Is the Benghazi Attack Obama’s Madrid Train Bombings?
Three days later, however, in sworn testimony before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Mathew Olson, the director of the National Counterterrorism Center, testified that “[y]es, they were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy. We are looking at indications that individuals involved in the attack may have had connections to al-Qaeda or al-Qaeda’s affiliates; in particular, al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb.”
Nevertheless, ignoring Olson’s testimony and the mounting evidence that Benghazi constituted a coordinated terrorist attack on an American diplomatic facility, the next day, at the Univision Town Hall, President Obama again raised the specter of a protest over the offensive video being to blame for the murders of Ambassador Stevens and his colleagues:
Well, we’re still doing an investigation, and there are going to be different circumstances in different countries. And so I don’t want to speak to something until we have all the information. What we do know is that the natural protests that arose because of the outrage over the video were used as an excuse by extremists to see if they can also directly harm U.S. interests.
Based on extensive reporting by CNN, the Wall Street Journal, and Fox News, there is not only no longer any doubt that Benghazi was a sophisticated and pre-planned terrorist attack against the United States. Indeed, the Obama administration very likely knew this at a much earlier stage than they have admitted.
In the face of congressional hearings, the State Department asserts that it never concluded the consulate attack in Benghazi arose from protests over the video. When asked about the Obama administration’s initial explanation linking the attacks in Benghazi to protests over the video, a State Department official said, “That was not our conclusion.” The implication being that those talking points had come from the White House.
The Washington Post’s “Fact Checker,” Glenn Kessler, wrote that “[f]or political reasons, it certainly was in the White House’s interests to not portray the attack as a terrorist incident, especially one that took place on the anniversary of the September 11 attacks. Instead the administration kept the focus on what was ultimately a red herring — anger in the Arab world over anti-Muslim video posted on You Tube.” The political reasons for the Obama administration’s portrayal of the attack arise from the fact that Benghazi fundamentally undermines White House claims that “leading from behind” resulted in success in Libya, that extremely conciliatory gestures to the Muslim World would defuse Islamic extremism, that the global war on terror is over and al-Qaeda defeated with the killing of Osama bin Laden, and that the administration had given proper consideration to the safety of American diplomats operating in Libya.
On Monday, in his speech at VMI, Governor Romney gave voice to what Americans already knew to be true:
The attack on our consulate in Benghazi on September 11th, 2012, was likely the work of forces affiliated with those that attacked our homeland on September 11th, 2001. This latest assault cannot be blamed on a reprehensible video insulting Islam, despite the Administration’s attempts to convince us of that for so long. No, as the Administration has finally conceded, these attacks were the deliberate work of terrorists who use violence to impose their dark ideology on others, especially women and girls; who are fighting to control much of the Middle East today; and who seek to wage perpetual war on the West.
Just as Spanish voters figured out in a mere three days between the Madrid bombings and the election (despite their government’s effort to point the finger at ETA) that it was al-Qaeda that was responsible, American voters are determining, as congressional hearings unfold and common-sense analysis takes over, that the Benghazi murders were a coordinated and pre-planned attack on America — not spontaneous mob violence arising from an offensive video as the administration has clinged to for so long.
In less than 30 days, we will know if the Obama administration will pay a price at the polls for its handling of Benghazi and its aftermath, just as the Spanish government did for Madrid.
I think many conservatives are overplaying Libya. In reality, almost no one cares. because it didn’t happen in the US, but a country we shouldn’t even be in.
Beyond that, it’s not at all clear that it is “terrorism”. Unfortunately, that word has lost all meaning, but it should be apply to deliberate attacks on civilian targets. Ambassador Stevens was not really a civilian, from what I’ve read, he could been classified a spy. In war time, those people are far game. Yes, because he was on my side, I’m sorry he’s dead, but it’s clearly not “terrorism”.
And in the constant cry in terrorism, many are overlooking the worldwide protests…those were real, not imaginary. That is the real problem we need to combat, the muslim world constantly getting worked up over what is perceived to be the slightest insult. We need the win the war of cultures, the war on ideals, not the battle against a handful of people.
Are you an Obama paid shill? The US are not in Lybia. They just have an emabassy there like in canada. Are you suggesting to withdraw from Canada?
It just happens that through criminal negligence the ambassador in Lybia was killed, oh and that the Obama administration toppled an old tyrant who had been decades without acting against teh US by an AlQuaeda friendly regime. It would be time you start to pay a bit of attention to foreign policy or one of these days you will awaken to a nuclear mushroom over the nearest city.
rumor has it khadaffi was cramping aq’s style in lybia, much as mubarak was in egypt. all the more reason to dump him. /sarc
Actually, it did happen in the US. Embassies and consulates are recognized under international law as being the soveriegn territory of the nation which establishes that embassy or consulate, not that of the host nation. So not only was the attack in Benghazi a direct attack on the USA, so were the attacks in Cairo, Yemen, etc. If you don’t realize this, believe me when I say that everyone else in the world recognizes this fact, and will see the snivelling apologies issued by BHO at the UN after a series of direct attacks on the USA, which included the kidnapping, rape, torture and murder of the representative of the United States of America as a license to push us around. How will Israel or the European countries respond to American weakness? Will we be able to count on their support for policies which might put them in an exposed position, vis a vis Iran for example, when we have shown such a feckless disregard for an attack on our own soveriegn territory? Will Iran (or Syria, Russia, China, etc.,) have any trepidation at all about aggrssively pushing its agenda in the face of American “concern”? If American leftists whish to stick their collective head in the sand (or whatever other orifice they use) over the calamitous nature of this debacle, and in particular the Obama adminstrations “response” to it, they may be able to delude themselves, but the rest of the world will not be so willing to drink the same kool-aid.
“Yes, because he was on my side, I’m sorry he’s dead, but…”
Ahh, the Copperhead conjunction rears its ugly head once again.
YES.
THAT MEANS THIS POST HAS TWO GREAT ANALOGIES:
(1)AZNAR: HANDLING OF MADRID ATTACK :: OBAMA: HANDLING OF BENGHAZI
(2) TODAY’S LEFT AND THE COPPERHEADS OF THE CIVIL WAR
You are soooo wrong. It did happen in the United States. What are you thinking?
How serious was this incident? That is one question. How seriously the American electorate will take it is another altogether.
The incident demonstrates three things: al Qaeda is as powerful as ever and that the Obama Administration is willing to lie blatantly for political benefit and finally, they are willing to throw Americans who exercise their free speech rights under the bus when it is convenient for them.
Now, if the Administration had been honest and if the Administration were not tirelessly flogging bin Laden’s death as evidence they had defeated al Qaeda, this would be a small matter – middle level bureaucrats at the State Dept misjudged the situation in Benghazi with tragic consequences for the ambassador. No doubt this is how the Democrats want people to see it.
The political consequences will depend on how this event is framed by the Romney campaign.
Assassinations by terrorist groups are usually considered terrorism. But keep regurgitating those lefty blog talking points. I mean after all President Dumbass already said the murder of 4 Americans is just a ‘bump in the road’ and special needs assisstant Stephanie Cuttner said ‘it’s only a big deal because Romney and Ryan keep talking about it’. We already know Obama’s willing to sacrifice anyone and anything to get reelected but apparently he just can’t get his lies straight.
….” In reality, almost no one cares……”That’s an incredibly coarse, crude and despicable phrase to use.
I think the White House has finally admitted that it was terrorism. Remember that Nixon’s resignation was not caused by the break-in but by his cover-up. Americans do not like liars.
Correct. And remember, concerning Watergate: Nixon lied but nobody died. Even Bill Clinton was impeached for lying. No one died in Monica-gate either. Mr. 0 should hope he loses the election. Otherwise he could be impeached.
