- “Whistleblowers confirm Obama regime lied about the Benghazi attack,” May 8, 2013.
- “BENGHAZI = TREASON,” May 8, 2013.
- “Benghazi Witness: Special Forces Told “You Can’t Go” To Benghazi,” May 8, 2013.
Wesley Pruden, editor emeritus of The Washington Times, nails it:
“This is a very different White House than any the country ever had before. We’ve left Americans to die before, when there was no alternative … but no president before this one left Americans to die, begging for help, just to save an election.”
Clockwise from top left: Amb. Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, Tyrone Woods.
By Wesley Pruden – The Washington Times – May 10, 2013
The Benghazi hearings have come and gone, and Barack Obama and the Democrats turn now to stuffing charge and countercharge down the memory hole. The lies the president and his men and (mostly) women told in the days after the great betrayal must be swept from sight. Can’t everybody shut up?
The Democrats are getting the usual help from the correspondents and pundits who haven’t recovered from the bite of the tsetse fly. They don’t want to be awakened until it’s all over and it’s safe to go on to more exciting things, like budget hearings, elections in Lower Slobbovia and the environmental whine of the day. The New York Times reduced the Benghazi hearings to an antiseptic blip for the personnel file with its headline: “Envoy Testifies/Libya Questions/Led to Demotion.” A demotion is not what Benghazi is about, as the man demoted would agree.
The Benghazi panel set out to ask big questions, one still unanswered and one with an answer now clear enough. The first was why the diplomatic post in Benghazi was allowed to be an unguarded fort among hostile Apaches, the second was why the Obama administration was so persistent with its lies in the days after the attack.
Jay Carney, the president’s press agent, repeated the official White House view Wednesday that it’s all “politics.” Which of course it is, but not in the way Mr. Carney wants everyone to think it is. “Politics” is to Washington what “sex” is to a bordello; what would you expect to find in either place? Benghazi is not politics, but criminal incompetence and worse.
The House hearings on Wednesday produced no smoking gun, to employ another popular capital cliché, but added heartbreaking detail to the astonishing story of a smoking consulate and how the lives of an American diplomat and three of his colleagues were weighed by a cynical White House against the requirements of a close-fought presidential campaign. The ambassador and his men lost. Once lost, an ambassador can be replaced. The State Department is full of replacements. A political campaign once lost is done and gone.
Gregory Hicks, the No. 2 man in the American embassy in Tripoli, gave riveting detail — some of the sleepy journalists finally forced to cover the story were riveted awake — about how the ambassador was left twisting slowly, slowly in the poisonous smoke of the burning consulate. American special operations teams were enraged when they were told they couldn’t fly to the rescue. It was too far, senior officials said, and the rescuers would get there too late. There was no point in trying; the embassy would send an inspection team after breakfast the following morning.
The rescue teams were “furious,” Mr. Hicks testified, and couldn’t understand why they were told to stand down. “None of us should ever have to experience what we went through in Tripoli and Benghazi,” he said.
These riveting details would have given the lie to the campaign assurances of President Obama that everything was OK in the Middle East, that he had personally destroyed al Qaeda. The war on terror was over. It was back to “re-setting” relations with a warmer, friendlier Islam. No one understood this better than the campaign mavens at the White House, for whom the only national security concerns were to get their man a second term. Nothing and nobody else mattered.
That’s why they put out the absurd story that nobody in Libya, including the Libyans, believed: The attack on the consulate was caused by an “anti-Muslim” video that nobody had seen. Faithful if excited Muslims had been provoked by evil infidels in the U.S.A. The president and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave us lectures about religious tolerance, expressed in the usual empty condolences (“our thoughts and prayers are with the families of the dead”) and then they dispatched Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, to flood the television channels with carefully contrived disinformation.
This is a very different White House than any the country ever had before. We’ve left Americans to die before, when there was no alternative. The defenders at Wake Island and Corregidor were left to the tender mercies of the enemy, but no president before this one left Americans to die, begging for help, just to save an election. Benghazi was a brutal betrayal, writ large with the blood of innocents. The perfidy of the guilty, including any someone who may be dreaming up a campaign for 2016, won’t be forgotten.
