Obama handling of Libya attack impeachable
October 31, 2012 11:12 PM | 3835 views | 15 15 comments | 10 10 recommendations | email to a friend | print
DEAR EDITOR:

The Associated Press continues its egregious display of political and philosophical bias by refusing to report the most important news story of the day, because it is a story most damaging to President Obama. One would think that in their creative genius for manufacturing alleged news, that they could distort, twist and bend the facts reported by credible sources about the attack on the Libyan embassy, which reveal a massive blunder and cover up by the Obama Administration. Too difficult a task it seems, or perhaps AP realizes that they would lose all credibility if they tried to spin the story.

The most important priority as president is keeping America and its citizens safe. While I was a member of our nation’s military, it was impressed upon us that our embassies in every country of the world were considered American soil and obviously, our ambassador and every American employed at the embassy is entitled to protection from harm. We were informed that an attack upon our embassy was an act of war, and such attack would result in quick military response against the enemy responsible.

We now know that Islamic terrorists attacked the Libyan embassy and murdered our ambassador and other Americans. We also now know that the Obama administration was aware that our Libyan ambassador had asked for beefed-up security and his request was denied. We now know that either during the ongoing attack, or immediately following, the Obama administration knew this was a planned terrorist attack, on the anniversary of 9/11. Yet for 10 days the president, secretary of state, our U.N. Ambassador, and most of the Obama administration attributed the attack to anger caused by a You Tube trailer that degraded Muhammad.

We can only assume Obama wants the voters to believe that — in his words — “Al Qaeda has been dismantled and is on the run,” and that Islamic terrorism is no longer a threat to America, or its citizens.

As commander-in-chief, Obama’s failure to respond to an act of war upon America and its citizens is disgustingly unacceptable. Lying about the circumstances of the act of war is cause for impeachment and removal from office.

Wayne E. Beyea
Mableton
Comments
(15)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
HFH
|
November 01, 2012
It is just incredible that anyone, even the sad sack kf, could and would, defend Obama's shameful, criminal, and unconscionable lies and subsequent coverup re Benghazi. The affair is unambiguous and irrefutable. If this affair doesn't tell you all you need to know about the evil of this administration AND the Big Media, nothing else will.

What's it like, you idiot lefties, running around stark raving mad?
Too funny
|
November 05, 2012
Today's episode of right wing paranoia is brought to you by HFH
shock
|
October 31, 2012
Apparently anybody can get a letter to the editor published here, facts optional.
Kevin Foley
|
October 31, 2012
Mr. Beyea is in a far right fantasyland. On September 12, the present called it a terrorist attack. Twice.

He is also unaware that Republicans in the House voted to cut funding for embassy security.

Please also share with us your outrage and call for impeachment of George W. Bush after the 10 years, $1 trillion waste in Iraq that took the lives of 4,500 young Americans.
For America
|
October 31, 2012
First off its president not present. I think you need to listen to Obama's speech 09/12 again. He mentions the terrist attacks on 9/11/01 twice, not about Libia. He claimed it was all over a you tube video.
ILoveOhio2010
|
October 31, 2012
ok kevin, lets say that obama called it a terrorist attack twice 9/12. ok, then, why did he send the Secretary of state, his press secretary, his ambassador to the un out to tell We the People that it was about utube video, was he lying then? or lying on the 12th? he also made a speech to the UN mentioning the video like 7 times. barry and hillary are the only ones telling the middle east about that stupid video. it only had 17 views until they kept apologizing for it.
Too funny
|
October 31, 2012
First of it's it's, not its. Second off it's terrorist, not terrist. Third off it's Libya, not Libia. Fourth off it's YouTube, not you tube. But you carry on now because we are all willing to overlook those details for your well reasoned criticism.
CobbCoGuy
|
November 01, 2012
Mr. Foley wrote:

"He is also unaware that Republicans in the House voted to cut funding for embassy security."

No.

This short-lived meme has been debunked. It was put forth by Congressman Elijah Cummings (D-MA) during the recent congressional hearings "The Security Failures of Benghazi." The budget numbers cited to support this argument were extrapolated.

As I've written before, according to a recent WSJ article, “Democrats take the Ryan budget's across-the-board reductions in nondefense discretionary spending and EXTRAPOLATE [emphasis added] them to State. But the Ryan budget never got into embassy security, nor did it become law.”

Furthermore, State Department official Charlene Lamb testified that security failures were not due to budget concerns.
Auggie56
|
November 03, 2012
There was and is a large untapped fund for consulate security, however the obummer admin would rather fund electric cars, at European offices rather than security. Further more, Benghazi is the most dangerous place in the mid East. Ask your self, why was there no security ? Mr Woods asked three times for help that day, and the ambassador twice. In the months leading up to the murders, the ambassador repeatedly sent requests for security. Stop bitterly clinging to hope and change, and support Romney for president.
WestWard Leaning
|
October 31, 2012
Unless specifically stated by treaty, embassies (which this was not) and consulates are not on "American soil" as is commonly believed. They are not sovereign territory. They are typically afforded special privileges, and ambassador, staff, etc enjoy diplomatic immunity. This notion that that land is our land and we should send an infantry unit over to protect it is great political fodder but has little basis in the reality of international law. As terrible as all this might be, many are short-sighted as to the long term repercussions of alternate actions. While a different response may have saved a handful of lives in the short term, what would have happened if the US put more lives on the line and most likely killed many more (Libyans) in the process of doing so? And then what if this was billed in the international media as a US response to "protest" in a foreign nation? Who knows what would have happened next? I would venture to guess that in the long run, 5 or more lives would be lost...
UnCoverUp
|
October 31, 2012
What was Wiynee's position on the war crimes and domestic ease-dropping carried out by the Bush-Cheney Regime? After all attacks against DoS/CIA/DoD tools of the Bush-Cheney Regime like Stevens are simply blow-back for DoS/CIA/DoD operatives like Stevens brokering (below free-market value) oil/gas deals with the corrupt Gaddafi Regime for Stevens' fellow lawyer-lobbyers (lawbyers) who were employed by international oil companies (IOCs) like ConocoPhillips. See http://UnCoverUp.net for how the blow-back against IOCs is playing out in the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
dishonest media
|
October 31, 2012
The loss of an honest media has hurt this country almost beyond belief! Whether Obama wins or loses, good people who believe in honest government need to stand up and make it known that we demand that the media do its job instead of catering to their own agenda. This could actually bring down a government and needs to be handled soone rrather than later. One suggestion is, follow the money. You can always count on Greed as an effective weapon. And as for the Benghazi attack, there is probably more to this than meets the eye. Whether we will ever know is another thing.
Any excuse
|
October 31, 2012
You will be able to impeach after he is reelected next week.
burhing pickfork
|
October 31, 2012
just like the 60s radical song sang only now 'four dead in lybia,did you hear facebook is punishing navy seals for telling the truth?

when barry called the seals they came running but when for seven hours the seals begged for barry he was with billy cilton in vegas.
Cindy Wolf
|
October 31, 2012
Yes, if Obama is re-elected he could be impeached. But then Biden would be president. That must not happen. We need to elect Romney.

*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides