Madam Secretary, why did we still have a presence there on September 11, 2012? Everyone else - including the Red Cross, for God's sake! - had already left, due to security concerns.
Ambassador Stevens knew it wasn't safe, had referred to the area as a "security vacuum" and made 600 requests for additional security, which were all ignored. Why? He bought additional barricades from the British when they left, because he was getting NOTHING in the form of help from you.
And why did you try to blame the attack on an internet video? Say it was spontaneous, when it was clearly organized - as you told Chelsea, by the way? Why did you tell the parents, at the casket ceremony at the airbase, that "we will get the guy who made the video" when you knew it was a terrorist attack? Have you no more respect for the parents of fallen heroes than to tell them a bald-faced lie?
Did you not consider that perhaps 9/11, in ANY year, might be a likely time - a time when we should take extra precautions - for terrorist attacks on U.S. facilities, ESPECIALLY in an area as volatile as this? Yet our ambassador was in Benghazi, with minimal security? Security that not only had not been increased, but had been reduced, following his numerous requests?
Can it really be possible - no, probable, or certain - that all this happened because your boss was running for re-election and wanted to maintain his assertion that "Bin Laden is dead and al-Quaeda is on the run? And blaming the video, produced by a poor jerk who is still in jail, was the most convenient explanation? Is that why it was Susan Rice - not you - that went on all the Sunday talk shows repeating that lie? You knew you were going to run for president again and didn't want that added baggage?
No comments:
Post a Comment