Article Co-Written by Craig Andresen and Diane Sori
After the attacks in Benghazi many questions remained that needed answers even after the Johnny-come-lately FBI investigation said all had
been answered, and those who wanted to protect the Obama regime by refusing to answer them was in full operational mode. The Rose Garden speech blaming the video…Obama jetting off to Vegas for a fund raiser…Susan Rice spreading the video nonsense on five Sunday shows…Hillary and Obama blaming the video at the memorial service as the caskets of Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods, and Glen Doherty arrived…and more of Obama’s blathering on about the video ruse at the U(seless) N(ations). We do NOT need to go into details with which everyone is already all too familiar. What we must do however, is connect the most disturbing of dots. Let’s begin with the ‘stand down’ orders.
Issuing a ‘stand down’ order does follow a specific chain of command, and the one relating to Benghazi would go like this, in order from top to bottom…President, Secretary of Defense, Secretary’s of the various armed services (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines), Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the various Chiefs of Staff for each military service, the Commanding General for AFRICOM, and the local command structure under AFRICOM.
All in the command chain below Obama have denied giving such an order, including then Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (remember, Dempsey testified that orders were given to assist in Tripoli but NOT to assist in Benghazi but NEVER telling who gave that order but we know it was NOT him). And all the military branch Chiefs have also said they gave NO such order. And while AFRICOM Commander General Carter Ham did give testimony in a closed door hearing before the House Armed Services Committee investigating Benghazi, we still do NOT know his testimony, but know that if he had given such an order it would have been made public for all to hear for it would have cleared Obama, especially important because everything possible is being done to try and distance him from this event, especially after his nonsense about a YouTube video.
But NO such announcement assuming responsibility for that ‘stand down’ order has been made by General Ham so logic would dictate he gave NO such order. And remember, Panetta announced back in October 2012, that General Ham would be retiring for refusing to obey orders NOT to assist the US personnel in Benghazi on that fateful night, and that on Saturday, October 27th, Panetta confirmed that General Ham had indeed been ‘relieved’ of his AFRICOM command.
Now here is something interesting about the official command chain…neither the Vice-President nor the Secretary of State is in that chain. But, the Vice-President and the Secretary of State do have the authority through the President to countermand any one below the President. And while the National Security Council and the Department of Homeland Security Secretary influence military decisions (to some degree) through the National Security Act and through their advisory positions to the President, they do NOT have the authority to issue an actual ‘stand down’ order on their own as that can ONLY be done by those in the direct chain of command.
Yet according to whistleblower Gregory Hicks (the Deputy Chief of Mission in Libya at the time of Benghazi), who when testifying before Congress said that after the first attack a security team left Tripoli for Benghazi with two military personnel, and that four members of a special forces team in Tripoli wanted to go in a second wave but were ordered to ‘stand down’ (but he did NOT know who gave that order).
And remember…
Yesterday, an 85 page “report” said to be “comprehensive” was released by the Senate “Intelligence” Committee regarding the September 11th, 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi.
Well, now…Retired Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has written a book, “Duty” which will be released within days and IN that book, he lets loose on several things but, the one that is raising the most eye brows, is the revelation regarding both Hillary and Obama and their opposition to the 2007 surge in Iraq.
In yesterday’s Weekend Edition, I outlined the desperation of last week’s New York Times attempt to provide cover by reintroducing that lame and false You Tube fabrication for the Benghazi attacks.
Benghazi.
Did anyone but me catch the attempted distraction yesterday?
You can’t win a war trying to win the hearts and minds of the enemy because, in no uncertain terms, our enemies are not imbecilic, touchy feely liberals.