Skip to comments.Armed Services Chair Demands of Obama: Whom Did You Order to Do What on 9/11/12?
Posted on 10/29/2012 4:19:56 PM PDT by Snuph
- In light of President Obama's statement in an Oct. 26 interview that the "minute" he found out about the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, on Sept. 11 he issued a directive to subordinates "to make sure we are securing our personnel," House Armed Services Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) has sent a letter to Obama demanding that he reveal exactly whom he ordered to do what on that day.
Although this response did not specifically answer the reporters question, your first directive would appear to involve potential actions by the U.S. military, McKeon said in a letter sent to Obama on Monday. Since you personally provided this directive, I have a series of additional questions that I am confident you can answer in advance of the conclusion of any formal investigation.
On Sept. 11, 2012--the 11th anniversary of 9/11--terrorists launched attacked the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, killing four Americans, including U.S. Amb. Christopher Stevens. During an interview Friday with Denver TV station KUSA, reporter Kyle Clark asked Obama, Were they denied requests for help during the attack?
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
Very good question.
More here on timeline / issues.
I can visualize how this “Directive” happened. Zero was walking out da Situation Room and threw up his hands and mutters “you guys take care of it”!
Hello? Is anyone out there? Benghazi is just a little piece of this story. Please read THE ILLINOIS PAY FOR PLAY blog. No, I didn’t write it. It helps explain why Obama and Hillary have been using US personnel, money, equipment and facilities to overthrow governments in Libya, Egypt and Syria. They want to make money rebuilding those countries. Iraq is their model. They are like arsonists who own the home furnishing store in town. They set fire to someone’s house so they can make money selling the homeowner replacement furniture. This is Crimes Against Humanity bad. Hello? Are you awake? Anyone there?
can you give a website for that blog?
0bama was notified immediately and automatically when the Benghazi consulate triggered the "Imminent Danger Notification System" alert. He did nothing.
There are three scandals here...
Denial of requests for security were a dereliction of duty. The lies and misdirection about the "video" after the attack were fraud and malfeasance under the color of authority. The inaction during the attack was something more than that.
The failure to act during the attack is the direct equivalent of desertion IMO.
ONE man had the authority to act that night.
ONE man deserted his post!
0bama Is A Deserter!
Finally someone not getting hung up in the distractions.
Go right to the source and have him back up his own words with answers.
If he did third he knows the , with whom, how, when where, and why.
The basics of any questioning, reporting.......
He’s doing the job the MSM , minus fox, some CBS, should have been doing
He’ll simply stonewall. The spoiled brat has gotten away with it all his life. Why change now. What it will take is someone with enough tenacity to push the spoiled child to answer. So far, we haven’t found that person.
Watch him stonewall!
Everything I have read and seen so far on Benghazi is still confirming my initial thinking on the matter, going way back to my days as a NavSpecWar officer who took a SEAL det to Beirut a long time ago.
Once the alarm is sent from Benghazi, dozens of HQs are notified and are in the loop in real time, including AFRICOM and EURCOM, both located in Germany.
Without waiting for orders, they begin planning and executing rescue operations, including getting air support over Benghazi ASAP. But one thing they CANNOT DO without explicit orders from the POTUS is cross an international border. That is the big red line.
All POTUS has to do is NOT grant cross-border authority, and the entire rescue (already in progress) must stop in its tracks. Ships can loiter on station, but planes fall out of the sky, so they must be redirected to an air base (Sigonella Sicily) to await the POTUS decision on granting CBA. If it never comes, the men in Behghazi must rely only on assets already in country in Libya, such as the Tripoli QRF and the Predators.
(And possibly AC-130s that might already have been in Libya: they were last year, but their location on 9-11-2012 is unknown. If they were in country but were prevented from firing, that is another situation.)
So if at the 5 pm DC-time meeting with Panetta and Biden, Obama said, No outside military action, meaning no CBA will be granted, then THAT IS IT. Case closed.
That constitutes standing orders all the way down the chain of command via Panetta and Dempsey to Ham and the subordinate commands trying to rescue the men in Benghazi.
If Obama then goes upstairs to the family quarters to watch TV or sleep, or otherwise makes himself unavailable, then his last standing orders will stand until he changes them, even if he goes to sleep until the morning of 9-12.
Nobody in the chain of command below him can countermand his standing orders not to send military forces from outside of Libya into Libyan air space.
Personally, I think he left no outside miltary intervention, no cross-border authority standing orders, and then he went to bed. Damn him to hell.
(And to me, the most damning aspect of all is that Obama went to bed while his Ambassador was still missing and presumed kidnapped by Al Queda. Ambassador Stevens might have been on a Youtube video pleading for his life, ready to get the Nick Berg/Danny Pearl intro to jihad treatment, and Obama WENT TO BED to rest up for his much more important fund raiser in Las Vegas!)
