Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

White House shoots down rumors it nixed Benghazi intervention
The Hill ^ | 10/31/2012 | Julian Pecquet

Posted on 10/31/2012 10:56:01 AM PDT by PhxRising

The White House on Wednesday shot down rumors that President Obama nixed an operation to rescue U.S. diplomats under attack in Benghazi after former Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich made the claim on national television.

“Neither the President nor anyone in the White House denied any requests for assistance in Benghazi during the attack,” National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor told The Hill via email.

(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: benghazi; benghazicoverup; benghazigate; benghaziobama; libya; obama; obamabenghazi; obamamuteonbenghazi; shadowwars; threatmatrix; treason; wapo; wapobenghazi
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-70 next last
To: SDShack

“actually made the decision that this was a protest, and therefore did nothing.”

Yup! I always take my motor crew to protests!


41 posted on 10/31/2012 12:00:28 PM PDT by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ( Ya can't pick up a turd by the clean end!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: PhxRising

CHECK MATE!.... Who did then?...


42 posted on 10/31/2012 12:02:18 PM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe

THIS has... and is going VIRAL.... Internet VIRAL...
Hannity KEEP IT UP.. O’Really’s goin Hammina HAmmina(Gleason) over this..


43 posted on 10/31/2012 12:07:32 PM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine

Sounds too similar to BO’s habit of voting “present” while in the senate. This is probably what happened here.


44 posted on 10/31/2012 12:09:55 PM PDT by Blue Highway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Covenantor

Source: Marc Thiessen, Washington Post

“What was Obama told at the September 10, 2012, NSC meeting on ‘9/11 threats’?”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/what-was-obama-told-at-the-september-10-2012-nsc-meeting-on-911-threats/2012/10/31/4fda1f04-2379-11e2-8448-81b1ce7d6978_blog.html


45 posted on 10/31/2012 12:10:54 PM PDT by MissMagnolia (Being powerful is like being a lady. If you have to tell people you are, you aren't. (M.Thatcher))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: PhxRising

Well did they ask for help? Who did they ask, who heard them and most importantly.........who denied them? If Obama has a tape that supports his position, then lets hear it. We the people meet the payroll, FBI, CIA, MILITARY, WH, STATE DEPARTMENT, DOD, and any tape that is generated by those agencies, we own. Give it to us.


46 posted on 10/31/2012 12:17:12 PM PDT by Toespi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhxRising
“Neither the President nor anyone in the White House denied any requests for assistance in Benghazi during the attack,” National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor told The Hill via email.

Did he wag his finger when he said this? And did it begin with "Let me say this one more time."
47 posted on 10/31/2012 12:17:19 PM PDT by ZX12R (FUBO GTFO 2012 !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhxRising

THE HEAT IS ON!

No, no way all the arrows are not pointing toward Obama and he knows it. We all know how self-centered he is, he is not covering for anyone else because he is incapable of doing that.


48 posted on 10/31/2012 12:18:09 PM PDT by Ms Mable
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kidd

the standing orders do not include crossing a recognized international border.

Obama himself had to make/approve that specific order. If he did not grant cross-border authority, he de facto denied help to the consulate in Benghazi.

That statement that they (the WH) did not deny a request for rescue is heavily parsed.


49 posted on 10/31/2012 12:22:44 PM PDT by Triple (Socialism denies people the right to the fruits of their labor, and is as abhorrent as slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ZX12R
“But I do take offense with some suggestion that in any way, we haven’t tried to make sure that the American people knew as the information was coming in what we believed.”--Barry Obama, talking about his "It was the video" story on Benghazi.

Oh, Barry. I am somehow reminded of the previous Democrat president trotting out all his cabinet people to vouch for him and to say that there was absolutely no truth to the rumor that he had been conducting in-depth presidential polls with an intern and had ended up wagging his finger at us and categorically denying what we knew had to be true.

It's become abundantly clear in this matter (and many others) that you are either dishonest or delusional; of course, as a Marxist, you would, almost by definition, have to be some of both: dishonest, because those who you are pandering to wouldn't support you if you stripped off your sheep's clothing of "hope and change" rhetoric and presented them the grey gulag of central planning you want them to inhabit; delusional, because the idea that a small cadre of committed ideologues has the necessary scope of experience and knowledge to manage the economic and social affairs of hundreds of millions of citizens comes from a mind that is tethered to reality by only the thinnest gossamer.

What you're attempting hasn't been successful generally in any social unit greater than the family in many hundreds of years. And the answer isn't, as you leftist ideologues proclaim, that even more raw political power be accorded you to transmute base humanity into political gold and retrofit us for YOUR idea of paradise. Sorry, but MY idea of paradise doesn't include someone like you in the government second guessing every single choice I make.

A pox on you, Barry.
50 posted on 10/31/2012 12:24:48 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: MissMagnolia

Thanks for posting the source.


51 posted on 10/31/2012 12:25:26 PM PDT by Covenantor ("Men are ruled...by liars who refuse them news, and by fools who cannot govern." Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Covenantor

You’re welcome! :-)


52 posted on 10/31/2012 12:32:30 PM PDT by MissMagnolia (Being powerful is like being a lady. If you have to tell people you are, you aren't. (M.Thatcher))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: ilovesarah2012; Oldpuppymax
"Oaths," according to Rev. Benjamin Arnett, in his "Centennial Thanksgiving Sermon," at the St. Paul A.M.E. Church in Urbana, Ohio, in November 1876 (a celebration of the Declaration of Independence) are:

"Oaths and affirmations are appeals to God, by him who makes them, that what he has said, or what he shall say, is the truth. It is the most solemn form under which one can assert or pronounce anything, and its violation is a crime of the darkest hue; one which God has declared he will punish; one that is made infamous and punishable by fine and imprisonment, by the laws of the land. Thus Christian obligation is required of every officer of the general Government, who fills any position of trust, honor or emolument. Many reports are required in the form and shape of affidavits." - Rev. Benjamin W. Arnett, "Centennial Thanksgiving Sermon" - 1876

During that lengthy and remarkable Sermon, Rev. Arnett reviewed the history of nations and the history of America's founding, noting its Christian underpinnings, as reflected in the writings and speeches, constitutions and other documents, as well as the words of Supreme Court Justices to that date. The title of the Sermon was: "Righteousness Exalteth a Nation, but Sin is a Reproach to Any People."

Clearly, the current Administration places little value on its Oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

53 posted on 10/31/2012 12:35:01 PM PDT by loveliberty2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: loveliberty2

Obama has no respect for God or our Constitution or our country, for that matter.


54 posted on 10/31/2012 12:39:43 PM PDT by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: PhxRising

LIARS!!!!


55 posted on 10/31/2012 12:42:18 PM PDT by diamond6 (Freerepublic.com and Hillbuzz.org are my go to sites for conservative news.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Covenantor
The only way to answer these questions is for the administration to release the records relating to the September 10 NSC meeting ? including any briefing slides or papers prepared for the meeting. Those records will tell us a great deal about what the president knew ? and when he knew it.

The most important question left out is: Did ZERO even attend the September 10, 2012 meeting????!!!

56 posted on 10/31/2012 12:49:16 PM PDT by diamond6 (Freerepublic.com and Hillbuzz.org are my go to sites for conservative news.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Triple

“Mr. President we are ready to go on your signal”

“OK, I’ll let you know when...................” 8 hours pass.....and nothing was denied.


57 posted on 10/31/2012 12:51:57 PM PDT by CJ Wolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: PhxRising

Yep, truthful, but misleading (like the meaning of is) I believe he did not deny the requests - he probably just ignored them.

It is also true that assistance was given - from Tripoli. Also, He outsourced military assistance to the 17th....Brigade.

General Ham said request for assistance was never received. I believe that.


58 posted on 10/31/2012 12:59:39 PM PDT by greeneyes (Moderation in defense of your country is NO virtue. Let Freedom Ring.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kidd

“The details of the standing orders were not presented. Crossing into a foreign country would seemingly be above what a regional General is authorized to do; this would also seemingly be above the authority of the SecDef.”

That was kind of my thinking. All the President has to do is nothing. And the rescue mission is impossible. So, if you parse it carefully, he did not “refuse” a request. That would take some action. He just did nothing. In a very narrow sense, that statement is true. And, he can order US troops to save lives (per his earlier claim). But without the cross-border authorization, the former order is meaningless.

That still doesn’t explain the “stand down” orders the Seals got.

A lot of this is still speculation.


59 posted on 10/31/2012 1:03:54 PM PDT by ModelBreaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: ModelBreaker

Panetta could have authorized the “stand-down” order. As Panetta is not “in the White House”, the statement is correct...no one in the White House refused a request...but Panetta authorized an order for the Navy Seals to stand-down.

However, the POTUS didn’t authorize a rescue mission. He just let them die.


60 posted on 10/31/2012 1:23:41 PM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-70 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson