The Right

Still Lying

Sex, Lies, and Benghazigate
Sex, Lies, and Benghazigate
November 16, 2012: Sex sells, as the saying goes, and suddenly, with General David Petraeus's resignation (which came, conveniently enough for President Obama, right after the election), suddenly the mainstream media has heard of Benghazi again. | Photo: Aaron Stipkovich | Benghazi, David Petraeus, Christopher Stevens, Barack Obama, Video, Scandal, Lybia, Cia,

Covering up the cover up of the cover up...

As time marches on and crusaders for truth continue to push back against the secretive Obama administration, the picture of just what, exactly, happened in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 becomes clearer and clearer. Thanks to Judicial Watch and their Freedom of Information Act suit, it seems that the final pieces have fallen into place, giving a complete picture of the scandal that continues to plague the Obama administration.

Prior to NATO's military actions that unseated Moammar Gadhafi, the United States was providing aid to the Libyan resistance, who, as it turns out the CIA knew, were affiliated with Al-Qaeda. The U.S. government knew that it was giving aid to a terrorist organization, yet they did it anyway (kind of like what we're doing now in Syria) ' all while President Obama's presidential campaign kept touting the message that Al-Qaida was on the run.

Then NATO intervened in Libya, and Gadhafi was killed...and the media no longer focused on Libya, while the Al-Qaida and Muslim Brotherhood affiliated rebels took over. So now, they not only had the weapons and money provided to them by the United States government, but they also had access to whatever stockpiles Gadhafi's government had in Libya.

There has been a lot of debate over just who was to blame for the inadequate security at the facility in Benghazi. Many have blamed the State Department for not adding additional security that had been requested by Ambassador Stevens. Many have blamed Congress for not voting in additional funding for State Department security. But what is now known is that the State Department's security officer in Tripoli had sent out a warning that the security group contracted by the State Department had a bad track record, and had lost some security contracts they had with private organizations. They also were not licensed by the Libyan government.

Barack Obama
Barack Obama

Barack Hussein Obama II, born August 4, 1961, is the 44th President of the United States. |
On September 11, riots broke out in Cairo. Rioters scaled the walls of the U.S. Embassy, removed and burned the American flag, and replaced it with an Al-Qaida flag. Later in the day, the State Department annex in Benghazi was attacked by militants armed with automatic weapons, RPGs, and rockets. As of today, there is still no evidence linking either of these events to the now-infamous anti-Islamic video, other than the word of the State Department, who called both events "spontaneous protests," and the media outlets that promulgated the State Department's lies.

We now know that the White House was aware that the events in Benghazi were not a protest. The president had been briefed on events, and they knew that it was a coordinated terrorist attack. Perhaps they wanted to avoid embarrassment at having a U.S. facility attacked by militants that the U.S. government had armed. Perhaps they wanted to avoid the existence of their covert dealings to move weapons from Libya to Al-Qaeda affiliated rebels in Syria. Perhaps it was both. Regardless, the White House did nothing to rescue Ambassador Stevens or the three other Americans who died that night, though we now know that we had military resources that could have been deployed to the area.

The government's reaction was to blame that anti-Islamic YouTube video for everything. The story was thin ' the video barely had any views prior to the administration's blaming it for Ambassador Stevens' death. This was the first cover-up.
Then they sent U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice out to all of the Sunday shows to spread the story of how a YouTube video no one had seen was responsible for sparking off violence across the Middle East. The big first question was, why Susan Rice? Why send the ambassador to the U.N. out to spread this story? Personally, I think that the easiest answer was that Susan Rice was expendable. She was high enough within the State Department to lend credence to the lies she was spreading, yet she was insignificant enough that she could take the blame for any backlash...or, at least, that's how it would have gone if the White House hadn't decided to double down on their lies.

Instead, when hardly anyone believed their unbelievable YouTube video story, the White House chose to double down. They blamed the CIA for the video-related talking points that had been given to Susan Rice. The CIA, likely under orders from the president, kept their mouths shut for quite a long time, but finally it came out that the CIA had known that the Benghazi attack was a coordinated terrorist attack, and had nothing to do with the video, and the CIA had nothing to do with the talking points.
This open, honest, and transparent administration did what they always do: they denied and obfuscated, hoping the issue would just go away. They put Obama's presidential campaign ahead of people's lives.

And even now that we finally have hard evidence that the talking points were generated by the White House (12 drafts before the final version was given to Ambassador Rice), Jay "Baghdad Bob" Carney is still lying about it!
Maybe this is why Obama and Hillary were so hard to find while the attack was going on - they were both hunched over a laptop searching YouTube for the right anti-Muslim video to blame.

The entire Benghazi scandal was the result of the Obama administration's failures ' from beginning, to middle, to the end, where ever that may end up being. But to them, this is just another "bump in the road." After all, what difference, at this point, does it make if the administration put weapons into the hands of militant terrorists who ended up using them to kill Americans? In their minds, the constant accusations about Benghazi just amount to partisan attacks by right-wing wackos whose brains have been addled by too much FOX News ' and the mainstream media agrees, which likely explains why we haven't seen more news organizations digging into and reporting on the scandal.

Through his policies and his administration's actions, President Obama has turned our nation into a state sponsor of terrorism. The events in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 were a direct result of the Obama administration's immoral, unethical, and criminal behavior, made all the worse by the fact that while most of the pieces are now in place, we still don't know the whole truth, almost two full years later ' and the only person to face prosecution is the man who made the video.

Comment on Disqus

Comment on Facebook

Updated May 10, 2017 9:56 AM EDT | More details

AND Magazine AND MAGAZINE

©2017 AND Magazine, LLC
5 Columbus Circle, 8th Floor
New York, New York 10019 USA

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without express written permission from AND Magazine corporate offices. All rights reserved.