What I am about to say is going to be extremely controversial, but I have given it much thought and I must point this out. I realize most people have not studied subversion techniques, nor are they familiar with intelligence services other than what they have seen in movies. CIA holds training programs in which they use sleight-of-hand techniques, and it is not for the entertainment value. They do it to point out that what you think you see is not what you really see. I will confine this to Benghazi since that is the topic of this post, but the principle applies to everything that is going on in the Obama administration.
I have had extensive conversations with one person who was reportedly at Benghazi that fateful night. I say “reportedly” because I was not there. Now, realize that it is easy to get caught up in hero-worship. “Oh, he was there. What a hero!” John McCain has ridden that wave for fifty years. So, we do not question. Well, I am suspicious by nature, so I do question, and I do not like what I got from him. He seems to be disgruntled with how the investigation is going and would like to see the “truth” come out. When I asked him why he does not tell what he knows, his answer was “My credibility is shot right now”. I asked him what he thought needed to happen, and he said, “Someone needs to come forward”. Um, OK.
Well, I did some investigating, and there is a $250,000 price tag on violating a non-disclosure agreement. That is a huge incentive to remain silent. The problem is, he is not being silent. He is writing books, consulting on a movie, and holding rallies. So, why was he not at the so-called “Whistle-Blowers Hearing”?
Here is something else that disturbs me. He refuses to name John Brennan. He refuses to acknowledge him when I bring him up in conversation. He does, however, vilify Hillary Clinton even though until I told him he had no idea who issued the “stand-down” order, which is odd, because when I found out something very disturbing about the change in security at our Jerusalem embassy, he had no problem calling a “contact” at the State Department to verify the stories I was reading. He could not have called a “contact” to answer the question he has asked repeatedly on television and radio?
(FYI the disturbing information is that we have hired Hamas to "guard" Ambassador Shapiro:
So, I suppose we can all just sit back and wait for Benghazi the Sequel.)
Getting back to sleight-of-hand, let me cover the red herring of Hillary Clinton, and she is a red herring. Everyone loves to hate her, so she is a convenient target. I hate her myself, but some of the stories I have heard about her are positively laughable, and although I did my homework, as a United States Air Force veteran, I did not need to research whether or not she ever had the authority to give General Ham a direct order. She did not.
Here is the latest story that broke a couple of months ago, ultimately leading to Senator Menendez' current legal situation:
Let me be absolutely clear. I believe there was and is a war going on between the Pentagon, State, and the White House. I do not believe Obama abdicated his throne to Hillary. And I know the State Department is nowhere in AFRICOM's chain-of-command. General Ham answered to one man on the planet, and his name is Barack Obama. If Hillary had the brass to attempt to issue a direct order to that four-star general, I would love to have eavesdropped on that conversation! Ludicrous.
Also, there is nothing in “13 Hours” (other than some anecdotal stories) that differs one whit from what Fox News reported in November, 2012, two years before that book came out:
Here is my assessment:
WHAT WE ARE HEARING IS A CIA FRONT STORY.
Some, part, or all of it may be true. There is no way to know at this point. But that book raises more questions than answers.
One last point. General McInerney said “We knew about Benghazi two weeks in advance”. He did not say, “We knew it might happen”. He said, “We knew”. Which begs the question, why was Ambassador Stevens anywhere near Libya? Paperwork? Was the arms deal that important? Or was it the election coming up on the twelfth? Maybe he was there to smooth over ruffled feathers? (More on that in my next Benghazi installment.) In any event, that is a startling statement.
While I will do a brief recap of lesser events of 2012 in my next post, we are finally where I have been waiting to go. 2013 was the year Barack Obama let his mask slip, and the year I went on the war path. 2014 was the year he dropped it completely, revealing The Real Barack Obama.
NOTE: For the first three parts of my series on Benghazi, please see January postings.