So exactly what does the honorable CongressCritter do when POTUS tells him to go pound sand........as I’m sure he’s already done!,,
Either that, or he had just plopped his dirty golf shoes on the Oval Office desk, and said "I'm on my way to the links, don't bother me unless Valerie says it's important!"
as much as I can not stand those 2, you are incorrect. Only thing they care about is power. Period.
Then, please explain why Obama used American might to change the governments in Libya, Egypt and Syria. Does he gain power from doing this, or does he gain money from his agents rebuilding these countries? Obama is just a money- grubbing Democrat grifter.
September 14, CIA Chief Petraeus Tells Congress Benghazi Attack Started As Movie Protest
Top U.S. Military Officer Calls Pastor Over Film
“General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the U.S. military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff...”
Someone is finally asking the right questions.
Bumping Travis’s reply with the same reply and my comments:
Our own Travis Mcgee, a former seal officer, has been trying to clarify why there was a no go. Forget everything we have seen in movies, have seen or heard on tv about this no go op.
Below is a link to how Travis explains why there was a no go. Obozo did not approve it.
Did Obama withhold Cross-Border Authority?
Please help me. I am trying as hard as I can to get out the word about cross-border authority. I just can’t believe reporters don’t know enough to ask the right questions! It’s infuriating. Libya, as far as standing down the rescue, is 100% Obama’s show, and nobody else’s. Only he can grant CBA, not Biden, not Panetta, not Dempsey, not Hillary, and certainly not Ham in Germany.
The entire episode is explained perfectly inside the context of not granting CBA. The CIA QRF in Tripoli? No problem, send them on the local Tripoli station chief’s say-so. He merely informs up COC that he has done so. CCs them so to speak. “This is what I am doing.” Ditto if Predators were in country, no problem using them.
But the big rescue air armada streaming toward Libya right away after the alarm got to Stuttgart and Africom? That has to stop. I believe at the 5pm meeting with Panetta and Biden in the Oval Office, he said, “No outside military intervention,” on the basis that the last report was the “lull” from the consulate, at about 1030 p.m. in Benghazi, when the attack appeared to be over and the situation stabilizing.
(As a soft exception, Obama may have authorized sending an unarmed Predator from outside of Libya, but I am thinking the two Predators were already in-country, and hence available to use within no CBA granted rules.)
“No outside military intervention” equals “no cross-border authority” and that constitutes “standing orders” until POTUS changes them. Nobody else can un-decide the POTUS decree. The rescue air-armada of C-17s, C-130s and SOF helos like MH-47 Chinooks and Pavehawks cannot proceed directly to Libya without CBA being granted, so instead they are all staged at Sigonella, Sicily.
USN ships are in position to “lilypad” helos for long over-water flights. Airborne tankers are coming into position. SOF forces in Sigonella are going over their gear for different contingencies. Fuming all night as officers keep checking in with operational commanders. “Hold in place, no rescue yet. We can’t find the President, it sounds like,” say the colonels to the majors and captains. 100s of military must know about this. I keep waiting for the conclusive whistle-blowers to come forward BEFORE the election. After won’t matter, it will be for the historians.
Panetta is falling on his sword for Obama with his absurd-on-its-face, “The military doesn’t do risky things” defense of no rescue. Panetta is destroying his future reputation entirely, to save Obama. The question is why? Loyalty?
Petreaus was probably “used” in some way early, about the supposed CIA intel link to the Mohammed video, and now he feels burned. So he conclusively said via his PAO, “The stand-down order did not come from CIA.” Well, what is higher than CIA? Only White House. Obama, nobody else. Petreaus is naming Obama without naming him.
Now, as far as Obama / Huma Abedin / Valerie Jarrett etc actually wanting Ambassador Stevens dead, to terminate the end of the very dirty Libyan arms to Syrian AQ programs, I can’t speculate. Obama is not competent enough I’m thinking.
But for sure, the ambassador going to unsecure Benghazi on 9-11 of all days stinks to me of a setup. You can bet Stevens would have told the Turks, “No, 9-11 is not a good day for us,” and stayed in Tripoli behind many high and thick walls. For him to go to dangerous Benghazi on 9-11 means the Turks totally insisted, but why would they care about the meeting date, unless they were in on a hit as the Judas goat?
Alternatively, ordering Stevens to meet the Turks in Benghazi on 9-11 may have come from down OUR chain of command. Stevens seems to have been wearing two hats as ambassador and CIA arms shipper. Moving between more-secure Tripoli, the Benghazi “consulate,” and the CIA “annex.” So orders to him might come down the State or the CIA commo channels, or both. I am unclear on his job title and true position, but either the CIA or State sends him final instructions. How this works with dual-hatted ambassadors, I havent a clue.
