The Obama administration Benghazi narrative is unraveling
before our eyes.
Administration fabrications are falling away as more facts
become available.
This morning everyone is focusing on the new revelation that
the State Department and the White House received real-time information, via
email, about the nature of the attack. Link here.
Obama supporters are trying to obscure these revelations. They
will be saying that the information was imprecise and required extensive
analysis.
If no one understood the information and if it was not communicated
quickly to the important decision makers, then the Obama White House is simply incompetent.
This morning, too, Frank Gaffney offers an alternative explanation
for the administration’s failure: it has been arming Islamist rebels, in Libya,
and eventually in Syria, and has been trying to cover up its operations.
According to Gaffney, Ambassador Stevens was running a Middle Eastern version of Operation
Fast and Furious.
I cannot judge whether this is true or false, but the Obama
administration certainly wants to help fund the Egyptian government led by the
Muslim Brotherhood. Since money is fungible, there is absolutely no reason why
Mohamed Morsi would not be use the money to buy the armaments that he says he
wants to buy.
Most important, as I, following Col. David Hunt, have been
posting, is the fact that senior administration officials watched the attack in
real time and did nothing to rescue the victims from an armed contingent of
Islamist extremists.
Perhaps Obama cannot wrap his mind around the idea that
Islam has bred so many terrorists. Perhaps he sees them as freedom fighters. Whatever the reason, this
represents a serious failure to fulfill a basic responsibility.
Yesterday former Defense Department official Bing West argued a point that I have been emphasizing:
Our
diplomats fought for seven hours without any aid from outside the country. Four
Americans died while the Obama national-security team and our military
passively watched and listened. The administration is being criticized for
ignoring security needs before the attack and for falsely attributing the
assault to a mob. But the most severe failure has gone unnoticed: namely, a
failure to aid the living.
Since West, like Col. Hunt, possesses considerable expertise
in these matters and far better sources I defer to his reconstruction of the events
in Benghazi.
In West’s words:
By 4:30 p.m.
Washington time, the main consulate building was on fire and Ambassador Stevens
was missing. In response, the embassy in Tripoli launched an aircraft carrying
22 men. Benghazi was 400 miles away.
At 5 p.m.,
President Obama met with Vice President Biden and Secretary of Defense Panetta
in the Oval Office. The U.S. military base in Sigonella, Sicily, was 480 miles
away from Benghazi. Stationed at Sigonella were Special Operations Forces,
transport aircraft, and attack aircraft — a much more formidable force than 22
men from the embassy.
In the
past, presidents had taken immediate actions to protect Americans. In 1984,
President Reagan had ordered U.S. pilots to force an airliner carrying
terrorists to land at Sigonella. Reagan had acted inside a 90-minute window
while the aircraft with the terrorists was in the air. The Obama
national-security team had several hours in which to move forces from Sigonella
to Benghazi.
Fighter
jets could have been at Benghazi in an hour; the commandos inside three hours.
If the attackers were a mob, as intelligence reported, then an F18 in
afterburner, roaring like a lion, would unnerve them. This procedure was
applied often in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Conversely, if the attackers
were terrorists, then the U.S. commandos would eliminate them. But no forces
were dispatched from Sigonella.
He continues:
It is
bewildering that no U.S. aircraft ever came to the aid of the defenders. If
even one F18 had been on station, it would have detected the location of
hostiles firing at night and deterred and attacked the mortar sites. For
our top leadership, with all the technological and military tools at their
disposal, to have done nothing for seven hours was a joint civilian and
military failure of initiative and nerve.
Secretary
of State Clinton has said the responsibility was hers. But there has been no
assertion that the State Department overruled the Pentagon out of concern about
the sovereignty of Libyan air space. Instead, it appears passive groupthink
prevailed, with the assumption being that a spontaneous mob would quickly run
out of steam.
It seems likely that the “groupthink” reflected
administration policy not to call Islamic terrorism by its name. If you believe
in spontaneous mobs but not organized Islamic terrorists, you adopt different
policies to deal with them. If you believe that you can tamp down terrorism
by calling it something else, you are not going to be able to deal with it when
it arrives.
Finally, as West implies, only the commander-in-chief can make the final decision about launching or
not launching a rescue mission.
No military options could have been considered without the
president knowing about them. And no military action could have been taken
without his approval. If military action was contemplated and then aborted or
delayed, the responsibility is entirely his.
It appears that the man who courageously pulled the trigger
on Osama bin Laden became gun-shy in Benghazi.
4 comments:
don't forget that Obama took over 6 months to "pull the trigger" on OBL ... and had to override the objections of Biden and Jarrett to do so ...
to expect him to "pull the trigger" within minutes/hours of the start of the attack is simply impossible ... he at least had to wait for some focus groups and polls to shape his response ...
Good observation, thank you. In some places it would be called a reversion to the mean.
There is something that really smells bad and makes Watergate look like small in comparison. I keep hearing that Hilary Clinton, who I have little use, tried a number of times to improve the security, but Obama refused each time. The only reason Hilary took responsibility was to make Obama look small.
The Clintons are far too good at inside the Beltway politics to not have hedged their bets. I suspect that we are going to be none too happy when all of this comes to light. Inquiring minds want to know.
Here is an update worth watching
http://www.glennbeck.com/2012/10/25/updating-glenn-talks-to-father-of-navy-seal-killed-during-assault-on-libyan-embassy/
Post a Comment