Friday, October 19, 2012
The CIA is apparently not willing to fall on its sword to protect President Obama, Secretary Clinton , Ambassador Rice, and the rest of the Obama Administration.
It's now been leaked by officials within the Obama Administration that the CIA Head of Station in Libya reported within 24 hours that the attack on Benghazi that left four Americans dead was carried out by al-Qaeda and associated groups, that it was a planned operation, and that it had nothing to do with any protest or unrest over a video.
The linked story, which is essentially an AP rewrite says 'It is unclear who, if anyone, saw the cable outside the CIA at that point and how high up in the agency the information went.'
'Unclear'? It obviously went to various places - to the head of the CIA General Petraeus, to Obama's NSC Tom Donilon, and to Hillary Clinton as head of the State Department at the very least. That's how these things are routinely handled. Are we to believe Joe Biden and President Obama that nobody told them, and the entire attempt to spin this for nine days as a 'protest' over a video was due to misinformation and intelligence failure?
Or Hillary Clinton's claim that she didn't know either and that the obscene spin put on this was due to ' the fog of war'?
The AP does their best to shield the Administration, like always. They even repeated the falsehood Obama told at the last debate (with an assist from 'moderator' Candy Crowley) that he referred to Benghazi as a terrorist attack during his speech the day after in the Rose Garden, something I debunked previously.
But even if one takes a large leap in logic to assume that no one in the administration knew for certain what had happened, how does that explain the certainty with which the president and his minions declared for 8 days that what happened in Benghazi was a protest over a poorly made video on YouTube that turned violent?
How does it explain the deliberate removal of special forces security teams from Libya and the denials of Ambassador Stevens' own repeated requests for more of it? Even his request for a barbed wire fence around the Benghazi consulate was denied.
How does it explain situating an unprotected consulate and staff in Benghazi, known to be a hotbed of al-Qaeda and associated militias? Even the International Red Cross pulled out months before the attack because of the security situation. If the Red Cross knew, if most European intelligence bureaus like Britain's M15 knew, why didn't our own intel?
The answer of course, is fairly simple. None of it adds up.
What does add up is an attempt at a political coverup, and it possibly goes even deeper than just shielding the president and his administration from charges of gross incompetence during an election year when President Obama is chest pounding over his supposed foreign policy expertise.
Obama's big boast is 'I got bin-Laden'. What he also got (and its becoming more and more evident every day) is a relocation of al-Qaeda back into the Arab world.
He certainly deserved death, but along all the other disastrous fallout that occurred from assassinating a man who was essentially a retired terrorist, we settled a dispute between Osama bin-Laden and his second in command, Ayman al-Zawahiri:
Bin laden was relatively comfortable in Abbotobad and wanted to keep al-Qaeda anchored in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Zawahiri, looking at developments in his native Egypt and elsewhere like the 'Arab Spring' , the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood and President Obama's already announced retreat from the region was pushing to relocate al-Qaeda back to the Middle East and the roiling Arab world.
So now that Osama's dead (and according to my sources, there are pretty solid indications he was deliberately fingered) Zawahiri, a former Muslim Brotherhood member has taken over and we see increased al-Qaeda presence in both the Egyptian Sinai and Libya, as well as in Iraq where the Maliki government's marginalization of the Sunnis has given al-Qaeda new life.
And that's not all.
Libya is another case where President Obama's amateurism has led to dangerous developments.Moammar Khaddaffi was an odious tyrant, but he essentially retired from any support for terrorism. In fact, he was helping our CIA catch al-Qada fighters in the Maghreb and was actually receiving foreign aid from us.
It was known from the very beginning that the Libyan rebels had substantial elements of al-Qaeda and other salifist groups, yet President Obama intervened militarily, allowing the rebels to take over the country and murder Khaddaffi when he otherwise would have quashed the revolt.
Aside from allowing al-Qaeda and its associated militias to survive, it also allowed them to plunder Khaddaffi's armories and help themselves to his weaponry, including shoulder fired Stinger missiles capable of bringing down a helicopter or a commercial airline. In fact, a shipment of those missiles coming from Libya was intercepted on its way to the al-Qaeda forces in Sinai.
The mortars, RPGs and automatic weapons used in the attack on our Benghazi consulate were almost certainly obtained by al-Qaeda as a direct result of President Obama's intervention in Libya.
That's undoubtedly the Heart of Darkness, the real core of what President Obama and his minions would rather the American people weren't talking about right now.
Think of it as a Middle Eastern version of Fast and Furious, where innocent peopl egot murdered by weapons they obtained by this Administration's policies. Only this one has much more disastrous long term consequences for America.