CIA told help to Stand Down in Benghazi

http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2012-11-01-1.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Orson Scott Card nailed it.

Here are the only possible scenarios for that decision, in descending order of likelihood:



President Obama was kept fully informed, and issued the order for American military forces to do nothing -- including the former Navy Seals who were within minutes of the scene.



President Obama was not informed, or could not be reached for a decision, or simply did not make a decision during the hours of the attack, and therefore the orders to stand down came from underlings who dared not let any military action proceed in the absence of a decision from the President.



The Obama administration does not expect to inform him of such events, does not wait for his decision, and instead someone else made the decisions that led to the Obama administration's failure to defend Americans who were under attack, and issued those orders in Obama's name.



One of these scenarios is true, or close to the truth. In every case, complete responsibility for the decision still rests with President Barack Obama.

And consider that he won't say anything on it. and the media is quiet. So, which option do you think it is?

One of the first two. Actually leaning towards the second. It might be more palatable than the first.



I just don't want to believe our Commander in Chief would leave our people out try like that.



But then again, I don't think he fully believes in America the same way most Americans do.

The fact that the media continues to hide this story makes me so sad for America.

CougarClaw wrote:
Obama is still leading in most swing states.



Supposing those polls are accurate and he wins. Does Obama get impeached over this?

I wouldn't bet on it. As some have pointed out the media, except for Fox, are ignoring it and are on to bigger(?) and better(?) things. How does this compare with Nixon and Watergate? No one died in Watergate and the media was on Watergate for days and months.

This is Watergate x Iran-Contra. That this has been covered up is shameful - both on the administration and the media. The President should resign and Biden as well.

Reports this morning are that Special Forces have been on the ground in Libya looking for the attackers since the 9/12 and that they are "closing in" on those responsible.



Anyone want to bet against some Libyan getting killed (regardless of actual guilt) between now and Monday evening just so Obama can spike another football before Tuesday?

If they're looking for the one responsible they are in the wrong country. He's in DC, or rather, he's probably in Vegas partying with Jay Z.

snoscythe wrote:
Reports this morning are that Special Forces have been on the ground in Libya looking for the attackers since the 9/12 and that they are "closing in" on those responsible.



Anyone want to bet against some Libyan getting killed (regardless of actual guilt) between now and Monday evening just so Obama can spike another football before Tuesday?

Bingo!! It'll probably some 76 y/o, one eyed, senile dude that gets smoked.



Reality - Obama will claim he was the 45 y/o Kingpin leader of Ansar al-Aharia with direct ties to Al Qaeda's Ayman al-Zawahri. LOL!



I put nothing past the greasy maneuvers of David Axelrod, David Plouffe, and Stephanie Cutter . Look them up in the dictionary under "slime-ball."

nbc and several other outlets are reporting a timelines released by the government that shows that help was sent and didn't get there in time.



Said that there was a second group from the "cia annex" that rescued survivors at the compound and drove the attackers away with small arms. Also said the libyan government (whatever that means at this point) did not provide any support, heavy arms or fighters.



There is still the question as to why additional security wasn't provided and that several reports of a deteriorating situation were sent up the chain. There was also the "Libyan policeman or gaurd" who they caught taking pictures of the compound the morning of the attack.

SpiffCoug wrote:
One of the first two. Actually leaning towards the second. It might be more palatable than the first.



I just don't want to believe our Commander in Chief would leave our people out try like that.



But then again, I don't think he fully believes in America the same way most Americans do.

So does his comment "vote for revenge" give any further insight into the mind of this guy? I personally can see him telling them to stand down. He is still out insisting that alcreepy is on the run when in fact they are stronger now than any time in the past.



Also, remember the name Valerie Jarret (born in Iran). She is the one pulling Obama's strings (along with Sauros). But Valarie is the one that had Obama not go after Bin Laden the first two opportunities. They had to grab Obama from the golf course when they knew Valerie wouldn't be there to stop him to get the Usama raid to finally happen.