Bill Clinton was not impeached for “lying.” He was impeached for multiple accounts of obstruction of justice, including perjury and subornation of perjury by bribes and threats.
attacking American soil?
killing an ambassador, not done except by bararians/
if America does not care, I hope it is destroyed.
it should not exist
Jeremy, you would be wrong. We do care and because you support the status quo hurts. Nixon did the same thing and tried to cover it up but the republican leadership went to him and told him to resign or be ready to get impeached. He resigned. I believe the Democratic party if it truly cared about the USA , then they would do the same to Obama. They would confront him and lead the way but they wont as they are nothing but sheep in this instance.
With just minor but important corrects a great statement.
On Monday, in his speech at VMI, Governor Romney gave voice to what not nearly enough Americans already knew to be true:
The attack on our consulate in Benghazi on September 11th, 2012, was likely the work of forces affiliated with those that attacked our homeland on September 11th, 2001. This latest assault cannot be blamed on a
reprehensiblevideoinsultinghelping to expose Islam, despite the Administration’s attempts to convince us of that for so long. No, as the Administration has finally conceded because their lies fell apart, these attacks were the deliberate work of terrorists who use violence to impose their dark ideology, which is Islam, on others, especially women and girls; who are fighting to control much of the Middle East today; and who seek to wage perpetual war on the West.I’ve yet to encounter a compelling explanation as to how we win a war against a tactic.
” StrangernFiction
I’ve yet to encounter a compelling explanation as to how we win a war against a tactic.”
Destroy those who employ that particular tactic. Kamikazes suicide planes were such a tactic. They increased the combat air patrols and put them further out. They had picket destroyers to give early warning of an attack. They attacked the fields the planes were launched from. Eventually they went nuclear.
This is a big issue. The lying is having a big impact on international relations. Who would trust the US now?
Puts paid to the “they love me because I have a Muslim sounding name.”
There are certain actions, and their subsequent reactions, which resonate more than others. And there are so many incidents, of betrayals and lies by the Obama regime, it is hard to pick just one out.
However, the Libyan crisis, plus Fast & Furious are two such egregious examples of malfeasance. When politicians are caught with their pants down – some even literally – they will often lie, doubling down in the process. And it is the willful lying which has caused the public to be up in arms (particularly the independents),by even those who otherwise do not find the regime’s actions objectionable.
Their bodies of lies may end up uprooting their rule, in the same manner in which Anzar deceived his public. It was a bridge too far for the people, hence, they received a socialist in his stead, who is a different disaster in the making.
http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/09/26/unraveling-the-video-the-so-called-triggerfuse-of-libyan-egyptian-islamic-rage-sweeping-the-globe-northeast-intelligence-network-walid-shoebat-too-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/
“Anzar” or even Aznar was never “a sure thing” in the 2004 general elections because he was never a candidate in them. The Popular Party’s candidate, hand-picked by Aznar to succeed him, was the current prime minister, Mariano Rajoy. So the Spanish people didn’t “switch their support away from” Aznar, who had served two full terms and pledged not to seek another, they repudiated his party at the polls. Doesn’t cost extra to get facts right.
Quite right!
Actually Aznar didn’t lie he told to the press excatly what the police was telling him. But the police was feeding him lies. After the elections the police officials who had fed lies to Aznar and destroyed evidence (*) were promoted by the Socialist government
(*) the type of explosives is still and will probably remain foreverunknown so there is nop way to cheack if they vame from the La Rosita mine like in the officil thesis or if they were milita&ry grade explosives and these are not used in minery.
I think the Benghazi attack more closely resembles the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Terror? What terror? It was a simple criminal act that is best handled by our criminal justice system. Eight years later 3000 people died after “justice” was served in 1993.
It’s not the attack that’s the key, it’s where the underwhelming response leads.
Correct. Remember there had been a previous attack that blew a hole in a wall “big enough for 40 men to walk through.” http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jfaLgbAgWl1YtUVDlW-HCQCa-w0A?docId=a065f90d1d52434683c23e29597451d8
Remember that big article in the New York Times telling us about the June 6 attack? No? Come to think of it, neither do I…..
Interesting how the media forgets to mention that Obama has killed thousands with drone strikes and that Obama used the US military to take down Gadhafi (without Congressional approval).
