General Petraeus gets his payback: Obama goes under the bus
Now you can call him General Betray-us, you craven, dishonorable supporters of an Administration that stood back and allowed Americans to be murdered so that it wouldn’t take a political hit, or at least delay the hit until after the election — and in the mean time tried to pin the murder on our own First Amendment and a “shady” American filmmaker who remains even now in prison.
Breaking news on Benghazi: the CIA spokesman, presumably at the direction of CIA director David Petraeus, has put out this statement: “No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. ”
So who in the government did tell “anybody” not to help those in need? Someone decided not to send in military assets to help those Agency operators. Would the secretary of defense make such a decision on his own? No.
It would have been a presidential decision. There was presumably a rationale for such a decision. What was it? When and why—and based on whose counsel obtained in what meetings or conversations—did President Obama decide against sending in military assets to help the Americans in need?
Let me answer that: he’d already cut a commercial featuring Morgan Freeman suggesting Obama had essentially ended the threat of terrorism; and acknowledgment of this attack, and the players involved, would cost him a big political hit in the run-up to his foreign policy debates — and pierce the mythology of his foreign policy strength. He was prepared to let things play out and hope for the best.
This was, we’re now finding out, a calculated decision to let Americans die for what Obama believes is the Greater Good: his duty to “fundamentally transform” the United States. The SEALs who ignored orders and went to the aid of the consulate were collateral damage.
Obama is a Marxist true believer. He is the cause, and the cause comes first. And any one who votes for him now, once they learn of this (and the media will naturally downplay it, or allow Obama to obfuscate and distract, if they raise the issues at all), is voting for a man whose first instinct is and always will be to save himself and promote the cause, and he doesn’t really care who gets crushed along the way.
I wonder if even the true believers he surrounds himself with are starting to get a bit worried about what this man is capable of doing to keep any stink off him.
Sorry, comrades. But perhaps you’ll just have to take one for the team. That’s how important it is for Obama to be re-elected. Forward is so close we can practically touch it. Can’t turn back now…
(thanks to nr)
Geoff B sends the following along: “[Below are] thumbnails of both the Consulate area and the Annex with the best guess descriptions I have been able to figure out as no reporter/photojournalist is putting a good description on any images. In some cases where it is night or they made a dark image for dramatic effect I changed the gamma setting for more detail.”
Also, must listen: “It was a conscious act.”
In updates 5 and 6, a source suggests Panetta wasn’t lying. “Another (very very trusted) source is saying that the AC130 resources were in the middle of a rotation and that the new resources weren’t ready yet so no help would come from Sigonella. So that confirms Panetta’s statement.”
Even so, why, on 911, was there no contingency plan for that region? No ships in the Med? No armed drone? You don’t paint that target unless you believe something capable of taking it out is looking down.