Then who was it?
Fox News is reporting that the president has been avoiding questions on the Benghazi raid and recent reports that the White House denied fire support for troops in contact at the consulate which resulted in the deaths of four Americans;
The president said neither yes or no Friday when asked pointedly whether the Americans under attack in Benghazi, Libya, were denied requests for help during the attack.
Fox News has learned from sources on the ground during the Sept. 11 attacks that the CIA chain of command twice told agency operatives to “stand down.”
“The election has nothing to do with the four brave Americans getting killed and us wanting to find out exactly what happened,” the president said first in a TV interview with an NBC affiliate in Colorado.
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,” the president said in a TV interviews with an NBC affiliate in Colorado.
But in the vacuum of non-answers from the President, the White House’s National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor recently told the folks at Yahoo News that “Neither the president nor anyone in the White House denied any requests for assistance in Benghazi” which still doesn’t answer the question. Since the Defense Department and the CIA have both told the media that neither of them denied fire support for the embattled Americans in the consulate, then who was it? It only leaves the State Department without a denial.
Our new buddy, William Kristol at the Weekly Standard claims that only the White House could have made the decision to intercede, so someone isn’t being forthcoming with the American people who are clamoring for answers. COB6, a long-experienced special warfare officer, himself, agrees;
Only two places could have called off the attack at that point; the WH situation command (based on POTUS direction) or AFRICOM commander based on information directly from the target area.
If the AC130 never left Sigonella (as Penetta says) that means that the Predator that was filming the whole thing was armed.
If that SEAL was actively “painting” a target; something was on station to engage! And the decision to stand down goes directly to POTUS!
From the Fox News link;
Obama also said in the TV interview, as he said previously said, the administration is going to “investigate what happened to make sure it never happens again” and find out who was involved in the attack so they can be brought to justice.
Yeah, at this point, I think the only way we’re going to make sure that it doesn’t happen again is to remove everyone who was involved in the decision-making process in this instance come election day. Since the president is so adamant about NOT making this an election issue, it only makes me want to make it MORE of an election day issue. That might be the only way to get any straight answers out of this White House.
There’s a rumor flying around the internet today that General Carter F. Ham, the Africom commander is being fired because he tried to send reinforcements to Benghazi to relieve the defenders of the consulate. While it’s true that his successor has been named (General Rodriguez was announced as replacement on Oct. 18), I’m not sure why Ham is leaving the post, so it appears to be just speculation at this point. Probably another issue that won’t be resolved until we change teams in the White House.
Category: 2012 election, Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Military issues
Mmmm…unless GEN Ham is being considered for another 4 star assignment – this screams fire,fire,fire! GEN Ham has only been in command 19 months…Combatant Command normally 3 yr tour…VADM Charles Leidig is the deputy at AFRICOM, it would be incredible if he relieved GEN Ham for disobeying orders – just rumours for time being.
Both GEN Ham and RADM Gaouette are being relieved of duty. RADM Gaouette, the admiral in command of an aircraft carrier strike group in the Middle East, is being sent back to Bremerton, WA for temporary reassignment pending and investigation of unspecified inappropriate leadership judgment.
Opinion:
General Ham and Rear Admiral Gaouette are being screwed three ways to Sunday for attemptting to do their jobs properly after the White House told them they could not.
(Just my opinion, but I’ve seen this before.)
Here’s the link to the article, also posted elsewhere:
http://www.stripes.com/news/navy/navy-replaces-admiral-leading-mideast-strike-group-1.194780
As a taxpayer, I have questions as to why my employees are being treated like shit.
I wonder if they are going to be kept busy until after the election…
“Then who was it?”
George W. Bush and Dick Cheney
The POTUS voted “Present” on the Benghazi attack. “Present” is neither an affirmative attack order, nor a definitive stand-down order. It is ambiguity. Recall this POTUS actively prosecutes whistleblowers and employees who act counter to his wishes.
