Author Topic: Obama called the Navy Seals and they got OBL. Navy Seals called Obama and . . .  (Read 3171 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
 ;D

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Skip to comments.

Petraeus on Benghazi: It Wasn't Me
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/10/26/Petraeus-on-Benghazi-It-Wasnt-Me ^ | October 26, 2012 | Joel B. Pollak
Posted on October 28, 2012 9:01:27 AM EDT by yoe

Central Intelligence Agency director David Petraeus has emphatically denied that he or anyone else at the CIA refused assistance to the former Navy SEALs who requested it three times as terrorists attacked the U.S. consulate in Benghazi on the night of Sep. 11. The Weekly Standard and ABC News (report) that Petraeus's denial effectively implicates President Barack Obama, since a refusal to assist "would have been a presidential decision."

Earlier today, Denver local reporter Kyle Clarke of KUSA-TV did what the national media largely refuses to do, (asking) Obama directly whether the Americans in Benghazi were denied requests for aid. Obama dodged the question, but implied that he had known about the attacks as they were "happening."

Emails released earlier this week (indicated) that the White House had been informed almost immediately that a terror group had taken responsibility for the attack in Benghazi, and Fox News reported this morning that the two former Navy SEALs, Ty Woods and Glen Doherty, had been refused in requests for assistance they had made from the CIA annex.

Jake Tapper (quoted) Petraeus this afternoon denying that the CIA was responsible for the refusal: "No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate."

As William Kristol of the Weekly Standard notes, that leaves only President Obama himself to blame:

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

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Who denied the Navy Seals’ pleas for help in Benghazi? Bill Kristol, in a Friday Weekly Standard blogpost entitled “Petraeus Throws Obama under the Bus,” noted that the CIA put out a statement that “No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.” Bill says that “presumably” this statement could not have been made without the express approval of CIA Director General David Petraeus and that we must conclude that Petraeus decided that he was not going to take the fall on this. It must have been someone higher up who did, Bill says, and concludes that President Obama must have given the order not to help.

 

I have often been asked why Mitt Romney did not attack the president and the administration on the Libya issue in the Oct. 22 debate. He knew that moderator Bob Schieffer was was likely to bring the subject up, and probably early, as he did. Romney could have easily have memorized a tick-tock of the dates on which the White House was informed that there was a militarized attack on Ambassador Chris Stevens and his colleagues and that there was no spontaneous demonstration protesting that terrible, terrible anti-Muslim video and the dates on which the president, the secretary of state, the president’s press secretary and the oddly-chosen-for-the-Sunday-talk-shows ambassador to the United Nations kept suggesting or stating that the attack resulted from a spontaneous demonstration. Bret Baier of Fox News has been keeping America particularly well informed on this.

 

Why didn’t Romney attack? My answer—suggested by no conversation with anyone in the Romney camp or with anyone at all—is that he feared that in response the Obama White House would bring into the argument the one relevant individual who hasn’t been heard from in public much or at all, the Director of the CIA, General Petraeus. There have been at least hints that the CIA provided some nugget of information suggesting there was a spontaneous demonstration and that the Obamaites cherry-picked this bit of information because it suited their political or psychological needs. Who could testify to the existence of such a bit of information? General Petraeus. The last thing the Romney campaign would ever want, I think, is several of the last days of the campaign to be taken up by an argument between Romney and Petraeus. Mainstream media, which has been striving to downplay this story lest it hurt Obama’s chances Nov. 6, would spotlight that argument with glee. The general promoted by George W. Bush taking on Mitt Romney! Delicious! Retired military officers who know Petraeus well have told me that he would have affirmed the existence of such a bit of information if it existed and if the president told him to. Obviously Petraeus has not wanted to comment on this issue in public. But it may have made good sense for Romney not to give Obama an opportunity to play the Petraeus card and instead to talk repeatedly of “tumult” and “chaos” in the Middle East and around the world. Libya seems to have eliminated Obama’s advantage over Romney in poll questions on who would handle foreign policy better, even though Romney has no foreign policy experience at all. Romney evidently chose to build on that general advantage rather than engage in a tick-tock debate in which he might be pitted against Petraeus.

 

But now, as Kristol points out, Petraeus has made a statement in public, at least through his spokesman, and one that is not helpful to the president. Why would he do that? I suspect it has to do with the warrior’s ethic of not leaving a fellow soldier behind. I am told that that is a very strong ethic indeed. It is something a civilian commander can sometimes do honorably, in the broad national interest of which he has been chosen by the people to be the judge. But it does not seem to be something that a solider, even a retired soldier like General Petraeus, believes he could honorably do. And he doesn’t want anybody, now or when it comes time for his obituary to be written, to think that he has done so. If President Obama is shoved under the bus, so be it. Honor, as James Bowman has written and as George Washington and so many Founders believed, is paramount.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/27/obama-knew-about-attack-ignored-three-requests-hel



Obama should rot in hell along with everyone voting for him for doing this.  Their murders are on obamas hands. 

