John R. Houk
© January 24, 2013
Have you had an opportunity to listen to the hypocritical drivel proceeding from the mouths Secretary Hillary Clinton and the Dem Party Senators at the Benghazi Hearings? Does Obama own the Republican Party now? When the tough questions began Hillary would give the gruff evil eye and the GOP would back down. The disgrace of the ineffective GOP Senators to hold Hillary accountable even if she popped a gasket is shameful. GOP fear of BHO and Hillary is another reason for Conservatives to consider abandoning the Republican Party and begin building a grassroots national base for an alternative political party to confront the Leftist vision of the Democrats.
Anyway after listening to this politburo representation in the Senate I discovered a lengthy and yet concise report on the Benghazi Massacre that the Obama Administration could have stopped. The Accountability Review Board (ARB) led by Soros servant and Islamist loving Thomas Pickering basically gave anyone in the higher levels of the Obama Administration a clear pass (cough – high level as in President Obama and Secretary Clinton?). Independent examination of Benghazi data that was available imply Pickering’s panel and report was deficient in assigning accountability.
With this in mind Determine The Networks has that lengthy yet concise report that will bring more clarity to Benghazigate than Secretary Clinton’s contrived testimony which was more a Dem farewell party than an investigation.
Below I am going to post a hint of the DTN report which has analysis and timelines. Then I strongly encourage you to read the rest on the DTN site.
BENGHAZI: THE TERRORIST ATTACK OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2012
Alert Sent: January 23, 2013 2:03 PM
This report examines the most significant events that occurred before, during, and after the September 11, 2012 Islamic terrorist attacks against an American diplomatic mission (and a nearby CIA annex) in Benghazi, Libya. The compound that housed the diplomatic mission possessed none of the security features usually found in such a facility: e.g., bulletproof glass, reinforced ballistic doors, a “safe room,” and high concrete barriers surrounding the buildings. It also lacked an adequate supply of trained security personnel. According to Congressman Darrell Issa, the Obama administration intentionally withdrew security personnel and equipment from the mission in Benghazi for political reasons, so as to “conve[y] the impression that the situation in Libya was getting better [i.e., safer], not worse.”
In March 2011, American diplomat Christopher Stevens was stationed in Benghazi as the American liaison to Libya’s “opposition” rebels—among whom were many al Qaeda-affiliated jihadists—who were fighting to topple the longstanding regime of President Muammar Qaddafi. Ambassador Stevens’ task was to help coordinate covert U.S. assistance to these rebels. In short, the Obama administration elected to aid and abet individuals and groups that were allied ideologically and tactically with al Qaeda.
Following Qaddafi’s fall from power in the summer of 2011, Ambassador Stevens was tasked with finding and securing the vast caches of powerful armaments which the Libyan dictator had amassed during his long reign. In turn, Stevens facilitated the transfer of these arms to the “opposition” rebels in Syria who were trying to topple yet another Arab dictator—Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. As in Libya, the rebels in Syria were likewise known to include al Qaeda and other Shariah-supremacist groups. So once again, the Obama administration was willfully helping the cause of al Qaeda and its affiliates. In addition to facilitating arms transfers, Stevens’ duties also included the recruitment of Islamic jihadists from Libya and elsewhere in North Africa who were willing to personally go into combat against the Assad regime in Syria. The U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi served as a headquarters from which all the aforementioned activities could be coordinated with officials and diplomats from such countries as Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar.
As 2012 progressed, violent jihadist activity became increasingly commonplace in Benghazi and elsewhere throughout Libya and North Africa. At or near the U.S. mission in Benghazi, for instance, there were many acts of terrorism featuring the use of guns, improvised explosive devices, hand grenades, rocket-propelled grenades, and car-bombs, to say nothing of the explicit threats against Americans issued by known terrorists like al Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahiri. As a result of such developments, Ambassador Stevens and others at the U.S. mission in Benghazi repeatedly asked the Obama administration for increased security provisions during 2012, but these requests were invariably denied or ignored.
Then, on the night of September 11, 2012, the U.S. mission in Benghazi was attacked by a large group of heavily armed terrorists. Over the ensuing 7 hours, Americans stationed at the diplomatic mission and at the nearby CIA annex issued 3 urgent requests for military back-up, all of which were denied by the Obama administration. By the time the violence was over, 4 Americans were dead: Ambassador Christopher Stevens, Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith, and two former Navy SEALS, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, who fought valiantly (but unsuccessfully) to drive away the attackers.
In the wake of the violence, the Obama administration immediately and persistently characterized what had occurred in Benghazi not as an act of terrorism, but as a spontaneous, unplanned uprising that just happened, coincidentally, to take place on the anniversary of 9/11. Moreover, the administration portrayed the attack as an event that had evolved from what began as a low-level protest against an obscure YouTube video that disparaged Muslims and their faith. In reality, however, by this time U.S. intelligence agencies had already gained more than enough evidence to conclude unequivocally that the attack on the mission in Benghazi was a planned terrorist incident, not a spontaneous act carried out in reaction to a video. Indeed, the video had nothing whatsoever to do with the attack.
Given these realities, it is likely that the Obama administration’s post-September 11 actions were aimed at drawing public attention away from a number of highly important facts:
§ the U.S. mission in Benghazi had never adopted adequate security measures;
§ the administration had ignored dozens of warning signs about growing Islamic extremism and jihadism in the region over a period of more than 6 months;
§ the administration, for political reasons, had ignored or denied repeated requests for extra security by American diplomats stationed in Benghazi;
§ the administration had failed to beef up security even for the anniversary of 9/11, a date of obvious significance to terrorists;
§ the administration, fully cognizant of what was happening on the ground during the September 11 attacks in Benghazi, nonetheless denied multiple calls for help by Americans who were stationed there;
§ the administration had been lying when, throughout the presidential election season, it relentlessly advanced the notion that “al Qaeda is on the run” and Islamic terrorism was in decline thanks to President Obama’s policies; and perhaps most significantly,
§ throughout 2011 and 2012 the administration had been lending its assistance to jihadists affiliated with al Qaeda, supposedly the organization that represented the prime focus of Obama’s anti-terrorism efforts; moreover, some of those same jihadists had personally fought against U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
This section of Discover The Networks explores the significance of the events in Benghazi and of the Obama administration’s response to … READ THE REST
Benghazi, Senate Hearings and Hillary Clinton
John R. Houk
© January 24, 2013
BENGHAZI: THE TERRORIST ATTACK OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2012
Copyright 2003-2012: DiscoverTheNetworks.org
Your generous contribution right now will help us expose the networks of the Left — the connections that exist between thousands of key individuals, organizations, and funders spearheading the Left’s infiltration of the media, politics, academia, the entertainment industry, and a host of activist crusades. We cannot continue this effort without your help!