October 31, 2012

Pursuant to my last post: “Obama Met With Panetta and Biden at WH As Benghazi Terror Attack Unfolded”

What they discussed, however, no one can say. Some because they can’t. Others because they refuse to. Because they’re scum:

President Barack Obama met with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Vice President Joe Biden at the White House on Sept. 11, 2012 at 5:00 PM—just 55 minutes after the State Department notified the White House and the Pentagon that the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi was under attack.

The meeting between Obama, Panetta and Biden had been scheduled before the attack took place, and the Department of Defense is not commenting now on whether the three men were aware when they met that day of the ongoing attack or whether Obama used that meeting to discuss with his defense secretary what should be done to defend the U.S. personnel who at that very moment were fighting for their lives in Benghazi.

“Secretary Panetta met with President Obama, as the White House-provided scheduled indicates,” Lt. Col. Todd Breasseale, a Defense Department spokesman, told CNSNews.com on Tuesday. “However, neither the content nor the subject of discussions between the President and his advisors are appropriate for disclosure.”

The fact that the president had been scheduled to meet with Vice President Biden and Defense Secretary Panetta at 5:00 p.m. on Sept. 11 had been publicized  in the Washington Daybook–a planning service to which news organizations subscribe–and included on the official White House schedule posted online by the White House itself.

The State Department email notifying the White House and Pentagon of the Sept. 11 Benghazi attack was obtained by CBS News and reported by Sharyl Attkisson on Oct. 23, almost six weeks after the attack.

The terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi began at about 9:40 p.m. Benghazi time—or about 3:40 p.m. Washington, D.C. time. “The attack began at approximately 9:40 p.m. local time,” Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Charlene Lamb told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in written testimony submitted Oct. 10.

About 25 minutes after the attack started—at 4:05 p.m. Washington, D.C. time—the State Department sent an email that went to multiple recipients, including two at the White House and one at the Pentagon.

The subject line on this email said: “U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack.” The text of the email said: “The Regional Security Officer reports the diplomatic mission is under attack. Embassy Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well. Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and our COM personnel are in the compound safe haven.” It went on to say: “The Operations Center will provide updates as available.”

In her testimony to the Oversight Committee, Charlene Lamb indicated that soon after the attack started, she was able to monitor it from Washington, D.C., in “almost real time.”


It was not until 11:00 p.m. Benghazi time—or just as Obama’s 5:00 p.m. meeting with Panetta and Biden was starting in Washington, D.C.—that the U.S. agents in Benghazi decided to abandon the main consulate facility there.

“At 11 p.m. members of the Libyan 17th February Brigade advised they could no longer hold the area around the main building and insisted on evacuating the site,” Lamb testified. “The agents made a final search for the Ambassador before leaving in an armed vehicle.”

But the battle was far from over.

“Upon arriving at the annex around midnight, they took up defensive positions, including on the roof,” Lamb testified. “Shortly after their arrival, the annex itself began taking intermittent fire for a period of time.”

The battle continued, with the attackers now using mortars, and it was only in the “early morning” that two more Americans were killed and two more were wounded.

“In the early morning, an additional security team arrived from Tripoli and proceeded to the annex,” Lamb testified. “Shortly after they arrived, the annex started taking mortar fire, with as many as three direct hits on the compound. It was during this mortar attack that Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were killed and a Diplomatic Security agent and an annex quick reaction security team member were critically wounded.”

Doherty and Woods were both former Navy Seals who served in both the Iraq and Afghan wars. They were working as U.S. security personnel in Libya.

When exactly did Obama learn that the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi was under attack and whom did he order to do something about it? The White House is not saying.

“I can tell you, as I’ve said over the last couple of months since this happened, the minute I found out what was happening, I gave three very clear directives,” Obama told KUSA TV in Denver on Friday. “Number one, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to.”

Fred Lucas of CNSNews.com asked the White House on both Monday and Tuesday to reveal exactly when Obama learned the U.S. mission in Benghazi was under attack and who exactly Obama directed to “make sure that we are securing our personnel” there. The White House did not respond.

At an Oct. 25 Pentagon press briefing, a reporter noted that “there was, in fact, a drone over the CIA annex [in Benghazi] and there were intelligence officials fighting inside the annex.” He then asked Panetta: “Why there wasn’t a clear intelligence picture that would have given you what you needed to make some moves, for instance, flying, you know, F-16s over the area to disperse fighters or dropping more special forces in?”

“[T]here’s a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking going on here,” Panetta said.

“We quickly responded, as General [Martin] Dempsey [chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff] said, in terms of deploying forces to the region,” Panetta continued. “We had FAST platoons in the region. We had ships that we had deployed off of Libya. And we were prepared to respond to any contingency and certainly had forces in place to do that.