Coach is Back!

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 61595
  • It’s All Bullshit
http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/27/obama-knew-about-attack-ignored-three-requests-hel



Obama should rot in hell along with everyone voting for him for doing this.  Their murders are on obamas hands. 

Wait....where's slyy?

SLYY

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1364
  • A mug only your mom could love...
Wait....where's slyy?

Thanks for another shout out little guy  :-*



What does this OPINION article prove, Coach?  Don't forget, 33 is a lawyer.  He knows the President's power regarding foreign policy.  He is laughing at mindless dolts like you; however, he continues to post these articles because he knows the uneducated dolts eat it right up.  We all know YOU are quite full  ;)     

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Former Nat Security Adviser Bud McFarlane: For Obama to Do Nothing ... is “Dereliction of Duty”
 Gateway Pundit ^ | October 28, 2012 | Jim Hoft

Posted on Sunday, October 28, 2012 7:16:14 PM by Snuph

Full Tittle:

Former National Security Adviser Bud McFarlane: For Obama to Do Nothing During Benghazi Attack is “Dereliction of Duty”

Video at link...

Former National Security Adviser Bud McFarlane told FOX News today:

“You don’t just passively allow Americans to remain under attack for eight hours at a time when you have forces within range and do nothing. The Secretary of Defense was in the White House at five o’clock within an hour of when the attacks started. He could have told him, “Yes. We have special operations peope and F18 aircraft that could be deployed right away. To have known what he had available, to have known that Americans were under fire, and to have done nothing, is dereliction of duty that I have never seen in a Commander in Chief from a president of any party. Outrageous.”


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

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Gingrich: Obama Canceling Trips For Hurricane, Didn't Cancel Over Benghazi
 Real Clear Politics ^ | October 28,2012

Posted on Sunday, October 28, 2012 7:42:08 PM by Hojczyk

GINGRICH: But the bigger issue is, whether it's unemployment or it is what's happened in Benghazi, where we've had this strange story over the weekend that the secretary of defense apparently refused to obey the president's order. If the president is telling the truth and he actually instructed his assistants to get aid to Benghazi, we're now being told that the secretary of defense canceled that.

And I think these kind of things all drag down the Obama campaign. You'll notice he's canceling his trips over the hurricane. He did not cancel his trips over Benghazi. And so you have to wonder, between Benghazi, the price of gasoline, and unemployment, just how much burden the president's going to carry into this last week.


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

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
LYONS: Obama needs to come clean on what happened in Benghazi
 
The American people deserve to know the truth
results
 
There is an urgent need for full disclosure of what has become the “Benghazi Betrayal and Cover-up.” The Obama national security team, including CIA, DNI and the Pentagon, apparently watched and listened to the assault on the U.S. consulate and cries for help but did nothing. If someone had described a fictional situation with a similar scenario and described our leadership ignoring the pleas for help, I would have said it was not realistic—not in my America – but I would have been proven wrong.
 
 
 
We now know why Ambassador Christopher Stevens had to be in Benghazi the night of 9/11 to meet a Turkish representative, even though he feared for his safety.  According to various reports, one of Stevens’ main missions in Libya was to facilitate the transfer of much of Gadhafi’s military equipment, including the deadly SA-7 – portable SAMs – to Islamists and other al Qaeda-affiliated groups fighting the Assad Regime in Syria. In an excellent article, Aaron Klein states that Stevens routinely used our Benghazi consulate (mission) to coordinate the Turkish, Saudi Arabian and Qatari governments’ support for insurgencies throughout the Middle East. Further, according to Egyptian security sources, Stevens played a “central role in recruiting Islamic jihadists to fight the Assad Regime in Syria.”
 
 
 
In another excellent article, Clare Lopez at RadicalIslam.org noted that there were two large warehouse-type buildings associated with our Benghazi mission. During the terrorist attack, the warehouses were probably looted. We do not know what was there and if it was being administrated by our two former Navy SEALs and the CIA operatives who were in Benghazi.  Nonetheless, the equipment was going to hardline jihadis.
 
 
 
Once the attack commenced at 10:00 p.m. Libyan time (4:00 p.m. EST), we know the mission security staff immediately contacted Washington and our embassy in Tripoli.  It now appears the White House, Pentagon, State Department, CIA, NDI, JCS and various other military commands monitored the entire battle in real time via frantic phone calls from our compound and video from an overhead drone. The cries for help and support went unanswered.
 
