| Submit your comments on this article |
| Africa North |
| Inhofe: Benghazi cover-up bigger than Watergate, Iran-Contra |
| 2012-12-23 |
| One day after Senate Republicans held a press conference to question this week’s State Department’s report on the Sept. 11 terrorist attack in Libya that left four Americans dead, Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe said the scandal is bigger than Watergate and Iran-Contra. “I have made a study of different cover-ups – the Pentagon Papers, Watergate and Iran-Contra. I’ve never seen anything like it. I think this is probably the greatest cover-up, in my memory anyway,” the Oklahoma Republican said in an interview Saturday night on Fox News. Republican senators John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire said Friday that the State Department report does not address questions about the role of Cabinet officials in responding to the assault that night. Mr. Inhofe said that, despite the report and testimony before Congress this week, the Obama administration still has not explained adequately why the mention of al Queda was deleted from the “talking points” given to U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice. “They don’t talk about this, they don’t talk about who changed this, who was the boss of the cover-up and what was the motive,” Mr. Inhofe said. “We know what the motive was, this was before the election. And Obama had been saying he had done away with al Qaeda. Well, positively this was al Qaeda.” In testimony before House lawmakers Thursday, Deputy Secretary of State William Burns said that, while Secretary of State Hilary Rodham Clinton and other senior officials had been briefed about the security situation in Libya, decisions about security were made at the assistant secretary level. Four State Department officials were relieved of their duties this week over the report, and the three who were identified held posts at the assistant secretary or deputy assistant secretary level. |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #10 could someone have been observing and coaching at a distance, then entering the fray directly to 'kicked it up a notch'? The idea has been broached here at the Burg before of an intelligence agency being behind the incident. I still have my list of 'favorite countries'. Nobody's been dropped from it yet. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2012-12-23 20:34 |
| #9 I have fired a few infantry mortars. It takes a tremendous amount of luck.... or a considerable amount of expertise to land a mortar round directly atop a building and take out a sniper. When the assault began to drag on and on, could someone have been observing and coaching at a distance, then entering the fray directly to 'kicked it up a notch'? No one talks about voice intercepts. How terribly convenient. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2012-12-23 13:08 |
| #8 There are the stories and rumors that we were working with certain people to deliver old Libyan arms to the Syrian rebels, and that Benghazi was a key trans-shipment point for that. I've seen that mentioned in a few places but nowhere authoritative. Makes me wonder if al-Qaeda was trying to grab guns, or whether they were in the operation a lot deeper than that. For example, we know now that a number of the Syrian rebel groups are very Islamicist -- they might have had groups in Libya that were tied to them, and al Qaeda may in turn have been nestled inside those groups. So Amb. Stevens may actually have been working with al-Q -- would he have known that? Or was he trying to keep al-Q out of the arms transfers? Just this one angle alone would take considerable resources to figure out. And as a good progressive would say, I'm just asking a question. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2012-12-23 11:41 |
| #7 Agree, JohnQC. We have seen enough to know Fast & Furious was much more than incompetence, and we have seen the amount of effort invested in covering that up; with comparable cover-up going on over Benghazi we must conclude it too is not a case of simple incompetence, but involves something seriously illegal and probably evil. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2012-12-23 11:13 |
| #6 The more things are hidden and not discussed the more suspicious I get that something was going on seriously FUBAR. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2012-12-23 11:03 |
| #5 What B and RJ said. Dale, "no longer"? When were these clowns ever the right stuff? |
| Posted by: Barbara 2012-12-23 10:41 |
| #4 I just hope it's large enough to thoroughly screw Obama, the dead can't be helped now. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2012-12-23 09:49 |
| #3 Ditto that Mr.B. well said. This administration is no longer the right stuff. We can no longer expect this country to do the right thing. The world leadership compass is broken. |
| Posted by: Dale 2012-12-23 07:40 |
| #2 I'm obviously not privy to the sordid details or truth, but I know a thing or two about the identification of obfuscation and denial and one thing for dead certain. This talk about there not being enough time to conduct some sort of military operation is total rubbish. Something was going on in Benghazi that no one wishes to talk about and four Americans got terrible dead over it. The families of the dead deserve an answer. The American people deserve an answer. Unfortunately we are being lied to and told to fok off. Something much larger was in play here. I hope my days are lengthy enough to at some point discover what it was. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2012-12-23 05:52 |
| #1 Liberal media will continue to carry water for the Obama agenda, and try to bury stories like this one. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2012-12-23 03:43 |