Perhaps the most amusing thing I’ve heard on TV news lately was a remark by Defense Secretary Panetta when asked why he thought the recent deadly attack on the consulate in Benghazi was an act of terrorism. His answer was that he knew it was terrorism because it was carried out by terrorists. Has anyone ever stated the obvious to a greater extent than that? He might have mentioned methods, type of ammo, a leader or two (if known). He did later, to be fair.
It’s strange that he was providing the information, in the first place. It would appear that CIA Director Petraeus, not the head of the DOD, would be the go-to guy for intel, or maybe the head honcho of the president’s National Security Council or, certainly, the Director of National Intelligence, James R. Clapper, Jr. Has anyone seen or heard anything out of these folks lately? Is the whole sordid affair such a hot potato that no one in the intel community wants to touch it, ergo, tell Panetta to handle the cover-up.
The president was so concerned about the attack involving four murdered Americans that he took off for Las Vegas the next day to make speeches after blaming some sort of movie (made by an American, of course) for the whole thing. It seemed to him that an insult to Mohammad, who was indeed a monster, should be cause for most anything, including murder, and that Americans, especially, should therefore abridge their freedom of speech. Muslims in this country could call Jesus a cockroach and the public might yawn.
The girls at NBC Nightly News, Guthrie and Mitchell, gaily put what they likely hoped will be the final spin on the affair on 28 September, noting that the intel agencies had apologized for making a mistake, when it was the intel folks who within 24 hours of the event recognized it as a terror attack having nothing to do with a movie (but just didn’t mention that to the White House gang?), according to news sources such as Yahoo News. Indeed, the girls cited a release from Clapper’s office defending Obama’s spurious account of the Benghazi massacre and indicating that the terrorism became clear only in the aftermath (when?) of the carnage. Clapper was appointed to his position by Obama in 2010, and anyone who believes this “news report” reflected truth is ripe to buy a bridge.
Clapper is remembered for his testimony in a House intelligence hearing in February 2011 noting that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt was largely secular and not particularly extreme, a statement accruing to an incomprehensible naivete, ignorance, or pushing an agenda, especially for anyone in the intel community. A DNI apparatchik tried later in the hearing to clean up the remark but Clapper became a joke.
The Egyptian Muslim brotherhood now owns Egypt and its head beheader, Mohamed Morsi (oh yes, Democratically elected, okay… laugh), in his recent UN speech, urged the UN to crack down on expressions that defame religions. This was his way of excusing all protests and outright violence whenever any Muslim claims that Mohammad, the “prophet,” has been defamed, not to mention his consequent position that freedom of speech is not a “right.” Just a cursory look at the history books will confirm the fact that the “prophet” was a murderous scoundrel/pedophile who created the Koran “holy” book calling for “death to the infidels.”
A cover-up of the magnitude regarding Benghazi is mind-boggling, especially since four Americans were killed, though warnings had been issued concerning violence before the eleventh anniversary of 9/11. The Americans had virtually no security, the result of intolerable ineptitude by the State Department. Secretary Clinton should resign. For her part in the cover-up, UN Ambassador Rice should also resign, as should press-prattler Carney. The president should, too, but that ain’t gonna happen.
One is reminded of President Nixon in 1974. He attempted to cover-up a mere break-in at the Watergate complex that involved no loss of life or damage. He was hounded out of office, resigning to avoid impeachment and possible conviction. Obama committed an impeachable offense in March 2011 when, in direct violation of the Constitution concerning war-making, he ordered the U.S. military to attack a sovereign nation, Libya, that represented no threat to the U.S. or any other nation. Many Libyans have died as a result.
In short, Obama should be impeached by the House no later than yesterday for the well-documented cover-up of an episode costing the life of a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans. To do the honorable thing, he would resign.
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
No comments:
Post a Comment