The Big Benghazi Secret

Posted on Comments

In May, we began to learn the truth about what the Benghazi cover-up was all about: The State Department had a secret program to provide weapons to the Libyan insurgents who overthrew Gaddhafi. Once the dictator was gone and it became apparent that some of the “insurgents” the U.S. had armed were, in fact, dangerous radicals with ties to al-Qaeda, there began an effort to disarm these groups.

It was these negotiations that brought U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens to the Benghazi consulate on Sept. 11, 2012, in what appears to have been a carefully planned trap by the radical groups the U.S. was trying to disarm. It seems quite likely that the ambassador and three other Americans were killed with U.S.-supplied weapons. The fact that Benghazi was crawling with CIA operatives is something the Obama administration doesn’t want to talk about, for reasons that should be obvious enough. Jonathan Tobin writes at Commentary:

If Benghazi is a “phony scandal,” Americans are entitled to ask why the government is behaving so suspiciously. . . .
At this point with so many unanswered questions about Benghazi, the administration should be facilitating the investigation of the attack rather than actually impeding it. We don’t know whether the code of omerta being imposed on CIA personnel is merely a function of bureaucratic inertia or a far more sinister attempt to prevent Congress and the public from finding out more about the failures of both the agency and the State Department. No one should make assumptions about wrongdoing, but given the unwillingness of the administration to apply its supposed belief in transparency to this question, it is, at the very least, reasonable to conclude that something is amiss here.

“Something amiss” is putting it rather mildly. It stinks to high heaven. The administration has been lying since Day One, and what they’re trying to do now is to run out the clock, to delay as long as possible — if they cannot entirely prevent — disclosure of the truth, so that they can then dismiss it as, “old news.” And this is really the scandalous part of it: What if the American people had known in fall 2012 what we know (or at least think we know) now?

The absurd claim that what happened in Benghazi was a “spontaneous” demonstration inspired by a YouTube video was a deliberate lie, part of a cover-up, the initial purpose of which was to deflect blame from the administration during the presidential election campaign. In truth, the Benghazi attack was a direct consequence of President Obama’s embrace of the “Arab Spring,” four Americans died as a result, and the administration is still trying to conceal the facts because Hillary Clinton was deeply implicated in this debacle.

John Hinderaker gives heed to rumors that weapons were being shipped from Libya to Syria. I’ve heard nothing about that, but I was impressed by Joe Curl’s reaction to the CNN item:

Here’s my thing: I don’t really have a problem with shadowy CIA operations. I understand considerations of foreign-policy realism and I know that sometimes it’s hard to tell the good guys from the bad guys. But when you screw up — and I’d say a dead U.S. ambassador counts as screwing up — you can’t stonewall and lie and claim it’s all a “phony scandal.” Not if you’re the president who promised America the “most transparent administration in history.”

 


66 comments

  3. This run out the clock thing doesn’t make sense. If they are worried about the Presidential election then get it out now so they have two years to make up for whatever they lose. They have to realize by now this isn’t going to stay put.

  4. I remember various CIA personnel (who were also Democrat operatives) were constantly revealing Bush administration initiatives to the press. Where are the whistle blowers now?

  5. The trouble is, and this irks me, even if the whole matter had spilled out into the open, the LIVs would still have voted for Obama. So that question is not terribly relevant.

    This must be exposed. This whole dreadful business needs a public airing. Every single story about Benghazi is important and needs to keep the pressure on. More pressure is needed.

  6. I’ve got no problem with them running James Bond type operations, but can they at least take responsibility for them?

  8. You might be a Democrat if you think you can just loan guns to terrorists and then ask for them back.

  9. Why can’t it? The media and GOP have had to be beaten into covering this with a stick. You think Boehner, McConnell and our new default GOP minority leader McCain wouldn’t be happy to see this go away? You think CNN wouldn’t love to say “Hey, we gave Tapper his shot and…” *shrug* ?

  10. al Qaeda set up a trap to kill Stevens and whoever else the opportunity presented and 0bama’s very nature would
    not allow him to cop to that fact, especially after boasting that aQ – was for all intents and purposes – defeated.

    Especially w/his reelection on the line.

  12. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that this story broke on CNN just as Congress was about to take its August recess.

  13. What is more interesting are the lies that departments are telling each other about Benghazi. Seems the only honest players in this are the Muslims, who wanted Ambassador Stevens in exchange for the Blind Sheik. Stevens’ accidental death lead to Morsi’s overthrow.