 
 
Our Benghazi mission personnel, including our two former Navy SEALs, fought for seven hours without any assistance other than help from our embassy in Tripoli, which launched within 30 minutes an aircraft carrying six Americans and 16 Libyan security guards. It is understood they were instrumental in helping 22 of our Benghazi mission personnel escape the attack.
 
Once the attack commenced, Stevens was taken to a “safe room” within the mission. It is not known whether his location was betrayed by the February 17 Martyrs Brigade, the local force providing security to the consulate, which had ties to the Ansar al-Sharia terrorist group conducting the attack, and to al Qaeda. Unbelievably, we still do not know how Ambassador Stevens died.
 
The Obama national security team, including CIA, DNI, State Department and the Pentagon, watched and listened to the assault but did nothing to answer repeated calls for assistance. It has been reported that President Obama met with Vice President Joseph R. Biden and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta in the Oval Office, presumably to see what support could be provided. After all, we had very credible military resources within striking distance. At our military base in Sigonella, Sicily, which is slightly over 400 miles from Benghazi, we had a fully equipped Special Forces unit with both transport and jet strike aircraft prepositioned. Certainly this was a force much more capable than the 22-man force from our embassy in Tripoli. 
 
I know those Special Forces personnel were ready to leap at the opportunity. There is no doubt in my mind they would have wiped out the terrorists attackers. Also I have no doubt that Admiral William McRaven, Commander of U.S. Special Operations Command, would have had his local commander at Sigonella ready to launch; however, apparently he was countermanded—by whom? We need to know.
 
I also understand we had a C-130 gunship available, which would have quickly disposed of the terrorist attackers. This attack went on for seven hours. Our fighter jets could have been at our Benghazi mission within an hour. Our Special Forces out of Sigonella could have been there within a few hours. There is not any doubt that action on our part could have saved the lives of our two former Navy SEALs and possibly the ambassador.
 
Having been in a number of similar situations, I know you have to have the courage to do what’s right and take immediate action. Obviously, that courage was lacking for Benghazi. The safety of your personnel always remains paramount. With all the technology and military capability we had in theater, for our leadership to have deliberately ignored the pleas for assistance is not only in incomprehensible, it is un-American.
 
Somebody high up in the administration made the decision that no assistance (outside our Tripoli embassy) would be provided, and let our people be killed. The person who made that callous decision needs to be brought to light and held accountable. According to a CIA spokesperson, “No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need.” We also need to know whether the director of CIA and the director of National Intelligence were facilitators in the fabricated video lie and the overall cover-up. Their creditability is on the line. A congressional committee should be immediately formed to get the facts out to the American people. Nothing less is acceptable.
 
Retired Adm. James A. Lyons was commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet and senior U.S. military representative to the United Nations.
 


Comments
 



Read more: LYONS: Obama needs to come clean on what happened in Benghazi - Washington Times http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/28/lyonsobama-needs-come-clean-what-happened-benghazi/print/#ixzz2AhQV6UFl
 Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15439
I'm curious as to what happened that day. I know what anti Obama people say happened. I know very little about what the WH says happened.  But personally, I want to know what actually happened. It certainly *appears* like our people were left hanging and the WH is not doing a whole lot to reassure me otherwise. Having been part of an occupation that tends to want to wait until all the facts are in and the investigation done before commenting, I can understand the desire to wait before going into details. But don't think Obama can afford to wait in this case. The election is fast approaching and IF he had a hand in leaving those people to fend for themselves then that is unacceptable and he doesn't deserve to win. Not coming out before the election with a clear timeline of what they knew and when they knew it, I would not give him the benefit of the doubt.
I'd already decided to fire Obama due to his performance over the last 4 yrs, but it was 6 of those, half dozen of the others up until this issue. I wouldn't have been devastated if he managed a win. However, it would piss me off if the election comes and goes and he hasn't cleared this up if it can be cleared up    

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
It was a spontaneous reaction to the anti muslim video promo remember?   

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15439
It was a spontaneous reaction to the anti muslim video promo remember?   

And I could understand that assumption in the beginning.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
And I could understand that assumption in the beginning.

But for the fact that the terrorists took responsibility for it that day in revenge for the killing of a al queada operate from back in june. 

Obama / hillary / Susan Rice lied their asses off on this 

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15439
But for the fact that the terrorists took responsibility for it that day in revenge for the killing of a al queada operate from back in june. 

Obama / hillary / Susan Rice lied their asses off on this 

Again, I would like to wait and get all the facts.. For example, the WH is saying Facebook postings aren't considered empirical evidence by itself. Implying that the claiming of responsibility was done on a face book page. At least that was Hillarys response early on.

