The hot news of the day is the release of the e-mails showing that President Obama lied to America about the Benghazi attack that killed 4 Americans including Ambassador Chris Stevens. That Obama lied is hardly news. That he got caught in such an overt, indisputable manner is. Watergate forever tainted Nixon. The blue dress caught Clinton. But they didn’t have blood on their hands and Obama does. This will likely go down in history as the worst scandal ever in a town filled with scandals. The reason why isn’t the lying and the media complicit cover-up after the attack. It’s the lead up and what happened during the attack that is the key.

What everyone should be talking about is why? Why did we allow the attack to happen? How the administration botched the aftermath for political reasons to keep the ‘Al-Qaeda is no longer a threat’ narrative alive is really just a smokescreen.

Let’s find out why we had a drone overhead filming and didn’t alter our response. Could it be that our folks in the White House situation room were watching just as they were during the Bin Laden killing? Of course they were, in real-time to boot. Leads one to believe they were admiring their handiwork. Perhaps not optimal really means it didn’t go down exactly as planned.

Let’s find out why we had fighter jets and AC-130 gunships stationed nearby and never scrambled them. The AC-130’s would have put a quick end to the opposition. You can read about their capabilities here – http://usmilitary.about.com/od/afweapons/a/ac130.htm. We also had quick response teams that could have had boots on the ground via Blackhawk choppers within an hour. Yet the entire drama unfolded over 7 to 8 hours with the last deaths in the last couple of hours.

Let’s find out why the U.S. was gunrunning and supplied the Libyan rebels. Could it be that we supplied the arms used to kill our own people?

Let’s find out why there were in excess of 200 security incidents in Libya in the prior year with 48 at Benghazi and an apparent dry-run attack on June 6th, yet additional security requests were denied. The claim of budgetary restraints has already been debunked.

Let’s find out why the SST members as well as the Libyan February 17th Brigade were over at the CIA compound instead of protecting the consulate. Could it be they were purposely out of the area at the time of the attack?

Add it up. We supplied the arms. We had more than ample warning including a dry run at this very location. We had drones in the sky watching, support aircraft nearby unused, security forces relocated out of the consulate. We denied additional security requests. We ignored critical intel within 48 hours of the attack and intel briefings all the way back to Sept. 4th. To top it all off, it happened on 9/11. Then Obama flies off to Vegas and the video cover-up is hatched.

There are real questions that need answered. The Romney camp is entirely focused on getting Obama to admit that Al-Qaeda is still strong, that terrorism is still a threat, that getting Bin-Laden didn’t result in defeating Al-Qaeda and that he lied about the whole situation. That’s fine, it’s good stuff for the campaign and could very well result in the final nail in the coffin of the Obama re-election campaign.

The fact is that clear thinking people already know it was terrorism, Al-Qaeda is still effective and that Obama lied about the whole thing. What they don’t know is why the attack was allowed to happen. Or worse, that the White House allowed it to happen. Or beyond that, that they were complicit.

Obama has blood on his hands. Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans were allowed to die. The evidence is overwhelming. The best possible answer would be complete and utter incompetence by the Obama administration. Look at the whole picture and that doesn’t appear to be the case.

Advertisements

8 thoughts on “The Obama legacy is now complete – blood stained hands in Benghazi

  1. Questions and more questions. It does seem clear that someone decided that Stevens and the others were expendable. But, who and why? Doesn’t it semm illogical that this would have been approved by Obama before the elections? He has put a lot of other things off until after the elections. Or, is he so arrogant as to believe he couuld hide behind that stupid video story? If so, what is gained and who gains from this act? Is it possible that someone inside the CIA or the Pentagon was willing to sacrifice a few lives to see that Obama wasn’t reelected? Is it part of the big boy international chess game that for some reason couldn’t be put off?

    Until the media finally kicks the kool-aid habit, I’m not sure we will ever know the “who”, “what”, and “why”.

    Thanks, my friend, for putting this on the table.

  2. Some say it was Stevens for Qaddafi. Or maybe just that Stevens got bit by the snakepit he operated in and helped to enable. As you said, we’ll likely never know for sure. But we do know we allowed it to happen and that goes all the way to the top. You could even speculate that they allowed it to go forward to a point so Obama could have his pre-election surprise by collaring the bad guys but it went bad and became not optimal. Yet, we have all this evidence that shows they elected to not respond so that makes no sense.

    The only gain would seem to be Hamas or some contingent of the Muslim brotherhood that sought retaliation. Or is it just our military-industrial complex needing another reason for conflict?

    Obama has no more debates and no more press conferences before the election so he’s free and clear unless the media does the unthinkable and vets this story.

  3. Very troubling information. It especially worries me that we had the capability and the opportunity to stop this attack, but refused to do so. I’m not sure what the reason is for that, but I am sure there has to be a reason it was allowed to proceed. It’s doubtful we will ever know the full story, unless someone spills the beans to an investigator or the media.

  4. It’s in no way on the scale of 9/11, but there are some similarities. We had lots of intel we ignored or failed to connect the dots, we didn’t respond which allowed the Pentagon and PA tragedies. There are others to compare as well. Why the pattern? I hate to believe my own theory on these types of things. It’s as if we subscribe to the Rahm Emanuel never waste a good crisis thinking. We seem to allow these things to happen despite prior knowledge and then implement some agenda item that we needed an excuse for. Otherwise we’re left with the idea that we are simply incompetent.

Comments are now closed.