Saturday, May 3, 2014


The exploitation of Benghazi, is inexcusable, blatant, it is even unpatriotic. Although it is difficult to single out one person as the source of hate, it seems to center on Darrell Issa. It would be easy to attack him personally because of his well know questionable low life, paid to play, background, but that would be to use the despicable Rove technique. Nevertheless, to attack “the attack” on Benghazi with logical counter argument as is normally done in debates seems a bit like attacking someone who says the moon is made of green cheese, which suggests the deliberator accepts the premise that it is within the realm of possibility that the moon is in fact made of green cheese. This erroneously gives the protagonist an air of undeserved credibility.

We can attempt to refocus the Benghazi debate and put it on their real objective, which is to implant a visceral level of hate in the American people for the secretary of ex-Secretary State #Hillary Clinton: incompetence, wrongdoing, dishonesty, political, etc. Their quickly move from what would be near believable scenario to the ridiculous. In the original debate, the media radioed in on the nature of the mob, not to be confused with the attack itself on the Benghazi consulate (not embassy during which four Americans died. The appearance was that it was a mob of religious radicals with hate for America, connected with a recently shown anti-Islamic film, and not hate for “political” America, Christian America, or even on American arrogance as was the usual reason given for terrorism. There was a growing number of mobs attacking America facilities across the Arab world, all of which the Arab world blamed on that same film by name. Investigation by the State Department revealed that the mob was really an organized group of terrorist embedded in the mob objecting to the film.

A mercenary, hired by the State Department lied for personal glory, these guys revel in the idea that they look tough. The State Department had the  consulate was “under protected” for several reasons, the main one being that #Benghazi was a clandestine CIA operating station embedded in a particularly hostile area of the country. The main embassy was in Tunis. Ambassador #Stevens, the one the terrorists killed, was in Benghazi because he wanted the people to look at the American presence in Tunisia to as being a friendly one; therefore, he did not want to be seen with a bodyguard of uniformed military.

Unfortunately, a conservative South Carolina Senator and a Senator from Arizona who want to keep a dying heroic reputation as a warrior alive saw a political opportunity to blemish President Obama reputation by telling a little lie, which they did. United Nations Ambassador, Susan Rice, said that the attack was an organized “terrorist” attack. All of a sudden, according to the right wing media, an attack by a mob on a consulate could only be described only as a “terrorist attack on an un armed embassy”.

The right wing crazies and the nuts took over from there. For example, I saw a gruesome picture taken of a man being torture in Argentina, labeled as Ambassador Stevens in the hand of Islamic “terrorist” in the unprotected embassy ion Benghazi. Ambassador Stevens died alone of Smoke inhalation in a locked room Shame on America media but most of all shame on Senator #Lindsey Graham, and shame Senator #McCain.

URL: Comments Invited and not moderated

No comments:

Post a Comment