Posted on 11/01/2012 10:29:03 AM PDT by PhxRising
Concerning the 9/11 assault on the consulate in Benghazi, the crux of the issue during that tragic night is whether our military should have done nothing or should have tried to do something.
The president said he immediately directed that all actions be taken by our military to secure our personnel. Since then, he has made clear that he expects fast action when he gives a directive.
“You return everybody’s phone calls in 15 minutes,” Obama said at a news conference on October 31. “Whether it’s the mayors, the governors, county officials, if they need something, we figure out a way to say yes. . . . We leave no one behind.”
Secretary Panetta said General Ham, General Dempsey, and he unanimously agreed to take no action because they did not have enough information to place U.S. rescue forces in harm’s way. But if the president directed the military to take action, that is an executive order, not a request for the military to collect more intelligence.
The Pentagon is now leaking that it had no forces of any kind that could have helped inside seven hours — a different excuse than claiming a lack of information.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Why, then, was the answer “no” on 9/11 in Benghazi?
“Why, then, was the answer “no”...”
That is the question, and the only person who can answer that is the President, as it was his order.
Panetta, and Generals Ham and Dempsey, had nothing to do with “no”.
“Why, then, was the answer “no”...”
That is the question, and the only person who can answer that is the President, as it was his order.
Panetta, and Generals Ham and Dempsey, had nothing to do with “no”.
Ummm, we ARE talking about the military right? Not a girl scout troop... right? If we're paying billions in taxes for people who can't find 10 people to drop into a danger zone, then hell, disband 'em.
We’ll know when they’ve come up with a lie that works when the New York Times runs with it... that’s the tip off.
Why, if Stevens felt in jeopardy, was he even in Benghazi?
Why was Stevens given less security in one of the most dangerous cities on earth than Valerie Jarrett is given by US taxpayers to move around Chicago?
Why would the administration tell a lie about why the attack in Benghazi happened when it was obvious to anyone with a living brain that they would be caught lying, and caught long before the election vote?
Is it not logical that they concluded that it would be far less damaging to the Administration to tell a ridiculous lie about what happened in Benghazi to buy themselves some time, and to get caught at the lie, than the damage they'd suffer if they told the whole truth?
There were 30 other individuals in the compound that night? Have you seen them on TV? Have you heard their families speak out about what they've heard went on? Someone is making the witnesses disappear...at least until after the election.
Hillary's claw prints are all over this attack and denial of help. I've often wondered if she's too slimy for anything to stick, but I do have hope this time and LOVE that the conservative media WILL NOT LET IT GO!
Check out these videos:
What about the 30+ people who were supposedly saved? Who are they and where are they and what do they have to say about all this?
I can believe that they are so blinded that they believed the public would believe the video cover story. They did not count on someone rushing to the aid of the ambassador. They did not count on there being victims who had so many friends/family who would call them on the preposterous lie.
This makes me wonder if they have used the incited Muslim mob ruse before. What else went down back when that preacher was threatening to burn Korans? What else went down when the Muslim mobs went crazy over the US military burning Korans? I do recall that we had an officer or two murdered in Afghanistan in a supposedly secure building. Has the murderer been located?
It is coming unraveled and we want justice!
The Pentagon had no forces of any kind that could have helped?????????????? More of the Panetta Doctrine(Dumbest S@#T I ever heard).
That could only be true, if they dilly dallied around before the President gave CBA.
Most are probably CIA affiliated, and as such not available for public interview.
This is my guess based on what I’ve read and putting on the tin foil hat...
-Stevens was a loose end. He knew about this administration funneling weapons and money to terrorists in Syria and elsewhere.
-The election looked like it was going bad and they didn’t trust Stevens to keep his mouth shut.
-The video was preset as their cover story
-Protests were stoked by Code Pink and possibly CIA officials in other countries to validate the cover story
-Ambassador was supposed to be unguarded and his security forces were to ‘run away’ when it happened leaving him an easy target. It wouldn’t need to look like an all-out assault under these circumstances
-The Seals got wind of what was going down and intervened and it all went to hell requiring the terrorists to track down the safehouse and attack.
-The drone was overhead because they knew it was coming and were watching to make sure it went down as planned.
-They had no contingency for the Seals intervening so they went with the cover story and hoped it would stick
-They never expected calls for aid or for this to last 7 hours and have been in cover mode praying it would not be investigated.
Just my thoughts.
“They did not count on someone rushing to the aid of the ambassador. “
Bingo. After giving the stand-down order, they (zero/hillbilly) expected no survivors/witnesses.
They didn’t expect that the two Seals would intervene and save the survivors.
There is SOME reason why zero/hillbilly didn’t want survivors from the attack. Orders from Russia/Saudi Arabia/another Muslim country?? Botched kidnapping to force exchange of the Blind Sheik?
I pray we find out the truth.
Oh, I totally agree. I'm not letting Obama off the hook at all. But the latest cable dated August 16th that Catherine Herridge released on Greta's show last night went directly to Hillary. These are two rats on a sinking ship and we just need to pray that Romney wins so that the truth will FINALLY be exposed.
Thanks for asking THE question in the title of your thread.
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.