The authorities involved in bringing such a speedy end to the Boston Marathon bombings are to be commended. They reviewed the video surveillance tapes and quickly identified the suspects. They went public with the videos and photos and in just a few days time, the manhunt has ended with both suspects accounted for. Now, it’s a near certainty that more members of the ring or cell responsible will be identified in the future and justice for the bombings will be done. Congratulations to all involved.

It makes one wonder why we haven’t seen the same level of scrutiny applied to the Benghazi attacks that killed 4 Americans. It certainly isn’t due to a lack of video evidence to help identify the suspects. The U.S. special mission had surveillance video available and since the perpetrators entered through the front gate they would have been clearly visible. Not to mention the live drone feed the White House situation room was watching as it unfolded.

Does it seem a little strange that in Boston the surveillance videos were released in just a few days yet we still haven’t seen the Benghazi tapes in over 7 months?

In Boston, we had a scenario with many unknowns as the authorities squeezed the dragnet ever tighter around the 2 suspects. Despite having no idea how many I.E.D’s or other unexploded ordinance they were up against, the authorities bravely closed in on their subjects so they would have no chance for escape.

Does it seem a little strange that in Benghazi we were told we lacked the intel necessary to safely respond in a timely fashion and potentially save the lives of the Americans?

In Boston, we now know far more about the 2 suspects than anyone would ever care to know about anybody. In Benghazi, we don’t know the slightest glimmer about any possible suspect. In fact, our illustrious new Secretary of State, John Kerry, has said we need to just move on and get over it.

Secretary of State John Kerry had a message for lawmakers he suggested were harping on the Obama administration’s response to the September 11 raid on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi: let’s move on.

“Let’s get this done with, folks,” Kerry told the House Foreign Affairs Committee in his first appearance before Congress since taking office. “”I do not want to spend the next year coming up here talking about Benghazi.”
Read more:http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2013/04/18/kerry-on-benghazi-lets-move-on/

Could it be that the Obama Administration has much to hide in Benghazi compared to Boston? Gun trafficking would certainly fit that bill. So would the C.I.A. harboring prisoners at the annex. Officially, we’ve only been told that we had no consulate in Benghazi, that instead it was a special mission along with an annex utilized by other agencies. That’s it. No explanation for what anybody was doing there.

Former Sec. of State Clinton testified that she had no knowledge of gun trafficking to Syria via Turkey. She referred Sen. Rand Paul to the “agency that ran the annex”. It was one of those out of body experiences in which everybody in the room including the media and any of the public even remotely educated about Benghazi knew she meant the C.I.A. was running the annex. Yet she couldn’t acknowledge it.

http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/media-ignore-hillarys-bombshell-benghazi-claim/

I came across an article published in the Libya Herald on Oct. 7, 2012 entitled “The US consulate attack:the facts,the questions” written by reporter Chris Stephen. Yes, you read that correctly, the reporters name is Chris Stephen, not the Ambassador Chris Stevens that perished in the attack. Weird, huh?

http://www.libyaherald.com/2012/10/07/the-us-consulate-attack-the-facts-the-questions/

The reporter points out two important items not mentioned in the mainstream media. First is the lack of damage one would expect after such an attack.

The biggest mystery for anyone touring the compound is the absence of battle damage. The buildings are charred, along with three embassy pickup trucks, from arson, but there are few bullet strikes. If the attackers entered before the staff had fled, it seems there was no exchange of fire.

Then I caught this little nugget that I’ve never read anywhere else (and I’ve read a lot on Benghazi).

According to the two landlords, the annex was not, as some reports claim, a Safe House, being neither secure nor secret. It was where most of Benghazi’s US diplomats lived.

That little bombshell flies in the face of the Clinton testimony as to having no knowledge of the annex operations. In fact, our diplomats, including from Clinton’s State Dept., lived at the annex and not the special mission. Clinton has already made the claim that she never saw the cables requesting more security. Would you also believe that she was unaware of what her diplomats were up to? That lie is a bit rich for even her most ardent supporters to swallow.

Now you know why we haven’t had access to the Benghazi survivors. They were a mix of contractors as well as diplomats and staffers from the N.S.A., the C.I.A. and the U.S. State Dept. They have intimate knowledge of the gun trafficking as well as the detainees held at the annex.

I contacted the reporter Chris Stephen to verify his story. He personally conducted interviews on-site with the landlords from both the special mission and the annex. His story was first person, no Google searching and maybe a phone call or e-mail that most stateside reporters have been feeding us.

We’ve already had a significant amount of testimony on Benghazi as Kerry has complained about. The survivors are the only real chance at breaking this story. Getting one of them to sing on the record is a tall, tall order. We may get the off-the-record story someday but that won’t result in convictions or justice for the dead.

Advertisements