliable.

    • leftoftheboom

      August 4, 2013 at 10:41 pm

      It takes someone with balls the size of peas to attack the intelligence of some and start by misspelling the actual word.

  6. David

    August 4, 2013 at 12:19 pm

    Just a couple of thoughts. One the bad guys are getting pretty good about coordinated attacks. Now I would agree that all 20 are pretty unlikely. Second if it is actionable intel, some of the targets might be more specifically known. But we on the other hand might want to generalize it in order not to give away potential intel sources buy only closing the specific targets. Lastly, the rest of the USG is going on work shutdowns on Fridays to save money. What better way to shut down a bunch of overseas areas without actually claiming that is is because of our financial situation. Blame it on the bad guys.

  7. Old Soldier

    August 4, 2013 at 8:28 pm

    Seems to me that if we suspect the bad guys are going to strike one, or some of these facilities, maybe we should set a counter ambush? Beef up security, let them come to us, and then kill them.

    By putting this all over the news we have given the enemy the following intelligence:
    A. We are listening to you (Cracked your secret codes)
    B.Your intended targets are empty of high value (casualties)

    When in the history of our military have we told the enemy stuff like this?
    We have encouraged the enemy to back off, change their tactics and strike us again in a more vulnerable spot.

    • Bob Haber

      August 5, 2013 at 7:46 pm

      When in our history???
      When biden released the name of Seal Team Six.

  8. Storm

    August 4, 2013 at 10:13 pm

    This is a ‘damned if you do and damned if you don’t’ situation. There was rightfully loud screaming after Benghazi because the State Department didn’t take the threats seriously enough and US personnel died. Now folks are screaming that that threats are being taken ‘too’ seriously.

  9. leftoftheboom

    August 4, 2013 at 10:33 pm

    Well let me see. What critical national level issues are still undecided that require the administration to look like they are being proactive. They got splashed in toilet water over Bengazi and the situation still had not calmed down. The Russians have allowed Snowden to stay and that is causing high level diplomatic nail biting.

    So what do I think? I think that you cannot prove a negative and the administration is looking for an easy win. If there is no attack, then the administration claims their actions prevented it. If there is an attack, then the administration claims a win because they were right in their warning. If the attack takes place somewhere else, the administration claims that they blew the terrorist plans.

    So no matter what happens the administration gets a brownie point that they can use to derail any specific criticism against them in a variety of ways. And in addition this is going to cause disruptions around the world to our communications with host nations and aid to citizens in those countries. When someone complains that with the consulate or embassy closed they did not get the help they needed, the administration can now say that they intended to close Bengazi but did not because of just such need to help our citizens. This can now be used as proof they made a hard call.

    Once again the administration is shining a light in the darkness to light the way for the blind. But hey what do I know?

  10. Russ

    August 4, 2013 at 10:33 pm

    Since when has the United States started backing down? Why now? Threats, really? Or is this part of the Bullsh*t sequester….all so terrorist can gain ground… False conspiracies, when did we start turning the ” other cheek”…I completely agree… But nothing will be done as we the people, but as the “current administration” wants..

  11. Greg Zotta

    August 5, 2013 at 1:31 pm

    Can you believe the Government regarding the supposed terrorist threat that caused them to close all those embassies? Or is this a ruse to distract from the scandals and to justify the Government spying on American citizens. They claim they have information that it is a “specific” threat. Wouldn’t a “specific” threat reveal the target of the attack? We know Barack Hussein Obama was on the golf course when the closings occurred, but we still do not know what he was doing during the attack on Benghazi, where four Americans were slaughtered and reinforcements were ordered to “stand down.” I believe the US Government’s reaction to this supposed threat they received through the NSA spying program by closing the embassies is a ruse, because if anything happens they can say it was because of the spying program and if nothing occurs they can say it was prevented because of the spying program. That way the US Government can justify violating American’s Fourth Amendment Rights.

  12. Bill

    August 6, 2013 at 8:49 am

    There may be a legitimate threat, then again, maybe there isn’t. Our Nation has been burned too many times by this administration with their scandals, hypocrisy, arrogance and ignorance to believe anything they are saying without automatically believing that there’s a hidden agenda at work behind the scenes.

  13. Virgil Hilts

    August 6, 2013 at 4:18 pm

    From The Article: “And, we sure as hell should not expect our State Department to act like a bunch of pansy ass cowards which completely negates our nation’s reputation as the world’s number one superpower by shutting down so many embassies.” Laying that aside for a minute…Holder, Swillary, Kerry nd FUBAR-AK Insane O’Trauma………ARE pansy-assed COWARDS!

  14. Herne19d

    August 7, 2013 at 8:36 pm

    Being a naturally suspicious type, I find it to be odd that this action was taken 6 days ago and nothing has happened. In fact POTUS went on The Jay Leno Show and said that we should travel around as normal, just be a little more alert.
    This came along as the Hearings over several other things are coming to a head. The last time that I remember POTUS doing something on a Global Scale to distract us, it was 1998? And POTUS had gotten caught with his privates somewhere they shouldn’t have been….And he lied about it.
    I wonder what the outcome of the Hearings will be……And what will “they” do to try and further distract us…..>:)

Get notified of new Rhino Den articles and videos as they come out, Also, find out before anyone else about new product launches and huge discounts from RangerUp.com, the proud parent of the Rhino Den.

  • Videos (The Damn Few and more!)
  • Military-inspired articles
  • MMA (and Tim Kennedy) coverage
Close this window

Join the Rhino Den / Ranger Up Nation

Read previous post:
The Dumbass Chronicles – Sea Sick

  By Scuba Steve When you’re a bullet proof E-2, there is nothing that you can’t do. Leadership needs to...