  14. I believe the reason this is being so actively covered up is political, not operational. From what few pieces of the puzzle we have so far to date, it would appear that this whole mess is due to policy decisions made by Hillary Clinton and while Obama must have approved of them in a high level sense, the details were Hillary’s gig. I also get the feeling from this administration that the party (meaning Democratic Party) is controlling a lot of things through various working groups of people in administrative offices and Obama isn’t exactly calling all of the shots here. It is as if there is some hidden Politburo at work here.

    This smells to me more like “we don’t want to admit that our fundamentally naive world view influenced us to make extremely stupid decisions that got a lot of people killed because that paints the ‘progressive’ movement as incompetent and could risk our political gains for years to come”. In other words, this doesn’t smell so much like a President covering his butt as it smells like an entire political philosophy covering its collective butt and they are attempting to preserve their chances in the 2016 elections. In fact, 2016 would be a must-win for them because if the Republicans were to win, the cat would most likely find its way out of the bag. These people are acting like they are fighting for their political survival. I smell a certain amount of desperation in this.

  16. Okay, so can you guys stop comparing me to Obama? No one died in Watergate, the free and unfettered media actually did their job and forced me to put the good of the nation ahead of personal pride and arrogance by resigning. The only thing that warms the cockles of my non-beating heart is the fact that Hillary got fired from the Special Prosecutors Office for lying …

  19. ….and 51% (or more) of American voters scream, with their eyes bugging out and spittle flying from their mouths, “WE DON’T CARE!!!”.
    What our country once was, is gone.

  20. The theory I support is this:
    There were two operations going on in Ben Ghazi.
    One operation was the CIA and State Department doing an arms deal and,
    The other operation was President Obama, Mrs. Jarrett, and Mr. Morsi, kidnapping Ambassador Stevens and exchanging him for the Blind Shiek.
    Most people can’t wrap their heads around it. It’s too strange, diabolical, and ingenious.

  21. Obstruction of Justice…Providing aid and comfort to the enemy.(al qaeda was the recipient of these weapons.. yes the same al qaeda that flew those planes into the buildings) Intimidation of witnesses..etc etc etc etc etc do we really need to ponder as to why the cover up… seems pretty damn obvious to me

  22. Thankfully, some folks who are very supportive of the military refuse to let this thing go. Hillary lied to the face of the parents of the men who died, and somewhere, a deluded, low-skilled video publisher is still rotting in jail, and too many people on the right seem all too comfortable with that. They need to be reminded.

    I totally agree with Doug Ross, who is proposing we primary Boehner any way we can, including voting, and even sending money to the Dem opponent. (Voting Libertarian won’t get the job done, he has to go at all costs). We most definitely can afford to lose his seat in Congress, because retaining a majority with him returning is almost as bad as a third term for barack.

    Mark Levin has referred to Doug’s idea on a couple of different days, as a possible way to remove the Speaker. Let’s get it done.

    We must have a Select Committee on Benghazi, and on the IRS scandal. Even if it takes until after the 2014 elections. Boehner is the reason we do not have one now.

    (And for the love of God, people: stop appending “gate” to everything. In the age of barack,can we not have a new term for scandals? Are we this stupid? Compared to the IRS scandal alone, Watergate was the equivalent of letting your dog take a dump on the sidewalk in New York without cleaning it up.)

  23. Instead of focusing on the ‘obvious’ that is being poorly hidden: (1) State Dept gun running operation “Fast + Furious, the hummus intersect”, (2) POTUS election plan to engineer a hostage taking, allowing Obama to both release the “Blind Sheik” and stage very successful rescue mission, killing the terror ring leader patsies —- how about focusing on the not obvious that was only briefly mentioned days after the attack — the CIA had a Gitmo Benghazi campus that the terrorists knew existed in greater Benghazi but not specifically were it existed in Benghazi. Consequently the whole Benghazi thing was attempted terrorist jail break that ran afoul of (1) naive POTUS staffers organizing a kubuki theater hostage drama a month before the election (2) left/right hand not communicating, such that CIA contractors dashed out of the Gitmo Benghazi facility to defend the State gun running facility that the terrorists thought was the Gitmo Benghazi facility. Why the ongoing coverup? To embarrassing for Obama and foreign governments that President Hope-n-Change was never to keen on civil liberties in the first place. Widespread knowledge of Obama’s other Gitmo campuses would be bad for his naive leftist base. Perhaps even KGB Putin gave the turmoil a push, misdirecting the terrorists away from the Gitmo facility (were some KGB were working), toward the incipient staged hostage event.

Comments are closed.