But Stevens meeting the Turks at the unsecure Benghazi “consulate” on 9-11 stinks to me of a deliberate setup. The Turks left the meeting and probably flashed their headlights to the attack team commanders lurking in shadows. A coded text, a word on a phone, meaning, “The ambassador is there, with minimal security: proceed with the attack plan.”
But that is all pure speculation. What I know FOR SURE is that the big “stand down order” issue revolves around granting or withholding cross-border authority.
Every SOF officer and ops officer all the way up has this drummed into his head. We can make Obama respond to this question, even if reporters must shout it at him while he’s doing storm cleanup photo ops. If the reporters KNOW enough to ask the quesion. That’s why I am shouting all over the internet about CBA.
I can’t believe cross-border authority permission is not one of the top discussion points about Benghazi.
That, and who “set him up” by sending him to Beghazi to meet the Turks on 9-11, with them leaving after dark.
And of course, down the road, was the military rescue-in-progress turned back because Obama actually wanted to make sure the consulate was wiped out? Is that why the spooks at the annex were refused permission to travel the under one mile to intervene? That would connect it all together, but for now, the best focus is on Obama either granting or withholding cross-border authority for the rescue.
Feel free to repost these musings of a long-ago SOF officer anywhere you please.
17 posted on Tuesday, October 30, 2012 6:24:09 AM by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
Left wing presidents from LBJ to the current traitor, have left our military men in peril or allowed them to be captured when our military was ready to rescue them.
Think of the men on the Pueblo and Liberty with LBJ playing the role of POTUS. There have been scores of similar incidents where our left wing presidents abandoned our military personnel, who were doing their mission by failing to allow/authorize CBA.
This may be the first time that embassy personnel and other non active military were abandoned by a left wing potus.
I don’t think many here fully appreciate the consequences of this Administration’s mindset.
If Obama were a conscientious conservative, thrust into this situation, without any past experience or grasp of the situation, he might defer to others. The present Obama Administration mindset, though, is anything but compromising.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Obama considers his role as CIC to be in complete control, commanding everything, and if anybody attempts to act without his initiating the idea, he is the type of character to destroy those beneath him.
Military emergency response COCs have changed dramatically in the last 20 years. In the Cold War, and Total War command and control structure, plans were prepared to provide operational forces the ability to achieve their objectives on the battlefield, with adequate local control to respond to situational changes. We practiced centralized command with decentralized control.
Given the mission, junior commands could still fight the war, even if they had been cut off from lines of communication.
Liberals since Vietnam, always identified the discipline and immediate response to orders they observed in the military as a type of slavery, foregoing rights and privilege to those they labeled as superior.
Conservatives tended to use the terms junior and senior, rather than inferior or superior, recognizing the difference in rank, but that all men are equal but not with the same capacity.
The liberal mindset, when now placed in authority, thinks they are now superior, not simply senior. They demand all attention be given to primarily their volition and arrogance, and the mission is subsequent to that thinking.
In the world of spreadsheets and databases, they don’t believe in distributed decentralized control, but rather they now have more tools to more control absolutely all resources under their charge. They lean towards totalitarian power structures.
They have repeatedly referenced the ‘fog of war’ in regards the Benghazi incident. I suspect something in their mindset is using that phrase to write off an awkward situation.
If it was a fog of events on the scene, it may have included the status of the Ambassador in a several hour period between the Residence takeover and his appearance at the hospital. With the realtime intel on the ground and in theater, and positive response from AFRICOM, the only other fog must have been associated with the attacking force. Not simply as an attacking bunch of militants, but an OpOrder they were conducting which this Administration had prior knowledge and was trying to either support or orient themselves to ulterior objectives.
Maybe the senior person in the room was coked out their head, demanding full respect for their authority, was inactive due in part to changing situation and events not previously planned, and then went on a tirade with a thin veil of control by simply saying for others to ‘stand down’, ...who knows? anybody’s guess, maybe their comm didn’t work, ...they are covering it all up. It may have been a Hitleresque moment, where anybody approaching that person faced likely fatal repercussion, so silence loomed or it may have been complete confusion amongst those in control.
The scary thing is these same people are still in command and the same events will likely occur if not removed from power, so I hope the election removes them from power.
Compare how Obama behaved in the 3rd debate with Romney vs the first.
He had studied the first debate, considered his losses, and his response was a glaring, arrogant, adversarial opponent seeking to destroy anything he could.
He has had past exposure to a live situation room, in diminished capacity where he was later perceived as weak.
If his behavior in the series if debates is any indicator of how he prepares for future similar action, I fear he will resort to a totalitarian command with no empathy for those junior to him, unwilling to consider wise counsel, but quick to issue foolish forceful action.
This Administration and Hillary have now had 4 years to prepare for the present. They show no signs of acquiescing their lust for worldly power, but manifest what appears to be schemes for future evil kept in the shadows.
IMHO, the world would be a safer place if Romney wins the election.
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.