Free Markets, Free People


Benghazi bottom line

Two things we now know the President didn’t do.  First from CBS:

CBS News has learned that during the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Obama Administration did not convene its top interagency counterterrorism resource: the Counterterrorism Security Group, (CSG).

“The CSG is the one group that’s supposed to know what resources every agency has. They know of multiple options and have the ability to coordinate counterterrorism assets across all the agencies,” a high-ranking government official told CBS News. “They were not allowed to do their job. They were not called upon.”

The second from a former SEAL officer who knows the protocol necessary to launch a rescue from outside Libya:

No administration wants to stumble into a war because a jet jockey in hot pursuit (or a mixed-up SEAL squad in a rubber boat) strays into hostile territory. Because of this, only the president can give the order for our military to cross a nation’s border without that nation’s permission. For the Osama bin Laden mission, President Obama granted CBA for our forces to enter Pakistani airspace.

On the other side of the CBA coin: in order to prevent a military rescue in Benghazi, all the POTUS has to do is not grant cross-border authority. If he does not, the entire rescue mission (already in progress) must stop in its tracks.

So, bottom line – He didn’t convene the CSG which would have been the lead agency to coordinate an attempted rescue from outside the country and he apparently never gave the CBA (which only he can issue) necessary to do so.

Or, in other words, he lied about doing everything necessary to save and protect the lives of those in combat in Libya.

Finally, the cover-up and attempting to deflect the blame:

Leon Panetta is falling on his sword for President Obama with his absurd-on-its-face, “the U.S. military doesn’t do risky things”-defense of his shameful no-rescue policy. Panetta is utterly destroying his reputation. General Dempsey joins Panetta on the same sword with his tacit agreement by silence. But why? How far does loyalty extend when it comes to covering up gross dereliction of duty by the president?

Great question.  Don’t expect an answer anytime soon.

~McQ

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

19 Responses to Benghazi bottom line

  • Dempsey keeping his mouth shut strikes me as toeing the line – it wouldn’t be his place to come out publicly on this if he disagrees.  Like it or else, Obama is the CO and what he did might have been cowardly, morally criminal and essentially counter to what we think of as “American”, but not illegal.

    He can cover himself up with some bullshit about “geo-political considerations of relations with Libya”.

    And that IS bullshit excuse making of the first water I know, given that we wing our way into other countries and blast terrorists from on high via drone strike, but he CAN technically hide behind that fig leaf.    What were the Libyans going to do, attack our embassy, kill our ambassador?
    Not to cover for these bastards, but isn’t it Dempsy’s job to follow orders that aren’t specifically illegal?

    • I’m sorry, Looker, but Dempsey is a disgrace. You can always resign if you strongly disagree, you know.

      • No one does that anymore. My best, most logical lefty friend told me Colin Powell really didn’t believe the Iraq intel, but still sold it.
        Seriously, I want to say he’s crazy, but here we go again.

        • “No one does that anymore.” WTF, over? The greenest O-1 knows that he or she has a absolute moral duty to do everything possible to ensure the safety of those servicemembers entrusted to his or her care, within the reasonable limits of the mission. “Just following orders” hasn’t worked as an excuse since the war crimes trials at Neurenburg after WW II. If one doesn’t have the physican and moral courage to follow through with doing what’s right, then they have no business taking their oath and pinning on their shiney gold bars. Resigning one’s commission is exactly what is expected of an officer who is being ordered to do what they know to bemorally and/or legally wrong if there is no other forum to redress your grievances.
          In the case of our personnel in Benghazi, the attack started at 04:05 Wash, DC time, and a mass email was sent from the consulate to the highest levels of our government, including the White House, at 06:06 Wash, DC time – just 2:02 later! The battle raged for 5 more hours. That was five hours that were available for the US to launch a coordinated response. It has already been established that their were AC-130 gunships available in nearby Sardinia and F-18′s available from the USS Stennis carrier group, which was laying off the coast of Libya. This isn’t even taking into account the presence of (possibly armed) drones in the airspace over the battle.
          As for invading foreign airspace, the US routinely sends drones packing Hellfire missles over Packistan and Yemen, yet Libiya is somhow special? How are we to respond to the staff at the other ebassies and consulates around the world, now that the “Obama & Panetta Doctrine” clearly dictates that we won’t send our forces into harms way, even to rescue our own? In one fell swoop, Obama not only abandoned several US government personnel, but he did more than any other president to immasculate the entire US military. The worst part about it all is that the president’s incompetence is well known, yet he is getting away with their deaths scott free without any serious media scrutiny. Where’s Bob Woodward when there’s a real scandal? Remember that nobody died in the Watergate fiasco!

      • I stuck a disgrace label on him after he made the phone call to the film maker.
        That being the case, I didn’t expect him to say anything about this, or resign, because I don’t think he’s that kind of officer or gentleman.

        He’s probably a perfect general for an Obama presidency.  I hope he finds himself unemployed and retired, very very very soon.

         

  • There are lies on lies on lies here.
    As to Dempsey, if you sit in silence…knowing your full dress uniform is window dressing…when Penetta is telling a flat-footed lie you are complicit in that lie.
    AND you have utterly disgraced that uniform.

  • Again, let’s say they had their reasons for not sending teams in.
    You still have the problem of not providing enough protection.
    You still have the problem of blaming a video.
    This scandal does not go away even if they can give some decent excuses for no intervention.

  • OT: Looking at the state polls and feeling depressed, I started thinking about how the electorate could re-elect Obama?
    The House will not change hands, though the Senate may. So, what’s up with an electorate that says “GOP Congress Good, GOP President Bad.”
    My answer is that maybe the electorate is not re-electing Obama, but instead electing gridlock.
    They may not want a full GOP steamroller, and Obama is their brake.
    I don’t know how they are going to like it when Obama takes us over the fiscal cliff, because he will do that for sure – automatic tax increases and cuts to the military, with no need for pesky negotiations and a ready-made GOP Congress to blame? Its a liberals wet dream. But maybe more free market economic reform is just to scary for a lot of the electorate.
     

    • Buck up, dude!  You have people like Barone calling it BIG for Romney, and everything I sense says that is how it will be.

  • Panetta should never have been approved with all his previous communist sympathies.  He was not properly vetted and is intent on the destruction of our military.
    http://www.aim.org/aim-column/...
    http://www.trevorloudon.com/20...
     

  • When all the cards are counted: Stevens was profoundly inconvenient, because he was talking about the deterioration of the great “liberation” of Libya in diplomatic cables back to the State Department. He was expendable, and he was expended. That is the middle term missing from between the two outer terms: The refusal to send serious protection when Stevens asked for it and State Department security people confirmed the danger and then the denial of aid when the attack was in progress.

    Then don’t forget to add how slowly the FBI was allowed onto the scene. Who was picking the consulate clean of details in the interim?

    • Look for the Russians to show up in the picture at some point.

    • Hell, Martin, AFTER the FBI spent a whole 3 or 4 hours there, reporters were STILL picking up juicy tid-bits off the charred floor of the consulate.
      Color me extremely unimpressed by this “thorough investigation” BS.