As for the Admiral: the Navy regularly replaces its non-USNA commanding officers, and COB/MCPO who’ve angered the Goat Locker. Admiral either had sex during a portcall with a person not his spouse, or sailors were smoking in non smoking designated areas of the ship.
The Navy announcement made my local newspaper:
http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20121027/news/121029894/
Well, if General Ham did tell his highers “F— you” and tried to launch a rescue mission, good on him for doing the right thing.
“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.”
When was that? Two weeks after the fact?? And what exactly is “whatever we need to?” Was that a directive to your political operatives or to actual people who work for our best interests as opposed to yours (or theirs)?
Just curious – what were Directives #2 and #3?
Great, great post at Power Line: BENGHAZI: A READER ASSESSES THE EVIDENCE
An excerpt:
On to Hillary and her claim that Facebook and Twitter postings (2) during the attack don’t constitute “evidence that Ansar al-Shariah (and by association Al Qaeda) was involved.” When I saw that quote, it immediately brought me back to the most iconic photo of the attack.
??
(see post for photo)
When I saw this picture, the thing that instantly struck me was the way the guy was wearing his pants. I started doing some research and came across this (5) — another interview from one of the injured Blue Mountain guards at the consulate:
He himself was hit by grenade shrapnel, and then was shot through the knee when the first wave of attackers came in. He said those he heard speak had local, Benghazi accents, though he added that two men “looked foreign.”
He said some of the attackers wore masks, and many had their trouser legs rolled up – a mark of Salafi, or purist, Muslims and a common feature in members of Ansar al-Sharia.
Does Mrs. Clinton or the CIA have anybody with expertise on Ansar al-Shariah? Between the Facebook and Twitter posts and this picture, the evidence that Ansar al–Shariah was involved should have been clear as day. If I can figure it out, those paid to be “experts” in the Middle East had to know right away who was responsible.
On the Africom website the is a picture of Gen Ham greeting dignitaries on September 24th 2012 so it appears he is still in charge and was not relieved on the night of the 11th.
@DaveO I don’t know where you get off saying something like that, but it is completely out of line. This recall to Bremerton coincides with the recall of General Ham.
Admiral Gaouette was, in fact, Deputy Commander, U.S. Naval Forces, U.S. Central Command, stationed at Naval Station Great Lakes until April this year.
In 2003, he was awarded the Vice Admiral James Bond Stockdale Award for inspirational leadership in recognition of the hard work by the crew of Oldendorf.
Rear Adm. Gaouette assumed command of Carrier Strike Group Three, April 5, 2012.
So DaveO, you’re an asshole.
Okay here is an awesome joke….
President Obama visits the doctor, and says, “Doc….this is embarrassing, but every time I look in the mirror I get sexually aroused”. The doctor gives a noncommittal grunt, and replies, “I’m not surprised, Mr. President, you’re a pussy”.
Someone pointed me in this direction…Ace of Spades.
http://minx.cc/?post=334311
@12. I would have ended it with, ““I’m not surprised, Mr. President, you’re a dick.”
“The president did not give a yes-or-no answer Friday when asked pointedly whether the Americans under attack in Benghazi, Libya, were denied requests for help during the attack.” It’s Clinton and Lewinski Part II. It all depends on what the meaning of IS is. Right. obama’s position is that he did not personally know. I believe that PERSONALLY KNOWING to him means something other than what the rest of the English speaking world understands those words, together, to mean. His gam,es have cost the lives of good men and I pray that someone steps up and tells us the truth. They could have ended it all by now. Instead, we have an evasive president, an increasingly quiet H. Clinton, and reporters trying to learn exactly who know what and made which decisions when that cost those lives.
Jason, I knew plenty of Navy officers’ wives who knew their spouses were fooling around when they weren’t home. That’s as common as peas and apples. Hardly warrants a recall after barely five months. This is hogwash. If this recall were about parking the Stennis at ports in Thailand and elsewhere, the whole senior apparatus in the Navy would be planked, for pete’s sake. What am I supposed to do? Take asinine gossip seriously? Really?
There’s more to this than a senior officer fooling around, and you know it.
