Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Panetta: Obama Absent Night of Benghazi

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 03:25 PM
link   


Defense Secretary Leon Panetta testified this morning on Capitol Hill that President Barack Obama was absent the night four Americans were murdered in Benghazi on September 11, 2012:

Panetta said that Obama left operational details, including knowledge of what resources were available to help the Americans under seize, "up to us."

In fact, Panetta says that the night of 9/11, he did not communicate with a single person at the White House. The attack resulted in the deaths of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens.

Panetta said that, save their 5 o'clock prescheduled meeting with the president the day of September 11, Obama did not call or communicate in anyway with the defense secretary that day. There were no calls about the what was going on in Benghazi. He never called to check-in.


Wow. I find this "absence" VERY telling of the President and his knowledge of what was going to go down that night.

Where was he?

Did he stay out of the kitchen on purpose? Too hot for him?

Did he feel guilt or shame for what he was about to "allow" to happen?

Makes me wonder.

Does it make you wonder?

SOURCE




posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by phantomjack
Does it make you wonder?


No, it is not his job to micromanage everything - that is why there is a whole Dept of Defense, employing millions of people.



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 03:36 PM
link   
From nearly all of the first hand reports coming in from the White House, Obama isn't involved in anything. He rarely attends meetings, acts aloof and disinterested, and spends most of his time campaigning around the country even though the election is over. His "Jobs Council" hasn't met in over a year. And I believe I heard him say he wouldn't rest until the economy was fixed. LOL



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Obama has been absent for over 4 years



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by phantomjack
Does it make you wonder?


No, it is not his job to micromanage everything - that is why there is a whole Dept of Defense, employing millions of people.


commander in chief?




what a loser he is...



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 03:41 PM
link   
So their incompetence is excused by this? what is their point saying this.



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 03:49 PM
link   
Obama allowed the proper people to handle it. What do you think he should have done, shouldered a weapon and revved up the chopper? He trusts his people. He picked them, and trusts them. When he finally got a briefing I bet there was hell to pay for a few underlings, and Panetta likely didn't escape that dressing down.



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by jjkenobi
From nearly all of the first hand reports coming in from the White House, Obama isn't involved in anything. He rarely attends meetings, acts aloof and disinterested, and spends most of his time campaigning around the country even though the election is over. His "Jobs Council" hasn't met in over a year. And I believe I heard him say he wouldn't rest until the economy was fixed. LOL


exactly, I am more convinced than ever Obama is absolutely not involved with anything to do with running this country and never has been,because he is not qualified, at the prayer breakfast today he could barely keep his eyes open.
Where has he been since the election btw?

Maybe he is not qualified because he is not illegible.

No Word from Hillary During Benghazi Attack


Neither the secretary of defense nor the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff spoke to the secretary of state during the 8-hour attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012. At a Thursday hearing in the Senate, Republican Ted Cruz asked both Leon Panetta and Martin Dempsey, "In between 9:42 p.m., Benghazi time, when the first attacks started, and 5:15 am, when Mr. Doherty and Mr. Woods lost their lives, what converations did either of you have with Secretary Clinton?"

"We did not have any conversations with Secretary Clinton," Panetta responded.
www.weeklystandard.com...
"And General Dempsey, the same is true for you?" Cruz asked. Dempsey confirmed this.


Who exactly is running the country?



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aleister
Obama allowed the proper people to handle it. What do you think he should have done, shouldered a weapon and revved up the chopper? He trusts his people. He picked them, and trusts them. When he finally got a briefing I bet there was hell to pay for a few underlings, and Panetta likely didn't escape that dressing down.


Please stop making excuse for him, he is a pi$$ poor excuse for the supposed leader of the free world, neither Hilliary nor Obama was ready for that three o'clock phone call.



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by hellobruce
 


No, it is not his job to micromanage everything - that is why there is a whole Dept of Defense, employing millions of people.

Unlike you, and Mr. Obama, I don't consider attacks on American embassies to be "micromatters".

See ya,
Milt



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 



Who exactly is running the country?


Well, let's see.....Here is Hillary saying this....



What I find quite startling is that Timothy Geithner is now moving to a position with the CFR......

Hmmmmmm

Edit to stay on topic.

It makes sense that Panetta, would do whatever he can to save his boss. What he did not realize was the implications of him saying what he said....


edit on 7-2-2013 by seeker1963 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Aleister
 


Obama allowed the proper people to handle it.

That comment is ABSOLUTELY FALSE! "IT" wasn't "handled" at all! "IT" was only ignored at first, and then lied about later!

See ya,
Milt



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 04:07 PM
link   
You blokes have a real, genuine dud. Ignorant people think he’s great. Those people don’t know about things like this and the drone program. A wolf dressed in sheep’s clothing.

