Panetta: President Never Called Me Night Ambassador Was Slain

Thursday, 07 Feb 2013 03:57 PM

By Todd Beamon

Share:

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told senators on Thursday that President Barack Obama was absent the night U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed in Libya on last Sept. 11.

Under questioning by Republican Sen. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, at a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Panetta said that he had met with Obama at a pre-scheduled meeting at 5 p.m.,

The meeting was a pre-scheduled 30-minute session, Panetta testified. He testified that he and Obama spent about 20 minutes discussing the American embassy that was surrounded in Egypt and the situation that was just unfolding in Benghazi.

But, otherwise, Obama left operational details, including knowledge of what resources were available to help the Americans under attack in Benghazi, “up to us” — meaning Panetta and Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, The Standard reports.

When Ayotte asked whether Obama had called to check on the status of events in Benghazi, Panetta said, “no, but we got information that the ambassador, his life had been lost, it went to the White House.”

The outgoing Defense Secretary said that he did not communicate with anyone at the White House on the night of Sept. 11.

“There was no follow-up from the White House?” Ayotte asked.

“No,” Panetta responded. Obama had never called to check in, he testified.

When Ayotte asked whether the president had checked on what resources were available and how fast could they have been sent to the consulate, Panetta said, “The biggest problem that night was that nobody knew what was going on there.”


© 2013 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

WHAT IS OBAMA HIDING?

Opinion By:
Dwight Kehoe
TPATH

Kidnapping and Trade swap deal gone bad?

October 24, 2012 TPATH -  Late last evening FOX News broke the amazing story that has proven, beyond a doubt, that Obama and his administration knew immediately that the attack on the US Consulate in Libya was being done by armed and organized terrorists. 

The cable TV shows, thus far, are abuzz with this news but, they are asking the wrong questions.  The speculation is, that they fabricated and lied to  obscure the erroneous declarations of Obama relating to Al Qead's decimation and degradation. Ladies and gentlemen, not a chance.

Here is what we now know:
1. Just two hours into the attack on the consulate Obama and the State Department knew it was under a military style assault.

2. They had real time video being taken by drones.

3. Three brave American heroes fought off the
overwhelmingly superior forces for almost 7 hours before the compound was breached. 

4. Obama never made a move to help them when jets could have been scrambled and been there in in time to possibly scare off the attackers with a strafing run.

5. For five hours after the White House was informed, those men battled to hold the compound while Obama, reportedly went to bed.

6. Earlier in that day, the Ambassador sent emails warning of the impending danger and the White House did nothing to bring assets in to help.

So the question that needs to be asked is, why.  Why would the President allow a 7 hour siege to take place without lifting a finger to help?

Is it possible Obama knew this attack was going to take place and in fact was in cahoots with the fanatics?  It appears now that the only security that was supposed to be there were local Libyans and the three American heroes were  there just by chance.

So we are supposed to believe that Obama refused to send more security, refused to try to save the Ambassador, spent time creating a lie about some goofy video, all to cover up the fact that Al Qeada is still a threat?

There has to be more to it than that. No one, not even Obama would let 4 Americans be slaughtered and burned to death for something so trivial.

So what was it?  Until the State Department comes clean, we are left with the only option and that is to speculate.

So speculate we will.  Suppose Obama had made a deal with, oh let's say a Muslim Brotherhood leader of a Middle East country to allow our Ambassador to be kidnapped and then traded for the Blind Shiek?  Obama could be seen as a hero for getting back the Ambassador and we would be told the Sheik would be imprisoned in that country where he was transferred to.

A nice little boost in the polls just before the election.

Would that not explain why Obama did nothing for 7 hours?  The hired Libyan guards were supposed to flee their post and let the Ambassador be taken?

But three American patriots were there and gave their lives in defense of their country.

Make no mistake, the italicized paragraphs above are just speculation. But until we get one from the White House that makes more sense than hiding the viability of Al Qeada, this and other speculation will continue.

This may grow into the largest scandal ever perpetrated on the America people.  Congress needs to bring every single administration official in to answer questions until we know why 4 Americans were left to die while the President went to bed.