I can’t really understand why the Administration would think that blaming the Libya attack on a spontaneous protest over some weird Youtube video was ever going to solve anything anyway because that story creates all kinds of questions about the lack of security and why the Ambassador wasn’t better protected wherever he might be at any particular point in time. You could have a spontaneous protest outside our diplomatic sites in lots of places, some of them fairly dangerous spots, and it wouldn’t result in the killing of 4 Americans because the need to plan for such protests is already factored into the security equation.
When something bad happens and every version of the story leads to troubling and difficult questions, why not just go with the truth right up front? That way at least you can avoid the suspicion that you tried a cover-up because even the truth isn’t really the truth, that you’re hiding something else. This is how conspiracy theories get born. So what is the Obama administration really hiding from us here?
I think Obama terribly miscalculated his reaction to this incident. If he came out strongly and said there is no doubt that this was a terrorist attack and that we, the nation, will not let it stand until the perpetrators are brought to justice, etc, the nation would have rallied behind him and nothing Romney could have said would have saved the Republican campaign. Whatever inadequacies there are would have been covered/hidden by the media, and the narrative would have continued on a strong president who was standing up for America.
Instead, he is exposed as the blubbering, blundering idiot leftist that he truly is, and all the president’s media men will not be able to put Humpty Dumpty back together again.
The administration’s lies over the Libya incident is to protect the false illusion that Obama’s foreign policy is working. clearly, nothing this administration supports works as designed. Liberals are indeed the masses of incompetence.
The USURPERS Regime cover up of the Benghazi atrocity has nothing whatsoever in common with the Madrid bombing story. The reason that the Regime and the USURPER were so intent on making the ‘You Tube video’ that no one has ever seen the villain of the piece is very simple. To protect the USURPER and his Muslim *ass kissing, Dictator bowing, America apologetic and disparaging Foreign Policy being recognized for what it most clearly is a colossal FAILURE.
That and that alone is the reason for all the LIES, PERJURY,COVER UP and RED HERRINGS.
Gone now is his ‘football spiking’ BS ‘Osama is dead (subtext Al Queda is destroyed) and GM is alive (subtext US taxpayers BOUGHT GM and the USURPER GAVE it to the UNIONS and its in as much trouble now AGAIN as it was before)”. He can’t use it because its been exposed as the NONSENSE it always was and he has NOTHING else to brag about.
The Lame Stream EneMedia, Left Wing moonbats and the USURPERS Regime can’t even bring themselves to admit who it is they are fighting so how the hell can they possibly win or more to the point even know that they have won.
There may be many ‘moderate’ Muslims , it is they who are the misunderstanders of Islam, but what there most certainly is not is a ‘moderate’ Islam. Nor is there a ‘radical ‘ Islam or a ‘fundamentalist’ Islam or an ‘Islamist’ Islam there is just ISLAM.
Get used to it because if the USA continues on the path the USURPER has mapped out for it then you will either be a Muslim or a tribute paying Dhimmie in the not too distant future.
Left Wing moonbats and the USURPERS Regime can’t even bring themselves to admit who it is they are fighting so how the hell can they possibly win or more to the point even know that they have won.
There may be many ‘moderate’ Muslims , it is they who are the misunderstanders of Islam, but what there most certainly is not is a ‘moderate’ Islam. Nor is there a ‘radical ‘ Islam or a ‘fundamentalist’ Islam or an ‘Islamist’ Islam there is just ISLAM.
Get used to it because if the USA continues on the path the USURPER has mapped out for it then you will either be a Muslim or a tribute paying Dhimmie in the not too distant future.
Two reasons Libya matters in the election arena: While there are many Americans who care just that the the US Embassy was attacked and souls lost, there are many, many more Americans that care about being lied to about it. Many Americans could have forgiven Clinton for having sex, but not being lied to about it. Same with Nixon. It is the coverup, stupid! People do not like being lied to because they feel that the liars think those they lie to are too stupid to figure it out. It is the ‘you think we are stupid,’ stupid.
Clinton was re-elected despite his lies. And his impeachment was a slap on the wrist, annotated merely by an apostrophe in his bio, with no other consequences.
Now, he’s the Big Dog again, and I’m reading “you don’t want to get him mad at you”.
I hope that the difference between Clinton and Obama will be that Clinton’s lies were about a personal foible that voters couldn’t see affected his work elsewhere, while Obama’s lies are getting Americans (and Mexicans and Arabs) killed.
I’m just trying to figure out how the Democrats will manage to run Clinton for Prez again after the coming landslide, because he is the *only* Demo currently on the national scene who seems to have any gravitas left. And that includes Hillary.
They’ve already shown that they think we’re stupid and that they have nothing but disdain for us. Remember how when they were forcing Obamacare on us, and every poll showed a majority of Americans against it, Obama and other prominent dems came out and basically just said that we were too stupid to understand it and it was for our own good? I think a lot of the result of 2010 was due to voter rage at the way Obamacare was foisted on an unwilling nation by an elite snob who thought he knew better than the rubes. Romney and Ryan need to hammer non stop on the fact that the president spent the two years his party had to do whatever they wanted on an ideological bill the American people didn’t want when they elected him to fix the economy. Every time he blames the Republicans for blocking him they need to stand up and say that that’s what they were elected to do because of Obamacare.
I think the attack is reasonating well against Obama. That’s why Obama & ilk can’t get their story straight. Now the electorate does not believe him anymore.
Those pictures of the beaten up ambassador being dragged around, not too sure if he was dead at that point, is quite disconcerting & is getting alot of airplay. Just like those Fallujah pictures did in 2003. Bush had time for the 2004 election to recoup & he was reasonably honest about that event. Obama doesn’t have enough time. Everything is blowing up in his face.
Obama lost the momentum for the race!!!
I think the comparison is stretched in that it took place overseas and killed four people while the Madrid bombings killed large numbers right in the capital city of Spain. But the comparison is apt in that the two governments tried to shift blame in a way that reduces their credibility close to an election. I doubt that Benghazi alone will have as big effect on the US elections as the Madrid bombings did becuse they were clearly an effective terrorist operation that got Spanish soldiers withdrawn from Iraq. The Benghazi attack seems to me to be a guerrilla military operation by a terrorist organization. Somehow, I don’t think the terrorist organization – presumably al Qaeda in the Maghreb – set out to get Obama defeated by Romney. If they understood our politics and Obama’s likely response they might not have done it, but I think they hate the West and the US pretty indiscriminately.
In any case, the comparison I would make is with Ft. Hood where the Obama administration refused to recognize the incident as a terrorist attack and spun it as workplace violence. MSNBC stuck to that line for a week even inventing PRE PTSD caused by the mad major merely having counseled combat veterans. This administration has already demonstrated that it is thoroughly postmodern in its belief that its job is to ‘privilege’ the correct narrative and that the truth is a merely optional and unimportant construct. I happened to be in South Florida when Ft Hood went down and clicked from Fox, to CNN, to MSNBC. Fox, got the Muslim angle first from a coworker in Texas, and even Hassan’s shouting Allah hu Akbar from witnesses. CNN after flirting with the workplace violence meme got to work at Walter Reed and uncovered the openly threatening Islamist behavior of the Major that his colleagues warned the Army about. Then they scooped Fox by getting some surveillance footage of the major buying his morning coffee at a convenience store in his white frock on his way to the Mosque. At this stage I think it will hurt Obama at the pools but that the key is Romney continuing to look more presidential as he did in the first debate. He can’t be too bellicose because, as has been pointed out, America is a bit fed up with war right now.
I really like your reference to the Ft. Hood terrorist attack. The fact that our administration refuses to call this reprehensible cowardly attack on American citizens a terrorist attack tells me volumes about their character and ultimate goals. Still, the amazing and unconscionable support of obama by “so called” Americans just leaves me sick…. what has our country become? This is progress?
Stop talking about whether or not it was a terror attack. Stop talking about whether someone lied. This will all be used to start more discussions and muddie the water. The president got his 3 a clock call. Doesn’t matter what time it really was, it was clearly a 3 a clock call. His reaction was: thanks for waking me, I’ll go to Vegas now and raise some money.
i’ve come to the hypothesis that these leftist nuts just aren’t too bright. maybe just stupid?
fast & furious: wanted greater quantities of u.s. guns in mexican cartel hands to promote hitlery and obiwon’s u.n. gun grab treaty; and, still did promote and push the treaty to the senate immediately afterwards. then they deny, lie and finally claim executive privilege when the path started leading to a prez/a.g. again, msm provided cover by not reporting. then promoted the other bad guys to washington, and overseas (out of range). that was just arrogance.
stupidity: blame bush? his few guns actually had tracing tags, and never got lost. obi’s guns didn’t have tracing devices. no need if you just want the gun numbers increase showing up at murder scenes for political ends. how dumb is that? used stimulus funds to purchase them too. shovel ready? only for the dead.
true the vote: racist, making people have an i.d. hurts their ability to vote!
that’s beyond stupidity, in our computerized society where everybody knows you need and i.d. just to survive. is that the best they could come up with? and who gets helped to vote by not having i.d’s? illegal aliens. dead people. multiple voters. only stupid people wouldn’t see that. again the msm is right there with the stupidity coverup.
libya: lie about it, then lie some more, and finally lie about the lie. see what i mean? if stupidity had and address of late, wouldn’t it be along pennsylvania ave.?
i could go on and on with this hypothesis.
gulf oil crisis: finally arrives months late (playing golf)?
proper credentials for high office: presents a computer generated 1961 document? obviously forged selective service document? fruadulent ss#? and nobody in power questions any of it? plenty o’stupid to go ’round here it seems. 8th, 9th and 10th wonders of the world maybe? again, msm covers for him.
president of harvard law review: no writings of his to read on some law subjects? not stupid?
name change: when, where, why, and then lie about it, and still gets a security clearance? only in bizarro world are these people and their lemming drones not living in stupidville.
so, what do you call the people who don’t have sense enough to question aliobi and his den of 40 million thieves?
It’ll only be stupidity if they loose. Otherwise it’ll just be plain old fashioned venality and evil. They knew the media wouldn’t question them on any of their illegal and shady activities so they did everything they could think of, legal or not, to advance their political ends. Up until very recently it appeared to be working, and it still may. If we know about the things you’ve listed despite the media refusing to investigate or report, just imagine what we don’t know? How much malfeasance did they succeed in keeping totally secret? Don’t confuse evil with stupidity. These people know exactly what they’re doing.
Keep tour eye out for the threat of cyber threats. See the coverage of Leon Panetta’s push for prevention of the next ” Pearl Harbor.”
Any day now, the Obamacrats are going to do a Clintonian inspired “Aspirin factory” attack on some un-expecting group of Libyans. Of course the journalistic frauds will be at the ready to spin it in Obamas favor. My guess is that it’ll happen a day before one of the upcoming debates. It’s all being set up by the lying media and the crooked Democrats right this minute.
that’s what I’m hearing.
I hope that the media may be reaching a tipping point where they can’t carry the water for obozo any more and maintain any shred of credibility left.
Their polls were skewed and biased, and now changed when they had a bad debate to reflect true numbers.
Sad, very sad to watch the death of journalism in this country.
A death toll not as bad as the Madrid bombings, thank God — but maybe the underlying thinking is much, much worse.
Diana West writes that the locals performing the security tasks — at the direction of the Department of State — for the consulate were a militia formed in memory of the “martyrs” killed by the Qadaffi in riots that were part of the cartoon jihad. But wait, there’s more: the actual attackers were an offshoot of the “security” militia.
http://www.dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/2264/Benghazis-Real-Scandal-Uncle-Sam-Joined-the-Jihad.aspx
Well, the Khan, an animist, would hire Christians as ambassadors. The usual maneuver when negotiations failed was to chop the ambassador’s head off and nail it to the city gates. Since the ambassador was Christian, he was assured of Heaven, if he lived or died, it was a win-win scenario. The Khan couldn’t risk animist heads- they might reincarnate as bugs. He couldn’t trust Muslims as ambassadors or governors- they were hot-headed liars and thieves.