As for NBC, they are trying their best to cover for Obama. Reinforcements were less than three hours away- three seperate teams (Army Rangers, Marines, and CIA) that should have been deployed but never were.

snoscythe wrote:
Reports this morning are that Special Forces have been on the ground in Libya looking for the attackers since the 9/12 and that they are "closing in" on those responsible.



Anyone want to bet against some Libyan getting killed (regardless of actual guilt) between now and Monday evening just so Obama can spike another football before Tuesday?

Do you really think President Obama and the United States government would actually commit murder for political gain?

BoiseBYU wrote:

Reports this morning are that Special Forces have been on the ground in Libya looking for the attackers since the 9/12 and that they are "closing in" on those responsible.



Anyone want to bet against some Libyan getting killed (regardless of actual guilt) between now and Monday evening just so Obama can spike another football before Tuesday?

Do you really think President Obama and the United States government would actually commit murder for political gain?

You don't think it has happened already with many other political figures throughout the history of the world?

Yes but where is the political gain here? Is it with the Muslims?

scott715 wrote:
Yes but where is the political gain here? Is it with the Muslims?

He was not talking about Obama letting the insurgents kill our citizens, he was talking about my assertion that Obama would kill any random Libyan he could paint as a plausible "he did it" guy before the elections.



And yes, I don't think it is outside the realm of the plausible that our government will kill for political gain.

Schmoe wrote:

snoscythe wrote:
Reports this morning are that Special Forces have been on the ground in Libya looking for the attackers since the 9/12 and that they are "closing in" on those responsible.



Anyone want to bet against some Libyan getting killed (regardless of actual guilt) between now and Monday evening just so Obama can spike another football before Tuesday?

Do you really think President Obama and the United States government would actually commit murder for political gain?

You don't think it has happened already with many other political figures throughout the history of the world?

I beleive it has happened "with many other political figures throughout the history of the world." But that was not my question. My question is whether he thinks President Barack Obama and the United States governement today would commit murder for President Obama's political gain. I may disagree with the President on many issues, but I do not beleive that is true of this man and this government today.

snoscythe wrote:

Yes but where is the political gain here? Is it with the Muslims?

He was not talking about Obama letting the insurgents kill our citizens, he was talking about my assertion that Obama would kill any random Libyan he could paint as a plausible "he did it" guy before the elections.



And yes, I don't think it is outside the realm of the plausible that our government will kill for political gain.

Plausible is a weasel word. Near everything is plausible-- It is plausible BYU will beat Utah next year--but I asked whether you believe President Obama would sign off on and order the murder of person(s) for his own political gain....

BoiseBYU wrote:

Reports this morning are that Special Forces have been on the ground in Libya looking for the attackers since the 9/12 and that they are "closing in" on those responsible.



Anyone want to bet against some Libyan getting killed (regardless of actual guilt) between now and Monday evening just so Obama can spike another football before Tuesday?

Do you really think President Obama and the United States government would actually commit murder for political gain?

Not, yes, HELL YES!



I suggest you read deeper into the histories of the Obama's and the Clinton's. They have committed murder on a number of occasions. They think it is some kind of cool James Bond movie. They hate the military so letting a soldier die is nothing to them.

BoiseBYU wrote:

scott715 wrote:
Yes but where is the political gain here? Is it with the Muslims?

He was not talking about Obama letting the insurgents kill our citizens, he was talking about my assertion that Obama would kill any random Libyan he could paint as a plausible "he did it" guy before the elections.



And yes, I don't think it is outside the realm of the plausible that our government will kill for political gain.

Plausible is a weasel word. Near everything is plausible-- It is plausible BYU will beat Utah next year--but I asked whether you believe President Obama would sign off on and order the murder of person(s) for his own political gain....

Yes, I do.

Hmmm, murder and Chicago politics?



That goes together like milk and cookies or Donnie and Marie.