What kind of a heartless, soul-less man is this?
Last night, Steve Kroft interviewed Obama and Hillary Clinton on CBS’s 60 Minutes. After the two interviewees did their cooing and gooing love-fest (7:35 mark in Part 1 of the interview, below):
Kroft finally got around to asking the two about the terrorist attacks in Benghazi which took the lives of four Americans: Ambassador Christopher Stevens, Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith, and former Navy SEALS Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty who provided security at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.
This is what Obama said (3:40 mark):
“You know, I remember Bob Gates, you know, first thing he said to me, I think maybe first week or two that I was there and we were meeting in the Oval Office and he, obviously, been through seven presidents or something. And he says, ‘Mr. President, one thing I can guarantee you is that at this moment, somewhere, somehow, somebody in the federal government is screwing up.’” (Laughter)
Obama thinks the State Department “screwing up” Benghazi is funny.
But then, this is the same man who went to bed after being told about the Benghazi attack as it was happening.
This is the same man who, in a previous interview last September by the same Steve Kroft, had referred to the four Americans being killed in Benghazi as “bumps on the road.”
H/t Breitbart.com and FOTM reader Maria
Are they all corrupt and rotten?
The GOP’s shining prince, Marco Rubio of Florida, who was elected to the U.S. Senate only two years ago, says he opposes an independent investigation into the terrorist attack on our consulate in Benghazi, Libya, which took the lives of four Americans, including that of Ambassador Christopher Stevens.
Javier Manjarres reports for Florida’s The Shark Tank, Nov. 26, 2012, that Rubio was the headliner at a rally for Israel held at a South Florida Jewish Community School last weekend, where he reiterated his support for America’s closest ally in the Middle East and took a few questions from the media as he exited the event.
Rubio expressed his deep concerns about the lack of security measures that the U.S. government was responsible for at its consulate in Benghazi, Libya which led to the murder of four Americans. He said:
“My number one concern about the Benghazi situation is that knowing it was a very dangerous place that was growing even more dangerous, the United States did not supply sufficient security for that consulate in Benghazi, and as a result, four brave Americans lost their lives. We need to make sure how that happened, so that it never happens again.”
When asked whether an independent investigation was warranted to get to the bottom of what really happened both in the run up to the attack on the consulate and its aftermath, Rubio maintained that an independent investigation was not necessary.
Rubio, who sits on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and is privy to intelligence briefings, insisted that Congress was more than capable of conducting an investigation into the matter:
“I don’t think it has to be independent (investigation) the bottom line is that, the Congress is fully capable, I am on the intelligence committee, I am on the Foreign Relations committee in the Senate, I think that those committees are fully capable of investigating why there was not sufficient security provided to the personnel in Benghazi, and how that could’ve been prevented.”
One thing you’ve got to admit is that Rubio sure is a fast learner. In two years, he has already learned to become a consummate member of the politics-as-usual old boys’ network.
H/t FOTM’s Tina.
The POS is not letting Frankenstorm Sandy go to waste, but is using the human misery and destruction wrought by Sandy to portray himself as a caring take-charge leader.
Yesterday, he paid a visit to the American Red Cross national headquarters in downtown Washington, D.C. where, feigning compassion, he said to the victims of Sandy: “America is with you; we are standing behind you; and we are going to do everything we can to get you back on your feet.”
I bet Ambassador Stevens, Sean Smith, and ex-Navy SEALS Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods would disagree with that statement — if they’re alive to actually disagree, that is.
Lest you’ve forgotten, on September 23, 2012, on CBS’ 60 Minutes, Obama referred to the four as “bumps in the road.” Stevens, Smith, Doherty and Woods were murdered by Islamic jihadists in Benghazi, Libya, which Obama kept insisting was a spontaneous mob riot for days and weeks after the attack, although he knew full well it wasn’t since he had watched the attack IN REAL TIME in the White House Situation Room.
Hope the victims of Frankenstorm Sandy don’t get the same treatment.
