News about the facts being discovered by the investigations of the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya continues to unfold. What the recent Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearings made apparent is that the Obama administration was lying to the American public. Obama blamed the incident on an anti-Islamic film probably because such a film actually did incite a violent riot in Egypt. Nevertheless, the terrorist attack was was planned military style attack. It was most likely motivated both by revenge against our government’s military intervention in toppling the Gaddafi as noted by Congressman Kucinich and in-sync with the memory of the successful attack by Islamic terrorists against America on 9/11 as Congresswoman Adams made evident. At the same time, the successful terrorist attack in Benghazi was made possible by a minimization of the real threat posed by Islamic terrorists by the Obama administration in general and the real escalating violence and threats in Benghazi as emphasized by Congressman Rohrbacher. This was an issue repeatedly explored by various members of the Oversight Committee and confirmed by witnesses who were directly involved in security of the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. In fact, Lt. Colonel Woods and Mr. Nordstrom, who was head of security in Libya prior to the attack, both affirmed that they had requested more armed military units to meet previous levels security personnel but their requests were ignored or denied by the Department of State.
As you will hear in the following video, Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinish discusses the illegality of the Obama’s intervention in Libya and how it has created animus of Libyans against America. He makes it evident that neither the current Libyan government or Obama’s administration know which terrorist groups possesses the thousand of weapons and missles missing from Liyba’s arsenal. Thus, demonstrating the severity of the threat in Benghazi.
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TnoYMMVrJ0&w=500&h=375]
As previously mentioned, an underlying problem contributing the successful terrorist attack on our consulate in Benghazi is Obama administration’s mindset. It is a mindset that minimizes the threat of Islamic radicalism. This mindset towards Islam makes America appear weak and thus has made our embassies more vulnerable. This is brought out clearly by Congressman Rohrbacher in the next video.
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGV1e8ab3nI&w=500&h=375]
Congresswoman Adams has experience in law enforcement, Her questioning not not focused on those concerns common to law enforcement concerning terrorism, but it further demonstrated the disregard for those same issues by the State Department’s head of embassy security, which is detailed in the next video.
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-qC1Ay2aME&w=500&h=375]
Congressman Jim Cooper read a list of American military and embassy personnel who were killed by terrorist attacks. The provide important perspective no both the real threat to our Ambassadors, their staffs, and our military. By implication, it affirms Congressman Kucinich’s position that much of U.S. military interventionism produces anti-American violence.
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYzc4O2CAWQ&hl=en_US&w=500&h=277]
The only real difference between Central American terrorists and Islamic terrorists is ideological justification and concomitant financial support. Nicaraguans and other Central Americans have experience the violent and degrading interventionism of the American government as have the Libyans and others. Central Americans have no religion or other pervasive worldview that has historically justified killing others, but Muslim do. Because Central Americans do not, they have no financial backers make it possible for armed attacks or war against the American government i.e., ambassadors, embassy employees, military personnel, etc. Muslim, however, do have such backing as Al-Qaeda and all other Islamic Jihadists do.
Obama and the Benghazi Debacle
by Daniel Downs
The Obama administration’s poor judgment concerning both the nature of the Benghazi attack and security of our Consulates in Liyba is old news. From President Obama to Susan Rice, Americans were misled into believing the Benghazi attack was a mob action. It was determined earlier in the investigations that security personnel wanted more security personnel to address the increasing threat of Al-Qaida’s presence.
In his second debate, President Obama said he did call the attack on the Benghazi embassy an act of terror. Some commmentators claim he did say it was a terrorist attack, while others claim he did not. Those who deny the Obama’s claim do so because they did read the transcript of his Rose Garden speech on September 12, 2012. The President mentioned terrorist in the context of the attack of September 11, 2001, the sacrifice of American soldiers in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars that proceeded in response to 9/11, and finally those who died in Benghazi.
In other words, his statement was vague concerning the nature of the Benghazi attack.
If President Obama actually knew or wanted Americans to know the attack was another act of terrorism against America, he would have continued to state that fact while being interviewed by David Letterman on September 18, 2012. However, he blamed the attack on extremists angered by anti-Mohammad video made by an American of questionable character. Obama did use the term terrorist but only in the context of all other attacks against American Consulates around the world that were a result of the film.
In an Foreign Policy article published on October 16, 2012, Christopher Stephen raise questions about the veracity of both a military style terroristattack and spontaneous mob violence. Locals consistenly claim seeing a group of 12 armed men. The gates to the embasssy were not breached, but there were 2 bullet holes in the front gate and 22 in the back gate. There were only two bullet holes anywhere in the compound. The only mortar penetrated the main building above the door. According to Stephens, the 3 embassy personnel who died were shot while escaping the compound and Ambassor Steven’s appears to have died of smoke inhilation as a result of the mortar.
As also noted during the Congressional Committee for Government Oversight and Reform hearings, Stephen’s article confirms the lack of any adequate security that could have prevented an attack.
It must be concluded that the Commander-in-Chief didn’t know the real nature of the attack, he prefers to view Muslim jihadic violence as merely extremism, or he was merely covering up a very embarrasing failure to provide even modest security.
Leave a comment
Posted in commentary, politics
Tagged Benghazi, Election 2012, embassy, foreign policy, jihadists, Libya, Obama administration, terrorism