An e-book has been making the rounds called Benghazi:The Definitive Report offering itself as the truth behind the Benghazi attacks. As with anything released concerning Benghazi, I am skeptical. For starters, no one will deny that the authors are trying to sell us something which raises concerns about their intentions. If someone has definitive, sourced proof of what is being covered up in Benghazi, selling it isn’t the way to go about it. Not when American lives were lost.
Next, we can look to a website run by the authors for some insight. There we find that the authors are not in the service now, nor are they writing about anything that happened while they served. In other words, they are freelance journalists without official sources they can name. Doesn’t mean there information is wrong, only that it must be taken in context.
Full disclosure. I haven’t read their book, only the snippets available on the web. Sure, the book is only $2.99. However, for me, it’s the principle. They can’t provide sources as their definitive proof, so it’s just another web source of opinion to me.
The reason I am suspect is the attempt to clear the CIA and the State Dept. of any connection to Benghazi. The authors contend that Petraeus and Stevens were both simply in the dark as to what the covert ops being run by Brennan were.
H/T to Right Scoop for posting a portion of their interview with Sean Hannity. This quote is from the interview.
Now the problem was [Ambassador] Chris Stevens and the CIA did not know about that program, about those operations. So they had no ability, they had no situational awareness to go ahead and raise their security posture. They could not have anticipated that there would have been blowback from these operations because they had no idea they were happening.
No ability to raise their security posture? The cables don’t support that as a long trail of security requests were denied.
Could not have anticipated? You mean the long list of security incidents in Benghazi including the dry run attack from June 6th played no role?
I’ve seen nothing to explain why Stevens met with the Turk diplomat that night if he wasn’t involved in the weapons transfers to Syria via Turkey. I’ve seen nothing to explain what the purpose of the “special mission” was. I’ve seen no explanation for the Obama call to Netanyahu during the attacks. I’ve seen nothing to explain the identities and whereabouts of the missing survivors. And on and on.
The Hannity interview claims that Brennan and Stevens were butting heads about ongoing ops, yet it is also claimed that Stevens was in the dark. Just common sense to ask which is it, did he know or not know?
I don’t claim to know if these authors have some agenda afoot. I don’t know them or anything about them. I just know that their definitive report is not answering many key questions and raises some contentions that just don’t add up. Is this yet another disinformation campaign conducted by either the CIA or State Dept. or both to get the focus off their involvement? That to me is just as plausible as a definitive report that is nothing of the sort.
Benghazi has been a story of cover-ups and lies from the get-go so any opine being offered as the truth is sure to receive great scrutiny. If the authors are legit, let’s hope they continue on and uncover something irrefutable.
So buy the book if you wish. This is capitalism after all. I’ve simply not seen enough to pique my interest. I’ve only touched on a few unanswered questions here. The quest for the truth goes on.