Benghazigate: Chapter Two = Treachery and Bbetrayal

Benghazigate: Chapter Two = Treachery and Bbetrayal

By Jed Babbin on 10.29.12 @ 6:10AM


Treachery and betrayal were the Administration's response, as the
media gives Obama cover.

What more does anyone need to know than that Americans are under
attack before ordering a military response to suppress the attack and
possibly rescue our people?

Even if the initial response isn't exactly what you'd want it to be,
even if you don't have every asset available that you might in a
perfect world, isn't it your duty -- whether you're a lowly second
lieutenant or the Secretary of Defense -- to do everything you can as
quickly as you can?

Of course it is, at least unless you're President Obama and his
minions. His two principal flunkies -- Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta -- had a lot of options on
September 11 during the seven-hour attack on our Benghazi consulate
and the CIA house about a mile away. According to a Fox News report
based on several sources, the people under attack pled with the CIA
for help three times during the attack and all three pleas were
refused. Team Obama did nothing to save their lives.

The accuracy of the Fox report is easily derived from other facts. One
element of proof that the requests were made -- by people under fire
-- comes from Panetta's whining. According to a Reuters report,
Panetta said there wasn't enough information to responsibly deploy
forces to Libya during the attack. "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."

Really, Mr. Secretary? Let's set aside the fact that one or more
drones were over the consulate during the attack, sending back the
information Panetta says he needed. But the drone issue begs the
question: Panetta cannot really believe that sending armed aircraft
from our base at Sigonella, Italy -- about 350 air miles away --
wouldn't have given him both the capability of suppressing the attack
and whatever other information he thinks he needed. Panetta's whine is
as evasive as his actions were treacherous.

President Obama was apparently so fearful of offending some Islamic
mob that he preferred to let our people be killed than send a couple
of F-18s from Sigonella to Benghazi. Flight time -- for fully armed
aircraft at about 0.7 or 0.8 Mach -- is less than an hour. The attack
went on for seven hours. If the fly-guys busted Mach, they could have
been there in about a half hour. Plenty of time to pop a sonic boom
over the consulate which -- as we've seen in Afghanistan many times --
is enough to send the terrorists running. And -- if there wasn't time
for the first flight to be armed -- it would have been able to recon
the situation and give the time for fully-armed aircraft to arrive
about fifteen or twenty minutes later.

Obama's fingerprints are all over this refusal to come to the aid of
our people when they were under attack. The CIA -- implicitly
confirming the pleas for help -- denies that anyone in its chain of
command rejected any such request. The specificity of the CIA denial
gives us another proof that the requests were made, but it carries a
second aspect of responsibility for the failure to send help. CIA
Director David Petraeus must have passed the requests up the chain of
command and someone higher than him -- the president is the only one
higher than a cabinet member -- denied the requests.

Clinton has to have known what Charlene Lamb -- her head of embassy
security -- knew during the attack. (Lamb testified at a 10 October
congressional hearing that she was in real-time contact with the
consulate during the attack.) So must have Petraeus, because his CIA
operators -- former SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glenn Doherty among them --
were making the pleas for assistance and asking permission to rush to
the consulate's defense. Woods and Doherty were told to "stand down."
As Fox reports, the two apparently ignored the orders and rushed to
the consulate to help. Unable to find the ambassador, they withdrew to
their CIA outpost, which then came under attack. Both were killed
there.

President Obama is still fumbling and lying about the whole incident
including the refusal of the pleas for help. In a Denver TV interview
on Friday, Obama ducked questions about the Benghazi incident twice.
He's also saying that he ordered support for the consulate personnel
as soon as he heard about the attacks.

Why, then, weren't the available forces deployed immediately to save
American lives? If no one in the CIA chain of command refused aid, the
failure has to be Obama's. No one else could have denied the real-time
requests.

Charles Woods, father of Tyrone Woods, said that those who denied the
requests for help murdered his son. Woods's anguish is understandable.
His son was a hero, and paid with his life for Obama's failure to send
military force to attack the enemy that was attacking him.

Naturally, Obama and his minions aren't owning up to their treachery
and the media -- except for Fox News -- are burying the story.

The Washington Post and the New York Times -- both of which have
endorsed Obama -- aren't reporting the story on the rejected pleas for
help. ABC, CBS and NBC aren't either.

To its credit, CBS did break the story last week on the State
Department emails that show Obama's administration knew that the
Benghazi attack was made by terrorists, not some mob distracted from a
protest against an anti-Islamic video. The other big liberal media --
i.e., most of the major media -- gave little or no coverage to the CBS
scoop.

As huge a scandal as the Benghazi incident is, it's not possible for
it to become an issue in the election unless Mitt Romney makes it one.
So far, he hasn't and he isn't likely to in the final week of the
campaign.

Don't expect to hear much about Obama's conduct of the Benghazi
incident before the election or after, if he is reelected. The effect
of Obama's refusal to come to the aid of people under attack is best
understood by the terrorists still walking the streets of Benghazi,
and their allies around the world.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
To post to this group, send email to OpenDebateForum@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to OpenDebateForum-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum?hl=en