Note to self: don’t piss off Ex-PH2. Don’t be deceived by her angelic picture in the Members Gallery (http://valorguardians.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/PH2-S-1969-1.jpg) BZ from an Army guy.
The lack of re-inforcements to Our beseiged Diplomats lies squarely on the shoulders of Obama. If he wasn’t informed is immaterial. If he wasn’t informed, it demonstrates a lack of leadership.
Panetta’s statement is pure hogwash. When OUR MEN are in harm’s way, you don’t wait for a poll of political hacks to send in re-inforcements.
General Ham did not have the authority to deny re-inforcements. That was a Presidential decision, period. And I’m pretty sure, in Obama’s first recounting of his words afterwards, (2nd debate), it wasn’t “protect our people,” first.”
Fire the Politician in Chief, and his cast of misfits.
Hardly warrants a recall after barely five months.
Hate to correct ya, PH2, but this ain’t the Navy of old.
Stickin’ to my guns, Sparky, until proven otherwise.
Not to worry, obummer’s fan base will claim this is all just “racist” nitpicking of the president to make him look bad before the election.
Okay, what happens if BO gets uninstalled from office w/ an ongoing investigation in progress? Does President Romney pull a Gerald Ford and pardon Obama if he is indeed found to be cupable of dereliction and obstruction? This could get really interesting…
Too bad if true about GEN Ham. He came up through the ranks, was a 1 star in Mosul when I was there in 2004-5. Hate to see him sacrificed on the political altar.
I am so mad I just want to punch these bureaucrats in the face.
I don’t think Ham’s leaving AFRICOM has anything to do with the Libya fiasco. He was puttering around doing the job for weeks after the attacks, not really the profile of a man coming off an on-the-spot relief of command.
My guess is Panetta was the one who screwed the guys on the ground in Libya and Obama followed his advise to let him “handle it” before heading off to bed. If that was the case, both men’s calls were bad and now they’re probably trying to keep it off the front page long enough for the election to take place; then it’s off to pasture for Panetta. He was rocking the boat on sequestration cuts anyway, something I think Obama is more than happy to pretend to be upset about while sharpening the knives for a defense budget he thinks is too big.
@25: Maybe he was just being the figurehead for those couple of weeks after? Regardless, this clusterf**k falls in the lap of Obama and his administration, period.
OK, I’ll be contrarian here.
If (and it’s a big if) GEN Hamm and/or RADM Gaouette disobeyed or refused to obey lawful orders from the SECDEF or POTUS to hold fast or not intervene, their relief is proper. Such orders, no matter how distasteful, are lawful. The POTUS and SECDEF are authorized to do exactly that. (Whether they are right in giving such an order is a different question entirely.) For the same reason, Truman was right to relieve MacArthur in Korea – whether or not MacArthur was right in what he proposed to do militarily.
However, in this case refusing or disobeying such orders is also worth it, even with consequent end of career. Those gentlemen will be able to look at themselves in the mirror for the rest of their life.
And it’s also worth going public with the details – both for payback, and to set the record straight.
This is a link to an AP story on the net this morning:
http://news.msn.com/us/witnesses-recount-organized-benghazi-attack
In it, the reporter says, specifically, that the White House has given out muddled messages since the attacks.
Should the incumdent not win re-election, the way is cleared for an investigation, the kind that got Nixon impeached and fired. Shoulld the incumbent WIN re-election, he can be impeached and removed from office.
This is an election year for the House of Representatives. I’m getting lots of junk mail from democrats saying that all their opponents are bad people and should be removed from office. In view of the bad people in the White House, I’m ignoring the propaganda.
It’s time for PRAVDA. Whatever happens, should the incumbent win re-election, he will not last long. I foresee a brief second term, maybe less than 18 months for him.
And, Hondo, you’re right — Truman was right to relieve MacArthur, considering that MacArthur wanted to use another bomb, this time on the North Koreans and Truman didn’t want that.
