- Joined
- Nov 20, 2013
- Messages
- 65,394
- Reaction score
- 49,421
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Okay. I think they tried to play a risky game and got burned, which appeared predictable given the events preceding the attack. After all, who would think that an attack on Americans might occur on 9/11 in the middle east? Anyway, we'll see how it turns out, if it does actually turn into something in which people shoulder responsibility. I have my doubts given the obfuscation up to this point.
From my view, the issue of contention isn't that some decisions went bad, security wasn't provided for properly, and 4 Americans died as a result. Yeah, it's not good, but sometimes it happens, and I'm glad that lessons learned are going to be incorporated so as not to happen again.
It's the handling of the matter after the attack that I have a serious problem with.
Both reports (Senate and House) clearly state that the President and the administration both knew before the attack and again within hours after the attack started, that it was 2 terrorist groups associated with Al Qaeda.
This ran afoul of the Obama campaign narrative that Al Qaeda was beaten down into irrelevancy.
It must have been perceived as a threat to Obama’s reelection chances, so what’s the tactic employed to mitigate this? Blame it on a YouTube video. Doesn’t matter that both the administration and the President already knew that the attack wasn’t a spontaneous demonstration, I mean really, how does someone spontaneously lug a mortar from wherever it was in the field to within range of an embassy? In a city?
So Rice, who wasn’t in the loop, was offered up to the media alter of the Sunday talking head shows to continue the YouTube narrative.
Carney continues to proffer up that narrative for the attack from his White House Press Secretary’s podium, for consumption and distribution to the electorate by the White House Press Corp.
As late as Obama’s address to the UN, the proffered narrative was a spontaneous demonstration caused by a YouTube video.
All this to obscure the truth of a significant event, a significant terrorist attack, to influence the upcoming presidential elections that November.
We already know that this president and this administration has little reservations about lying to the American public of matters of importance to the public. Seems that would include lying to the American public in order influence the results of a presidential election as well.
This, more than anything else, Obama and this administration needs to be held to account for.
When the President and his administration take on the role of distorting the truth for political gain, how close are we really to the famed and reviled ‘Ministry of Truth’?
So, “What difference does it make now?” Plenty. Not only now, for the remained of this administration, but also for future presidents and future administrations, and frankly, for the future of the nation as well. Are the electorate to be continued to be lied to? Continued to be manipulated for favorable and desired election results? Continued to led from the truth of the matter rather than to the truth of the matter?