Friday, Oct 31, 2014
Columns

Benghazi revisited


Published:

It seems that the debacle at Benghazi on Sept. 11, 2012, keeps coming back like a reccurring nightmare for the administration.

New revelations by the people that were there, who were kept under wraps, are beginning to tell what happened on that night when four Americans were killed, including our ambassador, Chris Stevens.

We know that there were survivors, but they have not be interviewed by the press nor testified yet before any Congressional committees. That is about to change as the House will be holding hearings on the Benghazi incident and they promise to be explosive.

Already some whistleblowers have begun to speak and they are taking issue with the administrationís version of events. There have been new emails and memos that have surfaced that seem to contradict the explanations given by State Department officials, up to and including the former Secretary Hillary Clinton.

The new documents are at odds with the explanations previously given and the fact that the ambassadorís request for more security was turned down. We still need to know why Susan Rice was sent out to the Sunday network news programs to provide information that was known at the time to be inaccurate.

As the ambassador to the United Nations and not a State Department official, it seems a little strange that she should be making the statements about Benghazi and not some high-ranking State Department official. †

When Clinton finally got to appear before a Senate Committee she did not shed any new information but continued the line of answers that had become the party line on Benghazi.

She said she didnít know about the requests for increased security nor did she refuse any requests, even though there is now a memo to the contrary with her signature on it. Her rather disingenuous statement ďWhat difference does it makeĒ was spoken in a very recalcitrant tone, hoping to close the subject.

The subject will not be closed because it made a lot of difference to find out what caused the deaths of four Americans and why help was not sent in the seven hours that the attack was taking place.

We have statements from reputable sources that help could have been sent but was not. We still donít know who was speaking to the president during the seven hours after the Secretary of Defense initially spoke to him.

There is no record of where the president was and what he was doing and who he was in contact with during the time frame in question. The most glaring omission on this issue besides the administration is the absent mainstream media, which, if this was a Republican president, would have hammered the government daily without mercy demanding answers and transparency that the public was entitled to.

Comments

Part of the Tribune family of products

© 2014 TAMPA MEDIA GROUP, LLC