Why was Christopher Stevens considered expendable?
The (seeming) fact that the Ambassador was a homosexual adds a further twist to this story.
Hillary Clinton has just returned the favor of Joe Biden where he and the administration threw her under the bus, claiming that they knew nothing about what was going on in Bengazi…
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/10/what-happened-in-benghazi.php
The Benghazi attack should be Obama’s Watergate. It won’t be because the press are going to choose protecting him over getting to the truth.
And now the State Department is releasing a blow by blow account of Benghazi events to put themselves in the best light. The Daily Caller and others have helpfully pushed a story of tension between the White House and HRC (step one) and now we have the “revenge” leak (step two) which we are to swallow whole because we all understand malice.
I don’t buy it. Hillary and the White House are in this together. Whatever was happening–a kidnapping, gun running, pro-islamist goals (“the Taliban are in the building”) or just a huge screw up–it has a Hillary feel to it. Everything she does is stupid. I think the released details may be partly true-just enough. They really want us to believe the ambassador died before his captors got to him and they want us to understand why some agents got away alive.
“Is the Benghazi Attack Obama’s Madrid Train Bombings?”
A more apt comparison would be Jimmy Carter’s Operation Eagle Claw, which went a very long way towards his massive defeat a few months later to a tall, robust, thick-haired man named Ronald Reagan.
Hillary Clinton Admits the U.S. Government Created al-Qaeda Published on Apr 10, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifZK6SVlQ1Y&feature=related
I think the biggest problem is that this administration lies so much its difficult to tell the lies from truth.
When they sold Susan Rice as for real I would assume some believed it. If nothing else it bought more time until another fable could be invented.
When you have an administration that never tells the truth ever its difficult to know what is really going on. Which may be their goal.did Disinformation.
Keep everyone dumbed and feed them what you want. Then hope you can win an election by lying, repeating the lie and getting the drivebys to repeat the lie until it becomes truth.
This is a pretty big reach. First of all, Spain did not switch it’s vote because of a cover-up but out of fear/indignation of being put in the cross-hairs of Islamic terrorists over wrong-headed Spanish foreign policy.
Libya, in terms of US security for its personnel, is virtually a war-zone and the outrage of the America people will be based on its expectations. You cannot compare that to a commuter train, or to the sheer numbers.
Egypt is a different matter. The embassy personnel obviously knew what was going on and I am perplexed why they referenced this video since Salafi protests had been an on-again, off-again event at the embassy since the fall of Mubarak. The video was just the latest bit of complaining to add fuel to the fire, not the cause of the protests, which have been and remain to ensure the release of the Blind Sheik.
Egypt continues to have it’s internal societal problems revolve around the concept of a separation of church and state. There is simply not enough will or leadership to try for such a thing. The Turkish model is slowly unraveling in this regard and Islam will remain in power in gov’t in Egypt unless they do something really stupid and goad Egypt into a military confrontation. Even in such a case, hatred of Israel is so great in Egypt I don’t know that any kind of humiliation would wake the people up.
IT IS JUST ANOTHER HISTORY FROM THE WHITE HOUSE. IT IS TIME FOR THE TRUTH AND THE NAVY SEALS TELL IT LIKE IT IS. DISHONORABLE DISCLOSURES – POLITICS SHOULD NEVER COME BEFORE NATIONAL SECURITY. WATCH HERE: http://bwcentral.org/2012/08/d…
IT IS JUST ANOTHER HISTORY FROM THE WHITE HOUSE. IT IS TIME FOR THE TRUTH AND THE NAVY SEALS TELL IT LIKE IT IS. DISHONORABLE DISCLOSURES – POLITICS SHOULD NEVER COME BEFORE NATIONAL SECURITY. WATCH HERE: http://bwcentral.org/2012/08/d…
One thing that is being ignored by the American Press is that Amb. Stevens was subjected to a brutal sexual assault by several terrorists, prior to being murdered. No doubt because he was the only the second serving Ambassador that was openly homosexual. This has been reported widely by the foreign press, but very little here in the States.(Google “Ambassador raped before murder.”)
