On May 10, 2013, I posted the following comments regarding the tragedy of Benghazi on the blog of a columnist for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:
“The tragedy that happened in Benghazi is being turned into political expediency by Republican power players, imo.
Ambassador Christopher Stevens and the three other American diplomats, who were killed in the attack on America’s Embassy in Benghazi, were seeking a more just world by risking their lives in their humanitarian service there. A more just world will not be created, in their memory, through tearing this nation apart for petty partisan purposes. Those four American patriots were not able to be rescued because of the time limitations in reaching them successfully by our military – regardless of whatever talking points were stated by UN Ambassador Susan Rice on the Sunday political television broadcasts, after the fact of the attack.
To insure a more just world, we should try to come together to heal as Americans in order to make our democratic republic work in harmony so that America will continue to be a beacon for liberty, justice, humanity, and reason throughout the world for which millions of Americans, including President Abraham Lincoln, have given their lives to make that America, and that world, possible for future generations.
The focus should be on the substantive tasks, first, of ascertaining more fully why greater security was not built into a prearranged plan to ensure the safety of these four American diplomats, well in advance of the Benghazi attack, and, then, of building that safety plan, now, so that, in the future, no other American Embassy, and its diplomats, will incur this type of tragedy. Americans must be willing to put monetary resources into ensuring the safety of their fellow Americans who are willing to work throughout the world to build a more just world for all.”
In response to a question addressed to me by another poster on the same AJC blog, I wrote the following:
“From the official report, the reason that no U.S. airplanes were sent to Benghazi in support of the diplomats was because, given the time limitations, that rescue mission would not have succeeded, regardless of how much we all might wish for that hard fact to be otherwise.
It has been suggested that, perhaps, more military officers should be interviewed in this regard, and I would have no objection to delving into that time limitation in greater detail for the full understanding by the public. I am in support of an honest exploration of the truth, but so far I have neither read nor seen anything which indicates that any more could reasonably have been done to have saved the lives of the four diplomats other than putting more monetary resources into building a safety plan well in advance of the attack’s occurrence. I believe Congress was asked for additional money for this safety plan purpose in Benghazi, but that those resources were denied by Congress. Why Congress denied those monetary resources for the Embassy at Benghazi should be looked into, also, in greater detai for the public’s knowledge, imo.
You may want to read the article by Jay Bookman, in the link below, which deals very effectively with the time limitations of the military. From that link to Bookman’s article are these words:
‘In fact, by 7:40 a.m. the surviving Americans in Benghazi and the first rescue team were already at the Benghazi airport and were being airlifted out. By the time the second team could have deployed, the crisis would have been long over, which is presumably why military superiors decided not to send them.’
Another poster on that same AJC blog, posted the following words on the same thread, which I felt were worthy of being copied to my blog. See below:
“. . .(H)ere’s a few questions that should have been asked by Issa. . .
If there was an active threat on 9/11 in Libya, why wasn’t Stevens at the much heavier fortified CIA compound to begin with?
What was the CIA doing there that required them to have a compound that could withstand a mortar attack while the State Dept personnel had no such protection?
How did the attackers know the CIA location to conduct the 2nd attack? Did they follow the Americans when they left the first area or did they already know where they would be?
Why hasn’t any of the top CIA brass been implicated as Clinton and the State Dept has? They were both equally involved as seen in the fight over the talking points release.
I could keep going on and on, but I’ll let y’all keep on whacking off on Clinton and the ‘cover up.’ Nevermind the fact that the laser-like focus on Clinton and Obama helps cover up the CIA’s involvement. It’s basically a fools search to try to ‘get to the bottom’ of this incident as that will never happen because of CIA involvement.”