But from the distance of 60 years later and the subsequent changes in the world over the last 10 years, do you still think Truman made the right choice? Or should he have given MacArthur the go-ahead to maybe carpet bomb North Korea and still withhold the A-bomb? I know Truman did that because MacArthur went public with his opinion, which was inappropriate on his part, but if MacArthur had not done so, how do you think it might have ended?
Ok, leaving the heavily biased Fox News out of this since I wouldn’t put it past them to make up a “source” to smear the POTUS’ image just before an election, there are still a ton of inconsistencies with the crap the WH is feeding us. Based on my experience, which was not a tier 1 job (I was just 11B…no V or 18 series), there is no way you will ever convince me that a couple of the best trained warriors on the planet were engaged with a numerically superior force for somewhere between 4-7 hours and that they did not call for support of some kind (fire mission, air strike, evac, etc.). Of course this is about the election ad there is a good reason you’re not making it public until after TE election because the information would, very likely, damage your political career. To go 3rd grade here…”Mr. President, liar liar pants on fire.”
Someone asked where General Petraeus is. I found this article this morning. I don’t know how reliable the source is, but I’m posting it.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/playing-the-petraeus-card/article/2511908
I’m sure that more stuff will come up.
Also, GEN Patreaus retired in 2011 and went to the CIA, hence my linking to the article in my previous post in which he refutes the claim that the CIA failed to offer any help to the Benghaza people.
Here’s the ‘retirement’ announcement link.
http://www.examiner.com/article/general-petraeus-biography-implies-obama-not-fit-for-command
I’d love to have a sit-down chat with McChrystal and Petraeus both. If you think that fecal matter wouldn’t splatter around the room …. 🙂
Was it Augustus or Tiberius who started the ‘bread and circuses’ in Rome, to keep the citizens appeased?
Ex-PH2: according to Gen. Curtis LeMay, we DID effectively do that to North Korea (and much of South Korea) during the Korean War. LeMay’s quote describing the outcome of the bombing campaign in Korea can be found here, in the “Epilogue” section:
http://www.japanfocus.org/-mark-selden/2414
The quote is accurate; I’ve read it in another source as well (one of Richard Rhodes’ books on the development of nuclear and thermonuclear weapons, The Making of the Atomic Bomb and Dark Sun).
Regarding Truman and MacArthur: yes, I do think Truman made the correct call. Both Korea and Vietnam were limited wars and showed the possible costs of engaging in a protracted, large-scale war on the Asian Mainland. Both Korea and Vietnam were probably 1/10th of what we could have expected in a general war with China at that time. We as a nation were not willing to do that. Given Soviet support for China, the casualties and other costs involved could easily have approached those for World War II. The Japanese found that out the hard way when they invaded China from 1932-1945. It would not have been in the US strategic interest to repeat their mistakes and bleed ourselved dry during the height of the Cold War.
Frankly, I’m still trying to figure out precisely what US national interests were protected by our intervention in Vietnam other than US national prestige. (“Making the world safe for democracy” is not a US national interest; it’s a nebulous political platitude.) And it was the US, not the North Vietnamese, that made upholding US national prestige a rationale for our involvement in Vietnam.
This whole thing about wondering who made the call to stand down isn’t that hard to understand. It came from the top, which means it came from Obama, period. Obama is good at throwing people under the bus for his own very long list of shortcomings and this is no different for him, however, it is different for the American people, who aren’t letting him off the hook so easily this time. He can fire everyone below him, but the blood is most assuredly going to still be on his hands and he can’t wash it off with me, or many other Americans. Others, within the chain aren’t letting him off that easy, either, by letting everyone know they received orders from higher and as CIA Director, that means those orders came from Obama.
Well, you know what they, guys. Shit floats.
Agreed, Old Trooper. The order either came from the POTUS himself or he abrogated his responsibilities as CINC by passing it to someone else. The former IMO shows unforgivably bad judgement. The latter IMO shows unforgivable irresponsibility and incompetence.
