Tuesday, October 30, 2012

More on Benghazigate


This thing does not pass the nose test. We don't have the detail and naturally the Obama administration will do what it can to keep the lid on until after Melbourne Cup day but like a dodgy tax arrangement with too many loose ends  --- it just smells.

Did the State Department pull an operation already in play to get support to Americans under siege on American soil because the "symbol" of US special forces arriving on the scene would be out of sync with its policy of appeasement of political Islam? Or for some other political reason however they choose to explain it?

What is this to be? If indeed that did happen then even if Obama is still in the White House next year why would that not be grounds for impeachment?

The first seeds of Watergate appeared before Nixon was re elected

When a US president abandons an ambassador and staff to the enemy because to mount an effective response will jeopardise whatever his Secretary of State is cooking up -- appeasement wise -- with some faction of the enemy --  or whatever -- then he has abandoned more than the lives of a few brave Americans doing their jobs in a dangerous place. This is no ordinary mistake of judgement..

This is a grave error of policy and principle.

Ambassador Stevens and the others were attacked because they are a symbol and you can be certain this victory is being celebrated by the enemy and those who share its vile ideology way beyond just Libya and the Middle East.  The defeat will be compounded if the Benghazi outpost is closed but  in this bloody war of symbols that seems likely.

To have sent in the marines. Or the cavalry. The guys who took out two holes. Whoever.  That was the symbol that was most urgently called for in this war. Its absence is a terrible message to the enemy. It tells them they are winning.

The worst symbol of all would be an US president who abandoned these souls to their fate even if that was because those were the policy settings in place while he and the others were on the campaign. Not on the job. Is that possible?  Maybe I'm naive but that would not happen on West Wing.

This is exactly the thing that inspires the enemy. This is what they celebrate. The hated West on the recoil from this blow from jihadist Islam. The spitting contempt  for democratic process would be just the fizz in their champagne.

This is why the appeasement of hateful murderous men inspired to every fibre by a hateful murderous ideology is so very very wrong.

Here are a couple of interesting articles from


courtesy of Shirlee at friend blog Israel Thrives

This is a cut and paste from The Lethal Price of Arming Jihadists 

The decision to stand down as the Benghazi terrorist attack was underway was met with extreme opposition from the inside. The Washington Times‘s James Robbins, citing a source inside the military, reveals that General Carter Ham, commander of U.S. Africa Command, who got the same emails requesting help received by the White House, put a rapid response team together and notified the Pentagon it was ready to go. He was ordered to stay put. “His response was to screw it, he was going to help anyhow,” writes Robbins. “Within 30 seconds to a minute after making the move to respond, his second in command apprehended General Ham and told him that he was now relieved of his command.”
If true, Ham has apparently decided he wants no part of the responsibility for the decision not to help those in harm’s way. He is not alone. As the Weekly Standard‘s Bill Kristol revealed late Friday, a spokesperson, “presumably at the direction of CIA director David Petraeus,” released the following statement: ”No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.”

Obama himself is stonewalling. During a Friday interview in Denver, the president revealed he was determined to postpone any revelation about Benghazi until after the election. “The election has nothing to do with four brave Americans getting killed and us wanting to find out exactly what happened,” said Obama in answer to questions about possible denials of aid, and whether it’s fair that Americans will have to wait until after the election to find out the results of an investigation. On Saturday, Obama upped the ante, telling ”Morning Joe” host Joe Scarborough that “if we find out there was a big breakdown and somebody didn’t do their job, they’ll be held accountable. Ultimately as Commander-in-Chief I am responsible and I don’t shy away from that responsibility.”

Well  yeah ....


Why Our Forces Were Told to ‘Stand Down’ in Benghazi

To understand what went wrong in the Benghazi mission, it’s important to begin by looking at what was so unique about it.
When the Islamist mobs began their September 11 rampage, they found embassies with high walls, heavy security and police protection. Even in Tunis and Cairo, where the Arab Spring Islamist regimes have been accused of collaborating with their fellow Salafists, there were credible military and police forces capable of preventing the kind of full scale assault that took place in Benghazi.

Hat tip Shirl in Oz

No comments:

Post a Comment