| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Obama Did Not Deny Requests For Help In Benghazi: Aide |
| 2012-10-27 |
| The White House speaks. Does this now drag the press into it? With that kind of denial?? The White House on Saturday flatly denied that President Barack Obama withheld requests for help from the besieged American compound in Benghazi, Libya, as it came under on attack by suspected terrorists on September 11th. "Neither the president nor anyone in the White House denied any requests for assistance in Benghazi," National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor told Yahoo News by email. That's not the same as saying he ordered a response. The statement is a negative: he didn't say no. Did he say yes? Was he put in a position to say yes or no? Fox News Channel reported Friday that American officials in the compound repeatedly asked for military help during the assault but were rebuffed by CIA higher-ups. At a press briefing one day earlier, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, asked why there had not been a quicker, more forceful response to the assault, complained of "Monday-morning quarterbacking." Panetta said he and top military commanders had judged it too dangerous to send troops to the eastern Libyan city without a clearer picture of events on the ground. So, was it Panetta who said no? I'm not sure how the chain-of-command works in a situation like this. 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. "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," Panetta said. General Carter Ham commands the U.S. Africa Command. And the CIA has denied that anyone in its chain of command rejected requests for help from the besieged Americans. But Weekly Standard Editor Bill Kristol, in a post published Friday, doubted Panetta's explanation and said the fault must lie with Obama himself. "Would the secretary of defense make such a decision on his own? No," Kristol wrote. "It would have been a presidential decision." "He's wrong," said Vietor. On Friday, Obama himself forcefully denied deliberately misleading Americans about the attack in Benghazi, which claimed the lives of four Americans including Ambassador Chris Stevens. CORRECTION 3:26 p.m.: An earlier version of this post confused the timing of the Fox News Channel report and Defense Secretary Panetta's remarks. Panetta's remarks came before the Fox report, not afterwards. |
| Posted by:Sherry |
| #27 It does indeed bring back memories of Shugart and Gordon. God bless them! |
| Posted by: Raider 2012-10-27 22:24 |
| #26 SOMEBODY got their blood on his hands...I can hear in a few months O'Bummer blaming Valerie Jarrett, as if she had an ounce of authority... |
| Posted by: Dopey Schwarzeneggar2960 2012-10-27 20:37 |
| #25 Catherine Herridge just ended her interview with Huckabye, by saying, "I just want to honor those four men who gave their lives." Think you will ever hear that any MSM reporter? If so, I've got a bridge..... |
| Posted by: Sherry 2012-10-27 20:17 |
| #24 Yes, quite humbling, the valour of Woods and Doherty, Shugart and Gordon. One cannot help doing the gut-check by silently asking, does that level of courage and valour exist within me, or has it ever? |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2012-10-27 20:13 |
| #23 And the other things I think I know are: 1- Whatever was happening in Washington, Sean Smith manned his post in a burning building until the smoke killed him. 2- Whatever was happening in Washington, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty -- think Shugart and Gordon-- marched to the sounds of the guns. I am reminded of the WWI description of the British Army: Lions Led By Donkeys. |
| Posted by: Matt 2012-10-27 19:57 |
| #22 Maybe Valerie Jarred denied the requests... This. |
| Posted by: Secret Asian Man 2012-10-27 19:52 |
| #21 Roger Roger Raider. Spot on! |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2012-10-27 19:31 |
| #20 Many here have suffered thru the ROE of PID (Positive ID). Nothing would surprise me. Keep in mind, the Champ is the sole arbiter of "Kill or Capture" of very HVT's (High Value Targets) in AFG. Personally, I loath these people and have for some time. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2012-10-27 19:30 |
| #19 Besoeker ... I don't want you to think that I beleive either of the situations I described is a satisfactory answer. They both indicate a lack of direct positive leadership. However, if the system said NOTHING then that would explain why the CIA is saying that they did not give a stand down order, and the White House is saying they didn't give one. Both answers are truthful. In that case ... the response was Nothing. |
| Posted by: Raider 2012-10-27 19:30 |
| #18 Rauder: Saying NOTHING quickly becomes a default answer. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2012-10-27 19:26 |
| #17 Raider, I have no idea what happened other than that four Americans died for their country. Or perhaps more accurately, they died for Obama's re-election. |
| Posted by: Matt 2012-10-27 19:23 |
| #16 OTOH I would not believe the current residents of the White House if they told me my own name. Maybe Valerie Jarred denied the requests... and the President simply 'relayed' the denial. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2012-10-27 19:14 |