I know YOU believe it is a closed case, and perhaps your conclusion will be the right one after all is said and done. I don't jump as fast as most these days. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Again, I would like to wait and get all the facts.. For example, the WH is saying Facebook postings aren't considered empirical evidence by itself. Implying that the claiming of responsibility was done on a face book page. At least that was Hillarys response early on.

I know YOU believe it is a closed case, and perhaps your conclusion will be the right one after all is said and done. I don't jump as fast as most these days. 

I believe obama and hillary made up that fake story so as not to destroy their re-election narrative of being successfull in Libya and the fact that unlike obama's claims that al queada is near finished, the reality is that they are taking over in many places across the middle east. 


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Early briefings on Libya strike focused on Al Qaeda, before story changed
 Fox News ^ | 10/29/12 | Catherine Herridge

Posted on Monday, October 29, 2012 10:13:50 AM by markomalley

Two days after the deadly Libya terror attack, representatives of the FBI and National Counterterrorism Center gave Capitol Hill briefings in which they said the evidence supported an Al Qaeda or Al Qaeda-affiliated attack, Fox News has learned.

The description of the attack by those in the Sept. 13 briefings stands in stark contrast to the now controversial briefing on Capitol Hill by CIA Director David Petraeus the following day -- and raises even more questions about why Petraeus described the attack as tied to a demonstration.

The Sept. 13 assessment was based on intercepts that included individuals, believed to have participated in the attack, who were celebratory -- as well as a claim of responsibility.

FBI and NCTC also briefed that there were a series of Al Qaeda training camps just outside of Benghazi, where the attack occurred and resulted in the deaths of four Americans. The area was described as a hotbed for the militant Ansar al-Sharia as well as Al Qaeda in North Africa.

Fox News is told there was no mention of a demonstration or any significant emphasis on the anti-Islam video that for days was cited by administration officials as a motivating factor.

The FBI and NCTC did not immediately respond to a request from Fox News for comment.


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

Busted

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2178
  • PROUD MEMBER OF TEAM MOWER
We shouldnt have been bombing them for 90 days earlier this year. We killed a couple thousand of them this year... payback is a bitch...

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15439
I believe obama and hillary made up that fake story so as not to destroy their re-election narrative of being successfull in Libya and the fact that unlike obama's claims that al queada is near finished, the reality is that they are taking over in many places across the middle east. 



And I doubt Obama or Hillary thought his re-election hinged on there not being an attack on that embassy. Even this Fox story that Obama held back forces, lied about the cause of the uprising.. hasn't killed his chances, so what makes you think that would have. It would be MORE risky in my opinion, to stage a cover up where deaths occured and you don't have total control of the information. THAT is high risk, low reward. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
And I doubt Obama or Hillary thought his re-election hinged on there not being an attack on that embassy. Even this Fox story that Obama held back forces, lied about the cause of the uprising.. hasn't killed his chances, so what makes you think that would have. It would be MORE risky in my opinion, to stage a cover up where deaths occured and you don't have total control of the information. THAT is high risk, low reward. 

I think they were afraid that if they sent a bunch of people to save the 4 people and those people got killed and or kidnapped and taken hostage it would have been worse for obama in the election.   

That is what i think.   They won't admit it, but the ghost of carter always haunts obama 

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
can anyone link me to the truth about what happened here?  I keep hearing "Obama knew and declined to help them" but i'm yet to see that source.  It's all "sources say", which could be completely made up.

I'm not saying they're BSing... but i'd like to see actual proof - not 'sources'.

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15439
can anyone link me to the truth about what happened here?  I keep hearing "Obama knew and declined to help them" but i'm yet to see that source.  It's all "sources say", which could be completely made up.

I'm not saying they're BSing... but i'd like to see actual proof - not 'sources'.

Probably too early for the truth of what happened. If there is an unbiased time line out there, I haven't run across it

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Probably too early for the truth of what happened. If there is an unbiased time line out there, I haven't run across it

33,

Do you know of any unbiased timelines with PROOF of who did what?   All this 'anonymous source' stuff, a week before the election, is a little weird.

I was a loud birther, long before you were.  I'll be louder than you on the embassy - but can you show us what happened without 'anonymous sources'?

Kazan

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6799
  • Sic vis pacem, parabellum
33,

Do you know of any unbiased timelines with PROOF of who did what?   All this 'anonymous source' stuff, a week before the election, is a little weird.

I was a loud birther, long before you were.  I'll be louder than you on the embassy - but can you show us what happened without 'anonymous sources'?

Obama tried to throw a Clinton under the bus, you think that shit goes without consequence?
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Obama tried to throw a Clinton under the bus, you think that shit goes without consequence?

I'm looking for a link to evidence that obama knowingly let those brave cats die.  Do we have that?  Or is it a bunch of anonymous sources telling glen beck's website something, a week before the election?