First, I want to show the motive for misleading the public about Benghazi. Obama was careful not to
emulate Bush's stupidity with a Mission Accomplished banner. However, what he did say is, "al Qaeda
is on the path to defeat and Osama bin Laden is dead." http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/18/white-house-view-on-al-qaeda-unchanged/ While the second part is true, the first is
demonstrably false. Benghazi contradicts that narrative. That's the motive for the lies.
With
regard to the Rose Garden statement, I think the President’s statement is at
best ambiguous. It’s true that he says, “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this
great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we
stand for. “ However, his comment
on Benghazi specifically is, “Yesterday, four of
these extraordinary Americans were killed in an attack on our diplomatic post
in Benghazi.
Among those killed was our Ambassador, Chris Stevens, as well as Foreign
Service Officer Sean Smith.“ Notice he
does not say it was a terrorist attack.
He goes on at length about the video saying, “While the United States
rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, we must all
unequivocally oppose the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of
these public servants.” Again, he skips
an opportunity to call it terrorist violence.
It’s just senseless.
Now we can move to Susan Rice. On September 16, 2012, the President of
Libya, MOHAMED YOUSEF EL-MAGARIAF, tells CBS Face the Nation, "The way
these perpetrators acted and moved, I think we-- and they're choosing the
specific date for this so-called demonstration, I think we have no-- this
leaves us with no doubt that this has preplanned, determined--
predetermined." Susan Rice
responding to this assertion on the same program says, "(W)e do not have
information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or
preplanned."
In Obama's speech to the
UN on September 26, 2012, he admits about Benghazi that "America’s compound came under
attack." He goes on to mention that
"a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage
throughout the Muslim world." The
sequence of the speech is designed to call attention to the video as a cause
for "the turmoil of recent weeks."
In the speech, Obama uses the word "terrorist" once,
describing groups supported by Iran.
Those are the lies, or most
charitably intentionally misleading statements.
At this point, Liberals want to change the subject to Bush and the twin towers. I do not
want to go into the first 9/11. Clearly,
there is enough egg on everybody's face on that one. Bill Clinton
didn’t capture or kill Bin Laden when he had the chance. Bush was asleep at the switch for the attack
itself. However, given the terrorist
fondness for anniversaries, I don't understand how we could have been caught
unprepared again. It's like Pearl Harbor being surprise attacked twice. The State Department withdrew security from
what has to be one of the most dangerous countries with which the US has
diplomatic relations. Some lower ranking
people are disciplined, but while Hillary “takes responsibility,” she can’t
even admit in testimony to Congress that the attack was premeditated. She calls it "guys out for a walk one
night who decided they’d go kill some Americans." That's denial if I ever heard it.
On a
lighter note, the comedy group The Capital Steps were in Skokie, IL,
this weekend. Their Obama impersonator
said, "Is it possible to answer a question and make both sides happy? Yes and no." The mainly Democratic Skokie
crowd laughed. Everybody seems to
recognize that the President is a master of this type of ambiguity. The Rose Garden speech is a classic Obama move to have it both ways. In effect, he says both it was and it wasn't terrorism. Take your pick.