STATE DEPT. EMAILS SHOW OBAMA LIED ABOUT BENGHAZI TERROR ATTACK

 by Penbrook One

IMPLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY:  Two months after the deadly terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya in which four Americans were slaughtered, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, the American people still have not been told the truth about what happened by the Obama administration.  Now, overwhelming evidence shows the Obama administration knew that terrorists were actively engaged in the attack as it was happening on September 11^th.

By Dan Crosby

Of The Daily Pen

NEW YORK, NY - A series of internal State Department emails reveals that within hours of last month's deadly consulate attack in Libya national security advisors report to Obama staff that Al Qaeda-tied group Ansar al-Sharia had claimed responsibility, according to reports by Fox News.

In spite of the recently publicized emails, the fraudulently ensconced Obama administration perpetuated a misleading narrative that the attacks were not the result of terrorists, but rather caused by an obscure internet video claimed by government officials to be offensive to Islam.

The lie by the Obama administration that the video incited “spontaneous riots” has been exposed after sources in Libya and at the State Department said that there was no riot at the time of the attack.

Despite the fact that the video has since been exposed as a fraud posted months before the attacks, the video’s creator was arrested and detained after charges of a parole violation were filed against him by federal law enforcement officers.

To date, no evidence has since been produced proving the video creator is actually the individual responsible for the video or that he was in violation of any parole conditions.  His identity has been kept secret leading many to believe that he may be a straw-man concocted by the Obama administration as a scape-goat.

As reported by Fox:  “The emails provide some of the most detailed information yet about what officials knew in the initial hours after the attack. And it again raises questions about why U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice, apparently based on intelligence assessments, would claim five days after the attack that it was a "spontaneous" reaction to protests over an anti-Islam film.

Ansar al-Sharia has been declared by the State Department to be an Al Qaeda-affiliated group. A member of the group suspected of participating in the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi has been arrested and is being held in Tunisia.

The emails obtained by Fox News were sent by the State Department to a variety of national security platforms, whose addresses have been redacted, including the White House Situation Room, the Pentagon, the FBI and the Director of National Intelligence.

Fox News was told that an estimated 300 to 400 national security figures received these emails in real time almost as the raid was playing out and concluding. People who received these emails work directly under the nation’s top national security, military and diplomatic officials, Fox News was told.

The timestamps on the emails are all Eastern Time and often include the subheading SBU, which is shorthand for “Sensitive But Unclassified.”

The third email came at 6:07 p.m. ET and was sent to a different email list but still includes the White House Situation Room address and a subject line of “Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack (SBU).”

“Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli," the email reads.

Earlier emails did not go into who might have been responsible for the attack.

The first email indicates that U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and other personnel were “in the compound safe haven.” Officials later discovered that Stevens and three other Americans had died in the attack.

The first email was sent at 4:05 p.m. ET with the subject line: “U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack (SBU).”

“The Regional Security Officer reports the diplomatic mission is under attack," the email reads. "Embassy Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well. Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four COM personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support.

"The operations Center will provide updates as available.”

The second email came at 4:54 p.m. ET, with a subject line: “Update 1: U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi (SBU)"

“Embassy Tripoli reports the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi has stopped and the compound has been cleared. A response team is on site attempting to locate COM personnel.”

The emails on the day of the attack further challenge not only the initial statements made by administration officials like Rice about the strike, but also recent claims that they were only basing those statements on the intelligence they had at the time.

State Department official Patrick Kennedy recently testified to Congress that anyone in Rice's position would have made the same statements about the attack being spontaneous.

However, the newly uncovered emails clearly state the involvement of a militant group whose agenda is to establish an Islamic state in eastern Libya.

Despite this, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney backed up Rice on Sept. 18. He said: "Based on information that we -- our initial information ... we saw no evidence to back up claims by others that this was a preplanned or premeditated attack; that we saw evidence that it was sparked by the reaction to this video." Carney went on to say "that is what we know" based on "concrete evidence, not supposition."