Gary M Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/leon-panetta-us-lacked-early-info-on-benghazi-attack/2012/10/25/d3aa2ca5-e8af-4dc0-95d4-a1b28b517aa4_video.html They were watching a live feed. http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/10/24/breaking-news-white-house-watched-benghazi-attacked-and-didnt-respond/ They are all a bunch of liars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 It's pathetic that Barry put politics ahead of the lives of Americans. Yet the MSM continues to turn a blind eye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Nixon's not a pimple on BO's azz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 (edited) Not to worry, the American press will inform the citizenry............................................... Edited October 26, 2012 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Heard on the news today that 3 different requests for help went out and they were turned down all three times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Let's focus on who the real enemy is here. Kill Romney! [/s] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1billsfan Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 (edited) Heard on the news today that 3 different requests for help went out and they were turned down all three times. In the second debate, Obama said that he was offended by the suggestion that anyone in his administration, including the U.N. ambassador, would mislead the country on Libya. Why would they deny CIA operatives 3 different requests for help against a "spontaneous" mob angered by a youtube video? A "spontaneous" mob is too threatening to the US military forces?... http://www.foxnews.c...ck-sources-say/ Edited October 26, 2012 by 1billsfan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Listened to Rush today. There was a guy who said that he knows how things work with urgent requests for help. The communication to the situation room in the White House would supercede all others. It requires that someone physically walk the request to the oval office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/petraeus-throws-obama-under-bus_657896.html If this had happened in any year other than Obama's re-election, there would be calls for impeachment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Petraeus Throws Obama Under the Bus Breaking news on Benghazi: the CIA spokesman, presumably at the direction of CIA director David Petraeus, has put out this statement: "No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. ” So who in the government did tell “anybody” not to help those in need? Someone decided not to send in military assets to help those Agency operators. Would the secretary of defense make such a decision on his own? No. It would have been a presidential decision. There was presumably a rationale for such a decision. What was it? When and why—and based on whose counsel obtained in what meetings or conversations—did President Obama decide against sending in military assets to help the Americans in need? http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/petraeus-throws-obama-under-bus_657896.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinga Posted October 27, 2012 Share Posted October 27, 2012 Listened to Rush today. There was a guy who said that he knows how things work with urgent requests for help. The communication to the situation room in the White House would supercede all others. It requires that someone physically walk the request to the oval office. And he's right... Protocol in a situation like this, is for all American "assets". military, and covert, to assume forward staging points, and await orders. These operations, subject only to the jurisdiction of the POTUS himself, are the best of the best.... Unfortunately in this case, REQUESTS for orders, were denied. I know the excuse... PBO didn't know.... Then who the ^%&$ told our rescue forces to stand down? Who impersonated, or spoke for the President?? In fact, all this is coming to light because 2 operatives, actually DISOBEYED orders to stand down!!! Flashback.... I was one of those forward staged personnel when the Iran Embassy was over run many moons ago so have a really, really good idea what those men and women must feel right now. We sat, on the tarmac, for a day and a half KNOWING we were going in to rescue Americans held hostage, hoping they were still alive when we got there, wondering what could be taking so long... Finally, after all the preparations, and all the planning, we were also, told to stand down, and in amazed disbelief, were told to simply go home ... At least after 444 days, those hostages still came home, but IMHO, it should have been more like an overnight stay for them... Ambassador Stevens and his team, are DEAD because we were told to stand down.... PBO has said he would seek justice against the murderers, but now you have to find them after letting them go you idiot!!! I don't know if Stevens and team would still be alive when our teams got there, but the people that did it certainly wouldn't be, and we wouldn't have to "seek justice".. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 27, 2012 Share Posted October 27, 2012 You people have a very warped, immature view of how the world works. Particularly if you think that Forbes piece made any sense whatsoever, which was as dumb as any criticism of Bush not doing anything on 9/11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinga Posted October 27, 2012 Share Posted October 27, 2012 You people have a very warped, immature view of how the world works. Particularly if you think that Forbes piece made any sense whatsoever, which was as dumb as any criticism of Bush not doing anything on 9/11. Wow... I'm compressed... you win first idiot award for comparing Bush 9/11 to PBO 9/11... Really thought it would be a self described lib to pull that, not someone who tries to ride the fence, falling to the left an awful lot.. And your world view on how this should have been handled is exactly what oh wise @$$ (one)??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 27, 2012 Share Posted October 27, 2012 Obama sacrificed 4 American lives for a political calculation that blaming a video would allow him to ride this out to election day. To have sent in help would have meant having to admit that there was a terrorist attack. It would have raised questions about why we were not prepared and would have set up the possibility for him to be compared to Jimmy Carter if things in a rescue went wrong. Too bad for those Americans in Benghazi. Obama's re election was more important. If he wins, issue disappears because "I won, again, and the American people want me to focus on something other than 4 bumps." If he loses,well, all hell is going to break loose anyway..................... (VIDEO) Obama dodges question on denial of help for Americans in Benghazi http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2012/oct/26/picket-video-obama-dodges-question-denial-help-ame/ If Reelected, Obama Should Be Impeached over Benghazi . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts