EWRoss.com 


HOME  I  ABOUT EWR  I  PREVIOUS ARTICLES  I  PHILOSOPHY BOARD  I  LUMINOUS LINKS  I  EMAIL EWROSS  I  BOOK A SPEECH

Military

Politics

National Security

Terrorism

The Presidency

China-Taiwan

Healthcare

Climate Change

Movies - TV

Technology

 

Bookmark and ShareCommentPrintSubscribeRSSMobile

iPhone, Blackberry, and other Smartphone users, view this site at www.ewross.com/mobi.htm

Ed Ross Radio #64 The Cover Up

BENGHAZIGATE

Ed Ross | Monday, October 8, 2012

Increasing evidence indicates the Obama administration has engaged in a cover up of intelligence that forewarned it of the September 11 terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Iranian support for jihadists throughout the North Africa-Middle East region, and al Qaeda penetration of Egypt and Libya.

If these accusations are true they would make Watergate, the cover up by President Richard Nixon of a third-rate burglary, pale in comparison. No one died as a result of the Watergate break-in and subsequent cover up; and they never imperiled U.S. national security.

Nevertheless, Watergate was about a crime of burglary and President Nixon's attempts to cover it up. The scandal resulted in the indictment, trial, conviction and incarceration of 43 people, including dozens of top Nixon administration officials. Underlying Benghazigate, on the other hand, is not the violation of criminal statutes and obstruction of justice; it’s the Obama administration's dereliction of duty, incompetence in Middle East affairs, and its attempts to hide them from the American people.

The cover up of intelligence about how al Qaeda and Iran have been exploiting opportunities created by the Arab Spring preceded the Benghazi attack. The cover up of the truth about the 9/11/12 attack, which resulted in the death of U.S. Amb. Chris Stevens and three others, began when U.N. Amb. Susan Rice went on five Sunday morning news programs and told the world that the attacks in Libya were the result of spontaneous demonstrations over an obscure anti-Muslim video.

Amb. Rice’s incredulous remarks were reinforced by statements made by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

Those explanations evaporated on September 19 when National Counterterrorism Center Director Matthew Olsen, under oath, told Congress the Benghazi attack indeed was an act of terror. This revelation, however, was only the tip of the iceberg.

Sources inside the intelligence community say there were numerous other attacks that preceded the attack on the U.S. consulate and ample intelligence about Iran’s and al-Qaeda’s activities in the region that should have caused the White House grave concern.

Individuals who worked in Libya have told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that Amb. Stevens and the diplomatic mission in Libya made multiple security-related requests prior to the attack that were turned down by Washington based officials. Amb. Stevens' journal reveals he knew he was on an al Qaeda hit-list and that he feared for his life.

Emails obtained by the committee show the White House was informed within hours of the Benghazi attack that it had been a deliberate terrorist attack, not an outgrowth of a spontaneous demonstration.

The administration’s motives for wanting to suppress this information are obvious. It seeks to keep it from becoming public to avoid exposing the failure of President Obama’s Middle East policy in the midst of his reelection campaign. “The Obama Administration is afraid to admit al Qaeda is running rampant throughout the region because it would expose the truth instead of what President Obama so pompously spouted during the Democratic Convention” said one unnamed intelligence official.

Reps. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) plan to begin holding hearings on these matters on October 10. They stated in a letter to Sec. Clinton that officials “with direct knowledge of events in Libya” revealed that the Benghazi attack was part of a string of terror attacks that preceded it and not a spontaneous uprising against an anti-Muslim video produced in the U.S.

With the mainstream media preoccupied with the presidential election and disinclined to do any investigative reporting that puts Barack Obama in a negative light, however, what difference will any of this make? The MSM routinely dismisses accusations by Republicans of wrongdoing by the Obama administration as partisan politics; and what Democratic voices of concern have been raised are not loud enough to make a difference.

As in Watergate, it likely will take a smoking gun, someone like White House Counsel John Dean testifying before a Senate committee that there is “a cancer on the presidency,” before Benghazigate becomes a first-class political crisis. But that doesn’t mean it won’t have a negative effect on President Obama’s election campaign.

The constant drip of negative information about the Benghazi attack likely to come out between now and Election Day can’t be helpful to the President. Mitt Romney certainly can use it in the second and third Presidential debates on October 16 and 23 when foreign policy issues are on the agenda. If Gov. Romney goes on the offensive like he did in the first debate, he will put President Obama on the defensive again, hard pressed to give a credible answer to why he didn’t take action to prevent the Benghazi attack and hasn’t demonstrated more concern about Iran’s and al Qaeda’s activities in the region.

The Benghazi attack was a wake-up call for America. Islamist-jihadists that would kill us and leave our bones to be covered in dust are still out there; and they haven’t been decimated as some might lead us to believe. The Arab Spring has not brought forth a wave of democracy and freedom for the Middle East; indeed it may have brought to power radical Islamists far more detrimental to U.S. interests than the dictators it replaced. Iran is a growing menace we can’t afford not to get tough with.

Benghazigate isn’t another Watergate; but whether President Obama is reelected or not, like Watergate, the American people must know the truth. Lives, not just political reputations, depend on it.

  

Add Your Comment

Post a comment on this column at Ed's Blog

Subscribe

Subscribe for free email alerts when new columns are posted. We respect your privacy. Your email address will not appear on emails to others and we will not share it with anyone.

Privacy Policy  |  Subscribe

 

HOME I ABOUT I PREVIOUS I PHIL BOARD I LINKS I EMAIL I BOOK A SPEECH

Search EWRoss.com

Related Links

Revolt of the Spooks

Email Shows State Department Rejecting Request of Security Team at U.S. Embassy in Libya

Benghazigate: A Timeline of Government Deceit, Deception, and Outright Lies

White House Has No Comment on House GOPers Assertions That Libyan Mission Requested Security Prior to 9/11/12 Attack

Congress to Probe Security Flaws for Libyan Diplomats

 

 

   

 

Copyright © Edward W. Ross 2006-2012 All Rights Reserved

HOME  I  ABOUT EWR  I  PREVIOUS ARTICLES  I  PHILOSOPHY BOARD  I  LUMINOUS LINKS  I  EMAIL EWROSS  I  BOOK A SPEECH

PRIVACY POLICY

site stats