He’s supposed to be the the leader of your nation. For serious incidents like this he has absolutely no excuse not to involve himself. It’s a akin to a ship sinking while the captain continues to dine casually. However, considering he’s a puppet I don’t he cares nor is interested...

Oh, and being Australian I should know a thing or two about dud leaders... My nation is full of them in Gillard, Rudd and the like.
edit on 7-2-2013 by BlindBastards because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stormdancer777

Originally posted by jjkenobi
From nearly all of the first hand reports coming in from the White House, Obama isn't involved in anything. He rarely attends meetings, acts aloof and disinterested, and spends most of his time campaigning around the country even though the election is over. His "Jobs Council" hasn't met in over a year. And I believe I heard him say he wouldn't rest until the economy was fixed. LOL


exactly, I am more convinced than ever Obama is absolutely not involved with anything to do with running this country and never has been,because he is not qualified, at the prayer breakfast today he could barely keep his eyes open.
Where has he been since the election btw?

Maybe he is not qualified because he is not illegible.

No Word from Hillary During Benghazi Attack


Neither the secretary of defense nor the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff spoke to the secretary of state during the 8-hour attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012. At a Thursday hearing in the Senate, Republican Ted Cruz asked both Leon Panetta and Martin Dempsey, "In between 9:42 p.m., Benghazi time, when the first attacks started, and 5:15 am, when Mr. Doherty and Mr. Woods lost their lives, what converations did either of you have with Secretary Clinton?"

"We did not have any conversations with Secretary Clinton," Panetta responded.
www.weeklystandard.com...
"And General Dempsey, the same is true for you?" Cruz asked. Dempsey confirmed this.


Who exactly is running the country?


The result of the investigation says those accountible start at the sub cabinet level. If any of them were involved from the start then the question becomes why are only sub cabinet level personnel being punished. During Clintons testimony she got pissed at the questions and shot back "what does it matter" at this point.

I get the impression the only part about this entire mess that the government cares about is the negative publicity it puts on them. They dont seem to care at all Americans lost their lives.

Obama and the Liberal Left have done nothing but weaken and destroy this country since Obama was elected,

I for one am hoping for Articles of Impeachment.



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by phantomjack
Does it make you wonder?


No, it is not his job to micromanage everything - that is why there is a whole Dept of Defense, employing millions of people.


I see. You must be referring to everything else he micromanages: guns, school lunches, healthcare, and his March Madness brackets. Right? Or, rather, was he needed to be present when Bin Laden was killed?

He sure broke out the Popcorn for that incident.



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by phantomjack

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by phantomjack
Does it make you wonder?


No, it is not his job to micromanage everything - that is why there is a whole Dept of Defense, employing millions of people.


I see. You must be referring to everything else he micromanages: guns, school lunches, healthcare, and his March Madness brackets. Right? Or, rather, was he needed to be present when Bin Laden was killed?

He sure broke out the Popcorn for that incident.


Dont forget about which media outlets are real and which ones are fake...



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 





They dont seem to care at all Americans lost their lives.


Absolutely and that is what makes me so livid.

And look at this topic, this topic should be filled with people that are concerned and it is only ONE page.

One?



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 05:56 PM
link   
Much has already been posted about the incompetence of our Dear Leader, on September 11, 2012, but absolutely stunning is Panetta remarks saying "Obama was NOT there" and NO ONE followed up with "Mr. Secretary, where exactly WAS the Commander-in-Chief?"

A cursory review of a web site that routinely publishes the public Presidential schedule shows NOTHING on tap for POTUS. So where was he? Seriously. The most protected individual on the planet...and NO ONE can account for his where abouts? It's not like he can go out for a pizza or a walk or...? So, if he was in the WH why wasn't he "disturbed?" Or is an attack on a US embassy, on the anniversary of 9/11 not viewed as important enough to rouse him about. Remember Hillary's 3 am phone call? Not a HRC fan, but pretty prophetic.

Where was he? What was HE doing that he was NOT doing the job he so vigorously campaigned for?
edit on 7-2-2013 by Glinda because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Surfrat
Obama has been absent for over 4 years


Come on now. Let's give the POTUS the benefit of the doubt. I'm sure he was abreast of the situation from the beginning.

He's the picture of brilliance.







posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 06:18 PM
link   
It's one thing to delegate authority, but quite another to stick your fingers in your ears and hummmm. I guess he figures if he doesn't know what's going on, he can't be responsible for making a big boy decision that he might get criticized for later. When I heard Panetta say he had not talked with the prez when this whole fiasco was going down, I was just gobsmacked!!





new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join