H/t FOTM’s Maziel
On October 25 2012, defending why the Obama administration did not send help to the besieged U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, Obama’s Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta made this interesting statement to Pentagon reporters:
“(The) basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on; without having some real-time information about what’s taking place. And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. [Carter] Ham, [Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff] Gen. [Martin] Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.”
The first thing to note about what Panetta said is that HE LIED about the administration not having “real-time information about what’s taking place”.
Last Saturday, Oct. 27, 2012, retired U.S. Army Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer said on television that his sources say Barack Obama was in the White House situation room watching the Benghazi attack in real time.
Shaffer said: “This was in the middle of the business day in Washington, so everybody at the White House, CIA, Pentagon, everybody was watching this go down. According to my sources, yes, [Obama] was one of those in the White House Situation Room in real-time watching this. Only he [Obama] could issue a directive to Secretary of Defense Panetta to do something. That’s the only place it could be done.”
The Inquisitr reports that not only did Obama refuse to send help to the Americans being attacked and killed, sources say he actually ordered an AC-130U gunship to stand down. After that, the Commander In Chief went to bed early in order to be ready for his Las Vegas fundraiser the next day.
Despite three urgent requests from the CIA annex, no military backup was sent for the besieged personnel of the consulate. The CIA officially denies that these requests ever took place or that they were turned down.
According to TheBlaze.com, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, the two former Navy SEALS who were among the four Americans murdered in Benghazi, disobeyed orders from superiors to “stand down”. They raced to the main consulate building to help Ambassador Christopher Stevens and others who were under siege.
Pat Dollard of BareNakedIslam writes, Oct. 28, 2012, that he heard that General Carter Ham, head of Africom (U.S. Africa Command), received the same e-mails the White House received requesting help/support as the Benghazi attack was taking place. General Ham immediately had a rapid response unit ready and communicated to the Pentagon that he had the unit ready. Dollard writes:
“General Ham then received the order to stand down. His response was to screw it, he was going to help anyhow. Within 30 seconds to a minute after making the move to respond, his second in command apprehended General Ham and told him that he was now relieved of his command.”
Gen. Ham’s “second in command” is not named.
The United States Africa Command, also known as U.S. AFRICOM, is one of nine Unified Combatant Commands of the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD). As one of six that are regionally focused, it is devoted solely to Africa. U.S. AFRICOM is responsible to the Secretary of Defense for U.S. military relations with 54 African countries.
The Benghazi attack took place on the night of September 11, 2012. On October 18, 2012, in a DoD news briefing, Leon Panetta announced that Gen. Ham was fired:
“Today I am very pleased to announce that President Obama will nominate Army Gen. David Rodriguez to succeed Gen. Carter Ham as commander of U.S. Africa Command.”
James S. Robbins of The Washington Times writes that Gen. Ham “is a very well regarded officer who made AFRICOM into a true Combatant Command after the ineffective leadership of his predecessor, General William E. ‘Kip’ Ward.” According to Joint doctrine, “the tour length for combatant commanders and Defense agency directors is three years.” But Gen. Ham had only been in the commander position at AFRICOM for a year and a half and the informal word was that he was scheduled to rotate out in March 2013.
In other words, Obama fired General Carter Ham, a distinguished U.S. Army general and a true patriot.
In my post earlier today, “Muslims rampage and kill a U.S. ambassador over this movie?,” I questioned whether yesterday’s Muslim attacks on the U.S. embassy in Cairo, Egypt, and the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and the killing of U.S. ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens and three embassy staff, can really be attributed to a movie about Muhammad.
Now, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Michigan) confirms that the movie is just a cover. He told CBS News that a random mob isn’t behind the attack.
Elahe Izadi of National Journal writes that Congressman Rogers said: “This was a coordinated attack, more of a commando-style event. It had both coordinated fire — direct fire and indirect fire. There appeared to be military maneuvers approaching the facility.” Rogers also said that the attack was carried out by “an external group we believe has at least extremist ties, maybe al Qaeda ties.”
Citing Pentagon sources, this evening’s CBS Evening News calls the attacks not random mob events, but “well armed”, well-coordinated “terrorist” attacks timed for the anniversary of 9/11.
Below, courtesy of Reuters, are some pictures of the coordinated attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi (h/t ZeroHedge).