A forgotten element in the Benghazi scandal: if Obama had said it was a terrorist attack back in September of 2012, he would have had to do something about it.
Now — not just on that one day of September 11, 2012 but for seven months thereafter (!) — the U.S. government has done zero about the murder of four American officials.
Consider the Benghazi scandal from the standpoint of Benghazi — where the militia that murdered the Americans is one of the most powerful forces in the city — and Libya itself. Suppose that from the beginning on September 11, 2012, the U.S. government announced that the U.S. facility was under attack by a militia group linked to al-Qaeda: it would have had to explain why it had hired members of that militia group to guard the facility, a scandal in itself.
We know, 100 percent, that this is true, but it hasn’t become an issue.
Next, there might have been a rescue attempt and a firefight between American forces and that militia group in which casualties would have occurred on both sides. (Note that, as far as we know, the militia took no killed or wounded, meaning that in its own eyes it achieved a total victory at no cost.) At any rate, the United States would then have been in a military conflict with that militia. It would have to demand that the Libyan government take action and cooperate with U.S. efforts to punish it. On one hand, that would have been a headache for the Libyan government; on the other hand, it might have brought welcome aid to suppress a troublesome militia and help in getting control of the anarchy in the country (see below).
Congress would have given full bipartisan support to punishing those found responsible by a quick and conclusive FBI investigation, support including putting forces on the ground in Benghazi.
In practice, U.S. policy is still acting as if it believed the attack was due to a video creating a spontaneous riot and not a terrorist attack!
Note — and this is pivotal — the scandal is not restricted to what happened on September 11, 2012, and the Washington cover-up that followed. It extends to the result of cover-up.
As a result of the cover-up, there has been no effort made to punish those who we know have murdered four Americans.
Think about that point. You cannot punish the terrorists if you haven’t officially deemed them responsible for the attack, and when an Egyptian-American provocateur who is supposedly the real guilty party is in prison already. Meanwhile, Libya is suffering serious problems that are undoing whatever good the Obama administration’s intervention to overthrow the old regime achieved.
Even as the Benghazi scandal is growing in the United States, the situation in Libya is deteriorating further. Ignoring the actual threat of revolutionary Islamist militias and attributing problems to a video, plus the botching of the investigation of the attack due to the cover-up, led to mishandling post-attack U.S. Libya policy. As a result, the terrorists who murdered four Americans are going free and the group that carried out the attack is still enjoying popularity and even playing a role in running Benghazi.
Libya itself was the biggest donor to the Muslim Brotherhood-led, U.S.-handpicked Syrian opposition, and is a source of a massive outflow of arms to terrorists.
In other words, as a result of the policy failure and cover-up, Libya faces a much greater threat of a revolutionary Islamist takeover, anarchy, and even becoming an al-Qaeda base. (Imagine, for comparison, the situation if the U.S. government had denied al-Qaeda involvement in earlier terrorist attacks.)