“But the basic principle here–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,” said Panetta. “And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, General Ham, General Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.”

A reporter followed up: “So the drone, then, and the forces inside the annex weren’t giving enough of a clear picture is what you’re saying.”

“This happened within a few hours and it was really over before, you know, we had the opportunity to really know what was happening,” Panetta said.

Not only did they make a conscious decision (by way of indecision, perhaps) to leave our men behind.  But they did so at what must have been for them an excruciatingly drawn out pace.

Seems some braver Americans didn’t want to go down without a fierce fight.  And that forced the CiC to keep that indecision ramped up for what must have seemed like an eternity, particularly for such a political animal as Obama.

Beyond that, his administration and the Secretary of State then pushed a story about a YouTube video being resp0nsible for the attacks, spent our tax dollars apologizing for said video on Pakistan TV,  repeated that claim in front of the UN and on the “Letterman” show, spoke of the video over the caskets of our dead, whom they knew had died at the hands of Islamists in a coordinated attack that had nothing to do with a spontaneous uprising over a video or the perfidy of our First Amendment, named and arrested the man who’d posted the video, and would have been content to let him remain the scapegoat had no emails been leaked or no investigative journalism attempted by a few real reporters.

Not only should he not be reelected, but he and Clinton and Panetta should all resign on principle.

But of course, that requires you to hold some.  Which they don’t.  Other than this one:  the ends justify the means.  And those ends are their desire to hold power over others.  Nothing more.

Posted by Jeff G. @ 10:09am

Comments (6)

  1. As I mentioned in another thread, Obama was pretty quick off the mark blaming the video.

    How did the President know the video even existed? If, as I suspect, this was a ready made excuse, then why did the administration need an excuse for the Libya debacle?

    The Crazy Man™ Glenn Beck, says Ambassador Stevens was involved in running guns to Al Qaeda, hence the video excuse so the President doesn’t have to admit he’s arming our enemies.

    See Beck video here:http://tinyurl.com/cd5ytxh

    Also, according to this guy: http://tinyurl.com/8perty5, Cross Border Authority is needed before we can send troops into a sovereign nation and the only person who can authorize a CBA is the President.

    Perhaps someone can confirm whether or not the Western Rifle Shooters Association web site is correct.

    Meanwhile, MBM saw nothing wrong with running a front page story about 24 year old DUI citation just before the 2000 election. Nor did MBM worry about running another front page story about McCain cheating on his wife before the 2008 election.

    Benghazi? MBM is collectively doing their best three monkeys impersonation.

  2. Pingback: Most Transparent Administration Evah Still Hasn’t Given Any Straight Answers on Benghazi : Stop The ACLU

  3. As I mentioned in another thread, Obama was pretty quick off the mark blaming the video.

    Quick, but clumsy, which is why CBS and 60 Minutes had to hide his interview for 6 weeks. Couldn’t have people knowing that the President knew who to blame the whole time. They might think that the YouTube story was just a distraction!

  4. Panetta never had any business being SECDEF in the first place – this just confirms it. If Clinton wanted to “take responsibility” why is she still working – where is her resignation? Dempsey has been a turd in the punch bowl for a long time now – so of course he ends up in the big chair.

  5. The DiploMad: Magreb Madness: We Will Pay More for Obama’s Libyan Lies

    The insanity of Obama’s Libya policy gets further underlined when see that now our clueless Secretary of State has gone to Algeria to seek support for US-French action against the growing threat of Islamic terrorism in Africa, in particular in Mali. There used to be somebody who knew how to keep those crazies under control; his name was Qaddafi. Maybe Hillary should go talk to him . . . oh, yes, I forgot, “We came, we saw, he died!” It now seems likely that Americans will have to risk their lives in Mali, because Obama’s delusions helped overthrow Qaddafi.

    We will kill and die yet more for Obama’s Arab Spring.

  6. Der Spiegel: Minorities Fear End of Secularism in Egypt

    Ha. Now they catch on?

    When a Coptic Christian tried to order a beer in a suburb of Cairo last week, the waiter reacted violently. The government plans to massively restrict the consumption of alcohol, a move whose effects will also be felt by members of the country’s Christian minority. Especially in Upper Egypt and in Alexandria, where religious tensions already existed under Hosni Mubarak, thousands of Christians are believed to have applied for visas for the United States and European countries.

    Best the US should keep a President who can’t imagine speaking forthrightly about a clash of religions, eh MirrorMen? But God forfend a German should have to imagine a restaurant patron denied his beer.