The State Dept has been rather vague, saying that Amb. Stevens “was tortured” prior to his death. No real substance when you consider that absolute savagery of the assault. Hillary Clinton must have no soul; She certainly has no conscience.
If this had occurred while Pres. Bush was in office, you would have gone deaf from the noise of a white-hot press. Now, the silence is both telling, and deafening.
Bringing in this comparison is rather pointless, unnecessary, and renders you speechless for a second or two. The author’s effort seems desperate and comical. This article pushs you to ask the question: can the author write without bringing on senseless parallels?
Why can’t you just analyze this terrible event by itself, against the background of history of a great nation, not on the stage of rather smallish presidential elections? When you can put the event and your analysis in serious light, voters will see. Nobody are that stupid. Why does the author just want to be a consultant or an adviser to some election or campaign? Why can you just see it as a historically important event?
There is a major flaw in your logic, other than misstating the realities of the Spanish election (see 5. barsoomian2002 above). You presume a rational response by the electorate. Support for Obama was never based on anything logical, quite the opposite, he was elected and still receives support in spite of an incredible number of red flags indicating moral, emotional and intellectual unfitness for the Presidency. The same indifference to commonsense should prevent his supporters from seeing him as anything other than a wise statesman in spite of the evidence of their eyes. Was it Woodrow Wilson who said logic won’t take out of a man’s head what logic did not put there.
The American electorate, for some reason, prefers delusions over substance.
They already know exactly who did it, and why: The CIA has independently obtained a report and found the information contained was known to the Obama administration, even though the Obama administration has not chosen to share with the American public the key findings contained in the report.
According to a 270-page intel report from Muftah Faraj, a member of the Warfalla tribe of Bani Walid in Libya, who is currently in exile: The document names Mohammad Abdullah Aqil, a wealthy and corrupt individual who owns and operates a Mercedes car dealership in Tripoli, as the principal funder of al-Qaida in Libya.
During Gadhafi’s rule, Aqil worked with Abdullah Sanusi of Gadhafi’s secret service, where Aqil provided the financing to implement logistics that were aimed to carry out assassinations of anti-Gadhafi Libyan expatriates living in France, Lebanon, Egypt and mostly in Greece.
After falling out of favor with Gadhafi, Aqil was put in prison for six months, turning him against Gadhafi and the regime.
The document further specifies Aqil works closely in Libya with Abdul Hakem Belhaj, the chief al-Qaida operative who organized and directed the terrorist attack that killed Stevens.
In 1992, after the Mujahadeen took Kabul, Belhaj traveled across the Middle East and Eastern Europe, before returning to Libya to form the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), a group that failed to overthrow Gadhafi in two decades of fighting.
After President Obama and Secretary Clinton expressed support for the Libyan revolution and engaged in military action against Libyan military forces loyal to Gadhafi, Belhaj then became the leader of the Misrata revolutionaries who ultimately captured the capital Tripoli and finally succeeding in ousting Gadhafi.
After Gadhafi was deposed and murdered, the report documents Aqil applied his wealth to
assisting Belhaj in supplying vehicles and military equipment for Libyan revolutionaries and
al-Qaida terrorists opposed to the regime imposed on Libya by Obama, Hillary Clinton and NATO.
Abdul Hakim Belhaj, whose real name is Abdul Wahab Ghaid, also wanted revenge for the killing of his brother, Abu Yahya al-Libi the second man in Al-Qaida, who was killed in Pakistan.
Belhaj had a second personal motive for wanting to see Stevens dead.
In an interview last year, Belhaj, then identified as a senior rebel commander, told the Guardian how he was tortured in Bangkok by two CIA agents, before being returned to Libya, where he was tortured again.
After Obama, Clinton and NATO sided in Libya with the rebels against Gadhafi, al-Qaida operatives suddenly became legitimate in Libya and Belhaj became a hero carrying out the Obama-Clinton-NATO plan for the anti-government rebellion to oust Gadhafi.
I got all this from Corsi over at WND today.