Good or Bad for the Jews

"Good or Bad for the Jews"

Many years ago, and for many years, I would travel to Morocco to visit uncles, cousins, and my paternal grandmother. Some lived in Tangiers;...

Monday, September 17, 2012

Benghazi: So is it a Crime Scene, or not?

In the wake of the murder of the US Ambassador to Libya, the Obama misadministration's foreign "policy" machine spins ever more out of control; the only thing saving it is the supine nature of the mainstream media.

On Friday, September 14, the nice but totally out of her league State Department spokesman, Victoria Nuland, told reporters,

"I'm going to frustrate all of you, infinitely, by telling you that now that we have an open FBI investigation on the death of these four Americans, we are not going to be in a position to talk at all about what the U.S. government may or may not be learning about how any of this this happened -- not who they were, not how it happened, not what happened to Ambassador Stevens, not any of it -- until the Justice Department is ready to talk about the investigation that's its got . . . So I'm going to send to the FBI for those kinds of questions and they're probably not going to talk to you about it."

How long did the vow of silence last? Not even 48 hours later, US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice went on a marathon Sunday news show run telling us that the attacks were not planned and that it was all the fault of some obscure filmmaker living in Cerritos, California. 

Susan Rice? Why Susan Rice? Is she FBI? What does she know about the "crime scene" in Benghazi? Susan Rice? Not Hillary Clinton, David Petraeus, or Tom Donilon? Not State's Undersecretary for Management, not the head of State's Diplomatic Security, not the head of State's Intelligence and Research bureau, or not even the head of the Near East bureau? Susan Rice? A political hack completely out of the chain of command and with no knowledge of the facts on the ground--that's who this administration sends out to lie two days after saying it would say no more because it is all a "crime scene" and the FBI is "investigating."  As of this writing the FBI is not even on the scene given that they do not approve of the security arrangements in Benghazi. But no matter, I am sure those friendly "folks" in Benghazi are preserving the "crime scene."


  1. A convinient scapegoat IF it proves true that the US had been warned days before (and the POTUS was blowing off his PDBs in favor of campaign cash) and/or the other reports starting to filter out that their were no riots in Libya at the time of the attack.
    Too much conflicting information and someone (either in the US or in Libya) is playing a serious game of CYA.

  2. We know some gruesome details about the murder of Amb Stevens, but much is still unclear. I have not yet read any reports that give the cause of death for the other three men or that attempt to explain the last hours of their lives. We’ve seen photos of the column covered with bloody handprints, described as an American’s desperate attempt to avoid being dragged out of the building. But that is ALL that we have learned about what actually happened to these three men. We all have reason to suspect that they were tortured and suffered horribly — it is the standard Muslim way.

    Is the Obama administration withholding information, perhaps disturbing and inflammatory information, about the likely torture and cause of death of these Americans? Would the truth stoke the anger of the American people and possibly affect his re-election prospects?

    I do not want to know the grisly details, but I do want to know the truth about what happened to our people. The truth will help the American people better understand the enemy we face. It will also help dispel the Obama adminstration’s myth-making about how well his foreign policy outreach to the Muslim world is doing — and that alone is sufficient motive for them to hide information from us.

    Diplomad unleashed a righteous condemnation of the Obama administration's lame claim that this event is being investigated. In the Internet age, we shouldn't be dependent on secretive government to keep us informed. There must be plenty of people who know the truth -- survivors, the families of these men, the funeral home and mortuary personnel. The killers certainly know the truth, yet they haven't posted photos or video online as their customary gloating requires.

    Releasing the cause of death and autopsy results should not not dependent on any investigation or "investigation" in Libya. We should be demanding answers to these basic questions.

    The Obama administration will spin this to their advantage, and I suspect that the American people simply don't care to know anything different.

    1. Why do you think they said the ambassador died of "suffocation"? It's as close as you can get to "in his sleep" and avoid the inconvenient details.

  3. Luckily, Americans don't have to rely on the MSM for information, now that we have access to the world press. And that's in spite of our not having access to our own government.
    And I'm particularly fond of the idea that Benghazi is not secure enough for the FBI - it seems to have been quite secure for the Americans tortured, killed, and dragged through the streets (ahem: NOT on the way to the hospital).