| #15 Mentioned my thought in the AC-130u thread, but basically it amounts to I think Obama dithering, waiting until the last moment like alot of things he does, and everything collapsed so fast nobody was able to rush in. All it would take is one of the SEAL's going down then they might just be over-run in a minute or less with advancing numbers. It was incompetence on such a level that it taints anybody by association. Which is why I believe we're still so unclear on this, it's not political but personal ass-saving that's stalling the release of information. |
| Posted by: Charles 2012-10-27 19:06 |
| #14 To Rantburgers ... Are we positively sure that a Stand Down order was issued from the top? That order has to be transmitted ... so it should be easy to confirm its existence at multiple levels in the chain of command. There are two possible situations: 1. A Stand Down order was given. 2. No order was given to Go Ahead with a rescue attempt. These two situations are not the same thing. Be sure about the facts before generating too much angst. |
| Posted by: Raider 2012-10-27 18:57 |
| #13 Paper trail of orders? When asked again, Obama said, “The minute I found out what was going on, I gave three very clear directives -- Number 1, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to.” From Bing West on Greta last night -- "If that order had been given, there would be a paper trail of the JCOS sending out the order." Would those orders be Classified? And from his answer of three things that he rattled off, bet those were the talking points he was gonna use in the debate that Romney denied him using. |
| Posted by: Sherry 2012-10-27 18:27 |
| #12 Saturday: "Neither the president nor anyone in the White House denied any requests for assistance in Benghazi" Monday: "Oh you mean THAT kind of request? Tuesday: "It depends on what the meaning of 'denied' is" Wednesday: "We have a hurricane to attend to" |
| Posted by: European Conservative 2012-10-27 18:04 |
| #11 The problem for champ is that the analysis Matt offers, which is not at all implausible and perhaps the lease harmful, still makes the Administration look like the clowns they are. It will be interesting to see how much traction this gets on the sunday talk shows. They've stifled F&F, but Mr. Woods has been much more eloquent. If the MSM cracks tomorrow, BO has a problem. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2012-10-27 17:49 |
| #10 The question being asked by Tyrone Woods' father is "Who made the decision not to save my son?" And that's a helluva good question that deserves a straightforward and honest answer. According to the NYT several months, Champ has to individually approve each and every dronezap in AfPak. So I don't think it likely that Champ delegated the go/no go decision here to Panetta, Hilly, or anyone else. The best guess I can make from everything I've read is either (a) Champ was too distracted by the election to make any decision or (b) Champ froze. In his effective absence, Jarrett or Panetta stepped in and made a decision based on pure electoral grounds. One thing about this that galls me is: Champ, Panetta, Hilly, the generals, etc. all work for us. But they dole out information about a very public matter like they were French nobility tossing the peasants a crumb. |
| Posted by: Matt 2012-10-27 17:31 |
| #9 The Prez says lots of things--many of them not true. He is what he accuses others of being--a BS-er. That's a new narrative: "The buck doesn't stop in the oval orifice?" |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2012-10-27 17:22 |
| #8 "Neither the president nor anyone in the White House denied any requests for assistance in Benghazi," National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor told Yahoo News by email. An obvious parsing of words. "Assistance" could run the gambit from moral support and encouragement to ..... weapons free! |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2012-10-27 17:19 |
| #7 So they were left to die by the SOD? He got his denial out last, is a loyal Democrat hack, and adds nothing to re-election chances, so he goes under the bus. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2012-10-27 17:14 |
| #6 Nobody is responsible. Good men die ... and it's just a sound bite. |
| Posted by: Raider 2012-10-27 17:08 |
| #5 Notice that everybody says they "didn't deny requests for assistance", but no one says that they approved such a request. This is just more FUD. Did the Obamanation vote present yet again? |
| Posted by: AlanC 2012-10-27 17:07 |
| #4 Yahoo news -- reported this... It's being published. This means the White House knows Fox has released it... they have stepped into the flay, acknowledging. Next, ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN will be reporting that Fox is wrong, cause the President denied it.... but JMHF, but I think with a denial coming from the White House on this, they have got to run come kind of cover to keep it from being a story. |
| Posted by: Sherry 2012-10-27 17:04 |
| #3 So they were left to die by the SOD? |
| Posted by: Shipman 2012-10-27 16:48 |
| #2 The press is not involved. This denial went to a pajama boy, not a journalist. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2012-10-27 16:45 |
| #1 Then who the Hell did? Only the POTUS has that ultimate Authority. |
| Posted by: Deacon Blues 2012-10-27 16:39 |