“With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of a bunch of guys were out one night who decided that they’d go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?” — Hillary Clinton testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, January 23, 2013
This particular passage from Hillary Clinton has become infamous. Hardly anyone can read the words without hearing them in her feigned outraged tone of voice. How do I opine it as feigned? For one thing, it is an obviously scripted line that was waiting for the proper moment to be used. No one says that final question with the interjection in the middle of it off the cuff, either it would come out “At this point, what difference does it make? “ or “What difference does it make at this point?” That oh-so-telling placement of the “at this point” interjection tells my pedantic ear that this was rehearsed with proper highs and lows included, notable from a public speaker who is rather monotone to the point of droning.
It is also my contention that this line was scripted because not only did it present a false premise, but both sides of the conjunction are a lie, a deliberate falsehood knowingly told. We now have proof of this, not insinuation, nor even evidence, but proof that Hillary Clinton knew the armed assault on the Special Mission Compound in Benghazi on the night of September 11, 2012 was perpetrated by the “Brigades of the Captive Omar Abdul Rahman – aka “The Blind Sheik” – as a revenge for our defending our nation on September 11, 2001, so stated in the September 16, 2012 memo from the Defense Intelligence Agency on which the State Department was copied. This memo preceded the lies Susan Rice told about a “disgusting video” being the cause of the “demonstration that got out of hand” to explain how the White House was so caught off guard that night, yet another lie. The memo demonstrates how both Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton lied over and over, to the nation, to the world at large, but most outrageously of all, to the faces of the parents and families of our fellow Americans lost, doing so standing in front of their flag-draped caskets.
Some outstanding questions remain, and one hopes they will finally be asked of Hillary Clinton and others when the House Special Committee on Benghazi commences with public hearings. A question which I have long been waiting to have put to Clinton under oath is just what was the mission she tasked Amb. Stevens with that required his personal presence in so dangerous a spot as the SMC in Benghazi for more than a year? Why did he need to reside there and not the Embassy in Tripoli? In reading through some of the information provided in emails that have been under subpoena and responsive to long-requested FOIA from Judicial Watch, we may now be seeing the lost pieces of the Benghazi puzzle fall into place.
Let us go back a few years in Christopher Stevens’ diplomatic career. He spent a good bit of time working in the Middle East before coming to Libya before his nomination as ambassador. He was a fierce supporter of the ouster of Moammar Gadhafi, was said to love the people and the land of Libya and was thrilled for them during their 2011 revolution. Yet once he got to his station post at the SMC and saw the black flags of Al-Qaeda flying everywhere, his enthusiasm lessened. While he was well-known to take his morning run through the open streets of Benghazi, he began to worry over his personal security and that of the SMC more and more. These worries were well documented in his cables back to the State Department requesting they beef up security, and also noted in his personal journal; he wrote as to how he felt himself a target.
Through Congressional Oversight hearings, testimony from State Department employees described passing along the requests and/or outright denial of same. So then why in a face-to-face meeting with General Carter Ham, then head of AFRICOM, does Stevens turn down a second offer of military security assistance after turning it down in an earlier August 16th telephone call from Ham? Mention of these refusals comes as a surprise to those involved, most notably Gregory Hicks, Amb. Stevens’ deputy who testified as to how concerned the ambassador was about the less-than-adequate security put in place. I postulate my theory based on what we have been told previously during under-oath Congressional testimony and now information provided from these few email transmissions.
What was long rumored is now indisputable: The Obama Administration was indeed shipping weapons to Syrian rebels of the Assad regime through Turkey via Benghazi. The Syrian rebels had and have connections to Al-Qaeda; they constitute illegal activity. Amb. Stevens was having dinner in the safe room of the SMC with a high-ranking official from Turkey right before the assault on the compound commenced. He was in favor of the Assad ouster as much as the previous removal of Gadhafi. He had a mission of at least fifteen months at the Compound which was just a mile up the road from the CIA Annex. Am I so far out in left field as to draw the following conclusions?
Amb. Stevens made all his security worries and requests for additional support to the State Department which was fully aware of the gun-running activity. General Ham took it upon himself to make his offer of military assistance, but Stevens turned down those offers twice because he would have been concerned the illegal activity would have been exposed.
The local hires-security tipped off the terrorist attackers that night as to precisely where they would find Amb. Stevens, their target for assassination. Diplomat Sean Stevens died because he was at the Compound that night.
Several members at the CIA Annex were readying to go help defend the SMC from the assault but were ordered to stand down. They defied orders and went anyway so they could comply with their lifelong oath to protect and defend sovereign U.S. soil. Some went to assist other Americans to get away from the area and back home to The States, others fought as hard as they could to save the SMC. They lost track of Ambassador Stevens in the heavy black smoke from the fires, later Smith’s body was found outside. Stevens was reportedly “taken to the hospital” but was dead by then, his body violated and dragged through the streets beforehand. The two other Americans who lost their lives that night, Navy SEAL/CIA contract employees Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were found dead, Doherty struck by munition targeted to his position because he had “painted” himself believing it would help the U.S. airborne assistance he was so certain would be coming.
The assault came in two waves lasting over 8 hours, nearby military assistance was being readied for deploy, but as we learned from Congressional testimony no “go” order was ever issued. We know Barack Obama was notified immediately that the Embassy in Tripoli made it known the SMC was under armed assault and his personal representative to the area was missing, yet instead of staying in the Situation Room to monitor events, or at the very least remain in the Oval Office, he took off for parts as yet known; it has been said he went to bed because he had an early flight in the morning to a campaign event in Las Vegas. It was at this event he briefly addressed the assault, terming the loss of the Ambassador and the three other Americans as “a few bumps in the road.” Why did he not stay where his authority was required? Why did he not issue the “go” order to the several military units waiting to deploy? Was it due to his own knowledge of the illegal weapons transfer activity, the fact that he did not want that discovered anymore than Stevens had a few weeks earlier?
Hillary Clinton was in the Situation Room, there is record of one phone call between her and Obama during the assault. What did they talk about? Why did she not strongly suggest he come back to do what was necessary? How is it she was the only one able to connect with him? Why did she not make more of an effort to get some kind of military defense sent to her responsibility, the SMC? Was it that she also could not make a large effort else it exposes her culpability?
Have all the less-than-satisfactory investigations by too many separate committees of the Congress occurred in order to aid in covering up the culpability of the Members of Congress who assuredly must have known of the illegal activity? Because the CIA was involved this would have required the signing off from some high-ranking Members. Is the feet-dragging and snail’s pace of all the committee investigations, including the House Special Committee, due not solely to the stonewalling by the State Department but aided by manipulation with just a bit of information released? Supposedly, this would appease those of us who simply cannot rest until all the answers are truly given, all witnesses, including those survivors that have been kept hidden from Congressional inquiry by the State Department interviewed, anyone who had anything to do with the attack that night being put on the record.
Hillary Clinton’s “What difference does it make?” has been misconstrued to mean reference to the loss of the lives of four Americans when in fact, as I point out above, it was a rehearsed lie as to the instigation of the attack. However, a difference was evident that night, and as I have written in an earlier piece Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty knew this and they gave their lives for that difference. The Special Mission Compound was adjunct to our Embassy in Tripoli, thereby causing it to sit on sovereign U.S. soil. Woods and Doherty performed as so many other heroes we honor throughout the history of our nation, they sacrificed their very lives to protect and defend America. Too many hear the word “Benghazi” and think only of some plot of dry sand in the Middle East somewhere when in fact, this attack was no different from that which occurred here on 9/11. This is why so many will not rest until the U.S. officials culpable finally have been brought to justice.