Georgia Voices: For Obama State Department, Benghazi remains a horrible black eye
by The Savannah Morning News
January 29, 2014 12:37 AM | 3244 views | 4 4 comments | 74 74 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Up until now, critics of the Obama administration’s mishandling of the events leading up to the murders of four Americans in Benghazi in 2012 were lambasted by the president’s defenders as right-wing crazies who were trying to derail the president’s re-election effort.

After Wednesday, they need a new script.

A long-delayed, bipartisan, 58-page report by the Senate Intelligence Committee faulted the administration and the intelligence community for not preventing attacks on two outposts in this Libyan city - a diplomatic compound and a CIA annex.

As a result, people were killed, including U.S. ambassador J. Christopher Stevens.

“The attacks were preventable, based on extensive intelligence reporting on the terrorist activity in Libya - to include prior threats and attacks against Western targets - and given the known security shortfalls at the U.S. Mission,” the Senate panel said in a statement.

This conclusion flies in the face of what the administration initially reported. It also contradicts much of the picture that then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton painted of the events before and after this outrage.

What’s unclear from this scathing report is why Ms. Clinton was caught napping.

The person who’s now considered the leading Democratic contender in the 2016 presidential race was in charge of the State Department when Americans died preventable deaths. She has never fully explained herself.

Democrats and Republicans alike on the Senate committee shared in the unvarnished critique of the Benghazi bungling. Georgia Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss, the ranking GOP member on the panel, was blunt: “In spite of the deteriorating security situation in Benghazi and ample strategic warnings, the United States government simply did not do enough to prevent these attacks and ensure the safety of those serving in Benghazi.”

There’s ample blame to go around.

But the biggest lapse was in Washington.

State Department officials naturally tried to downplay this report; careers are at stake. While it’s reassuring to know that the State Department learned from its tragic errors in 2012 and is working to prevent them from recurring, that doesn’t eliminate this horrible black eye. Or excuse the bungling.
Comments
(4)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Papermill gal
|
February 04, 2014
Hillary and Barack sat back and allowed good Americans to be murdered by al Qaeda and other rifraf. They told spec ops teams to stand down rather than go in and save lives. They lied about the reason, insulting Americans who knew an attack on 9-11 was CERTAINLY a terrorist incident and Obama lied again in the presidential debates. They knew all along what it was, but used an expendable member of his cabinet to go out and spread the lie that it was all about some bogus video. They even targeted an individual in California and had him thrown in jail! I notice the cherry pickers trying to put this on David Petraus ignore these facts.

Hillary failed here, lied to the families and then testified, "What does it matter now?" I don't want this heartless political hack becoming our next president. America needs to heal after Obama, and she ain't the answer.
Guido Sarducci
|
January 31, 2014
Jim Ward, you are either the most naive individual on the face of the earth or the biggest liberal apologist in the universe.

Of course, Clinton and Obama were excluded from the report on Benghazi. Of course, if you let a Nazi write history, Hitler had nothing to do with the Holocaust.

As to the video, give me a freaking break! That story has been debunked so many times and in so many ways that only a total nincompoop would even mention it again.

You need to go back to the drawing board on this one.
Lib in Cobb
|
February 02, 2014
@Guido: Right on cue, use the word "Nazi", when you disagree. Perfect, just freaking perfect.

Another brainless post.
Jim Ward
|
January 29, 2014
As the Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee explained about: "Secretary Clinton is not mentioned a single time in the 58-page bipartisan section of our Benghazi report."

As we all know by now, the Benghazi outpost, neither an embassy or a consulate, was largely a CIA operation supervised by Republican Gen. David Petraeus, who was asked to resign in the aftermath of the Benghazi attacks.

Nevertheless, as the facts have long verified, President Obama and Secretary Clinton were fully engaged in the rescue and evacuation operation which resulted in nearly 40 Americans being airlifted to safety.

Of course there were prior security issues -- Benghazi was the rebel capital of Libya during the war to overthrow the Qaddafi dictatorship. In post-war Libya, the mission was to disarm the militants, create a national security force and recover the many MANPADS that were looted from Qaddafi's arsenals during the war. These shoulder-fired missiles posed grave danger to commercial aviation. This mission was far too important to simply retreat from as partisans now claim.

Benghazi was not the first time "blowback" from Petraeus' leadership led to American casualties. He was the prime proponent of a counterinsurgency strategy that utilized indigenous fighters -- extremist ties and all -- as "force multipliers." The very militants that attacked in Benghazi included those Petraeus's CIA was training to take on security functions.

And, in fact, the evidence clearly points to the militants taking action in response to the anti-Islam propaganda video which was widely televised in the region just prior to the attacks. The video has been conclusively linked to protests, riots and attacks on more than 50 U.S. facilities in more than 20 nations.
*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