White House Tries to Throw Military Under Bus

Obama did not deny requests for help in Benghazi: Aide

news.yahoo.com...
On the heels of yesterday's CIA statement: "No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate."

"Neither the president nor anyone in the White House denied any requests for assistance in Benghazi," an Obama administration spokesman tells Yahoo's Olivier Knox.

I guess we should have seen this coming. Now we must be good sheeple and believe Secretaty of Defense Panetta's story:

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,"

Total bull#. They had time to access and sat on their hands.

reply to post by sad_eyed_lady


Perhaps I'm not reading the same article as you, but I didn't see anyone tossing someone under a bus or getting tossed under one. I didn't read any statement in that article that said "It's that guys fault".

reply to post by sad_eyed_lady


It will be a long while before the truth will ever come out....if at all.

In the mean time, it'll be finger pointing and shifting the blame.

And yes, we know, the "truth" has yet to be revealed......
Tell that to the administration.....[see below]

As I stated before, the WH should have never opened their mouths at the beginning about the video.
[No info, remember?! ]
If they had just said nothing and kept it to a simple response ["No comment"] or ["we have no further information at this time"] , I doubt this would have escalated the way it has.

This snow ball just keeps getting bigger and bigger......

It's not about Left/Right ---- it's about an administration who had extremely poor communication problem and lack of judgement on their original "story"....
Since that story has turned out to be false, why should they be trusted now about future stories about this particular situation?

Sorry, I will doubt the W.H. until all the investigation is done, which will take quite some time to find out the truth of what really happened.

If they lied at the start, how can I trust them now??
I simply can't......

reply to post by sad_eyed_lady


Remember that photo of them watching in "real" time when they were after Bin Laden?
Oh yeah, they harped on that for days, how they were watching it all go down......

But now, it's :

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," he said during a joint question-and-answer session with Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff General Martin Dempsey.

You guys had a drone over head recording it all, in "real" time.....
You mean after 7 hours that's not enough time to evaluate the situation???

Oookaaayyyy.....[sigh]

Stop already there are enough of these threads. Same story different titles.

It's getting awfully crowded under that bus!

Watch Obama avoid answering when he's FINALLY asked some tough questions about the attack response - right to his "talking points", as usual.

Reply to post by Maluhia

He has answered it several times.

The thing is, you are only reading crap like this thread and they're merely hit pieces, echoing the same tired right wing rhetoric. You are happy there are dead Americnans because you can join the Obama Bad threads.

If you read real news all the info you're referring to is there. I warm you though, you may not like it. There are actually more than one paragraph at a time which dont paint the president as a devil worshiping, communist muslim who wants to take your money and give it to the Wu Tang Klan.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by sad_eyed_lady


BS!

I'm going to avoid a full and complete statement I'd violate about 10 ATS's T & C's that I agreed to....

Suffice it to say.

It was requested then either denied or simply ignored

"Yes We can!"

My ass!

Originally posted by snarky412
reply to post by sad_eyed_lady

 

Remember that photo of them watching in "real" time when they were after Bin Laden?
Oh yeah, they harped on that for days, how they were watching it all go down......

But now, it's :

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," he said during a joint question-and-answer session with Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff General Martin Dempsey.

You guys had a drone over head recording it all, in "real" time.....
You mean after 7 hours that's not enough time to evaluate the situation???

Oookaaayyyy.....[sigh]

Right on. It also looks like the boys are getting to used to their fancy toys......as if fogy info coming from a gosh darn is all thats needed to come up with a sit-rep.

Originally posted by antonia
reply to post by sad_eyed_lady

 

Perhaps I'm not reading the same article as you, but I didn't see anyone tossing someone under a bus or getting tossed under one. I didn't read any statement in that article that said "It's that guys fault".

edit on 27-10-2012 by antonia because: opps

Actually, my headline was the title of another article I was going to use. They are basically the same story, but the yahoo story came directly from the president to yahoo news via email.:

White House Tries to Throw Military Under Bus

www.weeklystandard.com...

CIA would not take the blame. Who is left to pin this on? The buck never stopped.

It is becoming apparent, that his transparency has been obfuscated by his inexperience and ego.

Perception is the main point.

The fact is.....

The Administration is in turmoil over this boondoggle.

We have the highest officials countering each other on a daily basis.

I think the voters will show their "perceptions" pretty soon !!

This whole thing sure puts a new meaning to that Hillary 2008 campaign slogan 3am Phone Call

Somebody sure dialed a wrong number.

Originally posted by antonia
reply to post by sad_eyed_lady

 

Perhaps I'm not reading the same article as you, but I didn't see anyone tossing someone under a bus or getting tossed under one. I didn't read any statement in that article that said "It's that guys fault".

edit on 27-10-2012 by antonia because: opps

No, that's just the hyperbolic rhetoric used by the right wing, in particular Obama haters. And Panetta is correct: one doesn't just throw forces willy-nilly, without knowing as much as possible about what's going on, into a situation. Doing otherwise is how you get more people unnecessarily killed.

It seems a lot of people think that military operations can happen immediately, that troops and craft everywhere are on constant alert, that operation planning is done instantaneously, and that communication through the chain of command is also done instantaneously.

Speaking of which, remember the bang-up job NORAD and the USAF did in defending against the 9/11 hijacked aircraft? Don't recall seeing a lot of posts or news articles about how incompetent the Bush II administration was at handling that situation. And remember the video tape of Bush II being told what happened? He looked like a deer caught in headlights and continued reading a book about a pet goat to children for another 15 minutes. Now there was an assertive, on-top-of-things commander in chief.

As for comparing the WH's viewing of the Bin Laden raid to this attack, they are too entirely different situations. The Bin Laden attack was pre-planned and MUCH TIME went into that before the raid occurred. So the WH were sitting around waiting for it to happen. The Benghazi raid took place without actionable warning, i.e. nobody knew that an attack would take place at a specific time and place. To attempt to conflate these two situations is pure prevarication -- intentionally or not.

reply to post by MrInquisitive


God help us if we are ever under a nuclear attack if our military can't act any faster than you claim. I believe they can.
Anyone making excuses for this debacle and accuses others of right-wing rhetoric ought to look in the mirror. Why are you defending this unless you are owned by your political party?

I am going to put aside, for a moment, the issue with the Benghazi lack of response. With the dead Americans, the most senior of which had his murder put on the internet for all to gasp in horror over (i haven't looked, I prefer to not participate in gore porn....i am just relaying what I understand to be true).

If I put all that aside, I am mystified, shocked, and confounded by the aftermath. Today I am reading thread after thread where senior officials are contradicting each other, pointing the finger at each other, and saying it isn't their fault.

I am seeing a total meltdown int he Obama Administration. Perhaps over this weekend they will be able to regroup and get on the same page. But I think that after Petraus' statements, it will be literally impossible.

I have never liked Obama. I have liked him even less because of the shouts of "RACISM" i have seen from his followers. But if i put all that aside, what I am seeing in the way of executive leadership is among the most disgusting farces I have ever been witness to. And I am not just talking about him, but his entire cabinet. No where in their actions of blame laying do I see even a gram of leadership.

Expect on Monday that we will see a scapegoat forced almost at gunpoint behind a podium to take full blame for what happened. If you don't see this, it tells you that not even the folks on the inside have faith in Obama anymore, and he has completely lost all political leverage.

The issue is the White House paused to determine how they could benefit from this.

Indecision, obfuscation ruled the day.

When they couldn't capitlise, they searched for scapegoat(s).

They have now blamed;

The State Department
The CIA
The Military
The House of Representatives (GOP) side
Romney & Ryan

Be careful, folks. They might blame the "fringe" folks next!

reply to post by beezzer


Nope. It was Bush's fault.

Obama and his handlers have taken a play out of the Casey Anthony Playbook, imo. I know, that sounds weird, but this whole Benghazi cover-up reminds me of how she lied, changed her story, got others to obfuscate the timeline, lied some more, spoke convincingly, twisted the facts, blamed a fictional nanny, threw her own father under the bus.......and in the end, she got off scot-free. The truth never came out and still there is a little girl dead and everything has been swept under the rug.

I had a thought. I really don't think Obama wanted to kill any of his Muslim brothers regardless of the fact that they are racial terrorists. His efforts to ingratiate himself with the Muslim Brotherhood have not gone unnoticed.

I will be the one to say I think he put his allegiance to the MB over the welfare of the four who died. I think he gave the "stand down" order and should face the consequences.


Somebody else on the web agrees with me:

Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer: My sources tell me Obama was in the room watching Benghazi attack

www.therightscoop.com...

Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer said tonight that his sources tell him that Obama was one of the people in the room watching the Benghazi attack go down and both he and Col. David Hunt agree it would have taken an order by the president to intervene. Further, Col. Hunt said that we were only 20 min away by jet and a couple of hours away by AC-130 gunships and special forces, and the decision not to intervene had to be political.

Edited to add:

In “Audacity of Hope” he writes: “I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.” The quote comes from page 261 of the paperback edition of “The Audacity of Hope.www.conservativecrusader.com...

reply to post by sad_eyed_lady


Listen, it may be plausible and all that....but it is such a serious accusation that it will only be construed as someting concocted by right wing nutjobs unless you can connect a whole lotta dots to support it.

For now we should focus on proving negligence. We can address motive once that is out of the way.