WASHINGTON, May 2, 2014 – Can Republicans demand the truth about Benghazi?
House Republicans and Speaker John Boehner are announcing the formation of a special committee to investigate Benghazi. Party to that will be the subpoenaing of Secretary of State John Kerry.
Which begs the question: Do we know the truth about Benghazi? Can we handle the truth about Benghazi?
If we look back to May of 2013, questions about the September 11, 2011 attacks at Benghazi were still being asked close to two years after the attack. Nearly a year ago (May 14, 2013) a leaked White House Email sent by Benjamin Rhodes, a top aide to President Obama discusses the Administrations reaction to the Sept. 11, 2012 attacks on Benghazi, Libya.
If, as Rhodes says, there is a “ton of wrong information getting out into the public domain…” why did the President, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, Hilary Clinton, Jay Carney and everyone else that stood there repeating the same falsehoods, lie to us saying it was about a film?
Why has there been nearly three years of smoke screens and misdirections?
On April 30, 2014, and with unbelievable hubris, Jay Carney continues to lie about the White House’s influences on Rice’s media tour stating that Rhodes email and Rice’s talking points were not about the Benghazi attack, but the overall protests in the region including Cairo, Cairo, Sana’a, Khartoum and Tunis.’
And that the White House did not, even though Rhodes email says differently, provide talking points to Rice saying that the video was the catalyst for the attacks.
Even when everyone knew different.
CNN (Jake Tapper/The Lead) reported in May of 2014 that 30 people were evacuated from Benghazi and that of those thirty, at least 20 were CIA employees leading to the conclusion that the mission in Benghazi was covert.
There are two known objectives for the teams in Benghazi per reports: Countering the terrorist threat from extremists pouring into the country and helping to secure the flood of weapons after the fall of Ghadafi, the fear being that they were weapons that could have gone to terrorists.
The CIA roles, particularly in their relationship to the Libyan state arsenals at risk, have escaped scrutiny as the focus has instead been turned onto the State Department and their failure to heed growing signs of terrorist threat and/or the political debate as to why the White House downplayed the terrorist attack.
It is because the White House doesn’t want us to know the truth? It is because the CIA needs to protect the truth?
It is national security, or a bungling administration that felt that the collateral damage of a few Americans were an acceptable price to pay? And pay for what? To protect secrets? To protect radical Islam? To protect the incompetence of our sitting leaders?
Secretary of State Clinton and President Obama led the cheerleading cry that Benghazi was the fault of a filmmaker even as they, and the American people knew, that it was the actions of radical terrorists.
It was just one more lie told to us from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. They were complicit in the arrest of the filmmaker, removing him from public, and press questioning.
Read more ….Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2014 Communities Digital News
• The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or management of Communities Digital News.
This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities Digital News, LLC. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.
Correspondingly, Communities Digital News, LLC uses its best efforts to operate in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine under US Copyright Law and always tries to provide proper attribution. If you have reason to believe that any written material or image has been innocently infringed, please bring it to the immediate attention of CDN via the e-mail address or phone number listed on the Contact page so that it can be resolved expeditiously.