Posted on 11/03/2012 10:02:40 AM PDT by mgist
As details emerge of serious security issues before the attack on Sept. 11, Fox News is also beginning to hear more frustration from sources both on the ground in Benghazi and in the U.S. Multiple British and American sources insist there were other capabilities in the region and are mystified why none were used. Fox News was told there were not only armed drones that monitor Libyan chemical weapon sites in the area, but also F-18's, AC-130 aircraft and even helicopters that could have been dispatched in a timely fashion.
British intelligence sources said that unarmed drones routinely flew over Benghazi every night in flight patterns and that armed drones which fly over chemical sites, some a short flight from Benghazi, "were always said to be on call." American sources confirmed this and questioned "why was a drone armed only with a camera dispatched?"
Another source added, "Why would they put a ragtag team together in Tripoli as first responders? This is not even what they do for a living. We had a first responder air base in Italy almost the same distance away." Despite the team arriving from Tripoli that night, sources said sufficient American back-up never came.
British sources on the ground in Benghazi said they are extremely frustrated by the attack and are still wondering why they weren't called for help. “We have more people on the ground here than the Americans and I just don't know why we didn't get the call?" one said.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
When the facts are allowed to come out Lameduck Obama is not only going to leave office, he is going to leave in disgrace.
We need Mossad, British special forces, anti NATO, or any other source on the ground in Libya to help us sort this out before the election. There is no faith in Washington to resolve this. Our military (heroes) are loyal and will jeopardize their careers by talking. ANY source(s) who talk on or after Nov. 7th should be considered cowards.
The evidence is probably LONG GONE
There was a reason the Obama Administration wouldn’t let the FBI go to Benghazi after this mess...
There’s also a reason google searches of the term “ General Petraeus’ made earlier today linked him with Romney. That’s changed... in the last hour or so...
Sorry, the whole kidnapping scenario makes no sense. Letting your ambassador be kidnapped - weak. The President of the US begging a bunch of guerillas for the ambassador’s release - weak. Releasing the blind terrorist for the ambassador - weak, weak, weak.
What would actually have made Obama look good is backing up the two SEALs who raced to the rescue and giving them a hero’s welcome home - basking in their glory, lapped in the mantle of their courage and victory.
IMO, Obama just cared more about not making the Libyan government that he installed look weak, than he did about saving the lives of Americans - and not just any Americans but the Ambassador and his staff and the brave, brave men who defended them.
He wasn’t going to beg for his release, he was going to trade the blind sheik (9/11 organizer) for the ambasador. Play the hero and have an excuse to release the blind sheik. obama had already been in discussions to release him, when too many people started complaining.
This came out soon after 9/11. So far nothing contradicts this theory, and since we dont know the truth. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-jrEc7bTy4E
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.