The order to stand down was lawful. But that was an abominably bad decision. It hung US personnel and supporters “out to dry” unnecessarily. And doing so also made us look weak, irresolute, and ineffective to the entire world.
The only way I’d accept any justification whatsoever for doing nothing is if we had no suitable forces available that could react within 4 hours. And if that’s the case, I have a simple and pointed question for the SECDEF and POTUS: why didn’t we? That too IMO shows abject incompetence.
@37: Yeppers
Bottom line…it might have been legal but it sure as hell wasn’t right.
During 1962 Cuban missile crisis, SAC commander Gen Thomas S. Power was ordered to to go to DEFCON 2, but also on his own initiative/without authorization communicated alert status in the clear…inspiration for Gen Ripper in movie “Dr. Strangelove”. Gen Power I don’t believe was ever disciplined, his mentor the legendary Gen Curtis Lemay as CSAF probably was instrumental in protecting him.
PH2 I wasn’t agreeing with it I was just saying the theory was out there….
Jason — OK, I misunderstood. Sorry. I thought you were turning into a ‘gossip girl’ or something. My dander was up, and you got bit by it. Sorry.
I know you still loves me… 🙂
I posted a link above to an article about General Patraeus’s response to the criticism that the CIA denied help to the Benghazi people. The original source for this, as I found by digging further, is Jake Tapper, who has a column on ABC’s website. The ABC ‘tude toward Bo seems to be reversing itself a bit. It’s worth a look.
Virtual media blackout on Benghazi during Sunday morning talk shows. Fox News Sunday is only one getting into the weeds… Chris Wallace raised a very interesting point when pushing for an answer from Senator Tom Udall (D) , regarding whether or not the drones that flew over the compound during the Benghazi Massacre were in fact armed. Senator Udall refused to answer that question raising the now very real possibility that help flew directly over the heads…
Virtual media blackout on Benghazi during Sunday morning talk shows. Fox News Sunday is only one getting into the weeds…
And this is exactly the reason why liberals and other ignoramuses complain about Fox News Channel being “biased”… FNC actually reports on the news that liberals/Democrats do not want reported.
FNC doesn’t come up with fake documents to try to take down a sitting President in the middle of a Presidential election like CBS. FNC doesn’t doctor photos of a war zone to smear Israel and promote terrorist propaganda like the Associated Press did.
Nope, FNC simply reports on the news that the mass media wants to suppress and because of that the Left whines they are “biased”. Yeah, biased to get ALL the facts out to the public so they can make up their own minds. Imagine that.
#11 PH2: Yes, I am. Considering the Admiral is the 19th CO relieved this year, while during a deployment to a part of the world that has gotten very hot, I imagine it was just a simple recall to claim another leadership award.
So: did he abuse his trust, his subordinates, the money and equipment, or is he politically unreliable should the PLAN get feisty?
And don’t bother with the fuck-yous or what side of the line I’m on – the Admiral is still stateside and land-bound.
@DaveO, OK, I’ll retract the ‘asshole’ epithet.
To answer your question: It’s my considered opinion, based on other recalls of other senior level officers, ocurring at the same time and from the same general area, that he’s considered politically unreliable, because he has leadership skills (meaning, thinks for himself, is liked by his subordinates, and possibly has some common sense, too) and is therefore liable to question an order he doesn’t agree with.
Jason, of course I loves you, bunny. Just don’t pick on my Navy.
RADM Gaouette was recalled for was is termed “inappropriate judgment”, not for inappropriate behavior.
Inappropriate judgment does not necessarily mean boinking the local boomboomgirls or selling Navy equipment over the side, does it? No. It doesn’t.
The timing, which coincides with the early recall of GEN Ham, may mean he got a ‘stand down’ order and said “hell, no”. Considering how slimy this entire episode is becoming, I will speculate that both the admiral and GEN Ham said “hell, no” to a ‘stand down’ from the WH.
“Since the Defense Department and the CIA have both told the media that neither of them denied fire support for the embattled Americans in the consulate, then who was it?”
I figured it out. It was Bigfoot. It was. I saw him.