Thats the kicker though, General Ham of AFRICOM was detained by his second in command because he tried to ignore a "stand down" order from higher ups in DC (POTUS/Joint Chiefs). He was receiving the same real time information the White House was and attempted to spin up a reaction force, based in Italy I believe, that could have been there in 3 hours only to be relieved of his command by General Rodriguez. As for the failure of readiness, thats simply a question Obama needs to answer. Ambassador Stevens repeatedly asked for more security and was denied each time. England had removed their Consulate from the area out of concern for the safety of their citizens. Why did this not raise suspicions about the security of the area? The list goes on and on.Beiruty wrote:Failure of Intelligence and Failure of adequate readiness and response.bauer wrote:Oldgringo wrote:All of these silly petitions will certainly delay any POTUS response to/defense of the Benghazi coverup....if nothing else.
It still amazes me how Benghazi quickly got tossed to the back burner. Im sorry, but if that situation isn't a coverup I'm not really sure what is. Its awfully convient that there is always something new making headlines thus delaying an official response to what happened to Ambassador Stevens and his minimal security detail.
Now all this crap about Generals Petraeus and Allen surfaces a week before Petraeus is to testify about Benghazi.... the smoke screen can be seen from a mile away. Yet, the liberal media will do anything and everything to find "breaking headlines" to distract the American people from seeking the truth about Benghazi. In the end, liberals will chalk up Obama's miscues and despicable actions (or lack of action) Sept 11 to it being Bush/Cheney's fault.