We're Now Live with the Barry and Hilly Show!

For those who prefer to either keep their heads in the sand or don’t know how to find out, below is the timeline (found here) of the Obama administration’s statements ("misadministration" might be a better term) on the, now acknowledged, pre-planned Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack of our Libyan embassy in Benghazi.

Coincident with the 9/11/2012 attack of our embassy in Libya was an uproar, as is common in the Muslim world, over the release of a video on YouTube critical of the Prophet Mohammed. While everyone else in the know seemed to state up front that the attending brutal murders were not just your normal mayhem but rather a terrorist attack, shortly thereafter adding that it was indeed pre-planned, our administration went live with the “Barry and Hilly Show,” our own "Dumb and Dumber," continuing in the face of all evidence against such to deny this had anything to do with the anniversary of 9/11 and was simply an innocent and expected response to a video offensive to Muslims posted on the Internet.

Here in America, when your religion is mocked, you are not only expected to fork over taxpayer funds to make it available for all to see, but you are further expected to shut up about it and just grin and bear it. On the other hand, when Islam is mocked or ridiculed we have been conditioned to expect that rioting and killing are justified as a normal response and that the person or persons who made such offensive materials are actually the ones to blame.

September 12, 2012:

• Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton announced that four Americans had been killed in an attack on our consulate in Benghazi on 9/11/2012, including our ambassador to Libya.
• President Obama condemned the attack as outrageous and shocking and denounced attempts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others but added that such was no justification to warrant such senseless “acts of terror” and brutality as had occurred at our Libyan embassy.
• An unnamed senior administration official stated that the administration could as yet speak no further to the identity of the perpetrators of the “complex attack” and that there needed to be a full investigation.

September 13, 2012: (Here comes the further attempt to place full blame on an Internet video.)

• White House spokesman Jay Carney announced that the protests occurring across the Muslim world were in response to “the movie that has circulated on the Internet” and that Hillary Clinton was correct in stating that the U.S. was not involved in the production of such video but re-emphasized, as did our president, that there was no justification for responding to the movie with violence.

September 14, 2012:

• Hillary Clinton made reference to the embassy killing and the violence at our other embassies based on “an awful Internet video” that was not our doing.
• In response to a report indicating that the Benghazi attack was imminent and thus obviously pre-planned, Jay Carney stated at a news briefing that any story of such reports was false.

September 16, 2012:

• Face the Nation (CBS): Susan E. Rice, U.S. ambassador to the U.N., stated that available information informed that the violence “began spontaneously in Benghazi” in response to events in Cairo, Egypt, some hours earlier where a “violent protest” was “sparked by this hateful video,” and that such events were neither “premeditated (n)or preplanned.”
• This Week (ABC): Susan Rice stated we had a “substantial security presence” in the Benghazi consulate in which two of the dead Americans were actually engaged in providing.
• Mohamed Yusuf al-Magariaf, president of Libya’s General National Congress, stated that there was no doubt that the attack was preplanned and premeditated based on the 9/11 anniversary and the manner in which the attack was carried out.

September 17, 2012:

• State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland stated she was not ready to call the attack an act of terror until the outcome of a “complete investigation.”
• Jay Carney responded to suggestions that the attack was a terror attack by stating that the questioner was “conveniently conflating two things”—the anniversary of 9/11 (2001) and the events that had transpired on 9/11 (2012).

September 19, 2012 (After days of disavowing terrorists’ involvement by various U.S. officials, though surprisingly not by Libyan officials, the story begins to morph):

• Matthew Olsen, director of the National Counterterrorism Center testifying before Congress, stated “…they were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy…this was an opportunistic attack…What we don’t have…is specific intelligence that there was significant advanced planning…for this attack.”
• CNN reported, based on Ambassador Chris Steven’s journal, that Stevens had been worried by security threats in Benghazi.

September 20, 2012:

• Jay Carney stated, “It is…self-evident that what happened was a terrorist attack…that’s self-evident,” but also insists it was the result of exploiting the reaction to the (anti-Muslim) video that was found to be offensive. (Jay, you can’t have it both ways.)
• CBS News reported there never was an anti-American protest (in Benghazi) stating, “Witnesses tell…that there was never an anti-American protest outside of the consulate….it came under a planned attack.”
• On an Univision town hall production, President Obama continued to parrot his administration’s official denial, “…there is an offensive video or cartoon directed at the Prophet Muhammad. And this…is an excuse to carry out some inexcusable violent acts directed at…Americans…My number-one priority is to always keep our…embassies safe…When the initial events happened in Cairo and all across the region, we…sen(t) a message to the leaders of these countries…saying we had nothing to do with the video…but we will not tolerate violence.” Univision asked if the Benghazi incident was a terrorist attack and (nine days after the incident) President Obama said, “…we’re still doing an investigation …What we do know is that that the natural protests that arose…over the video were used…by extremists to…harm U.S. interests.”

September 21, 2012:

• Hillary Clinton told the Pakistani foreign minister that, “What happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack…”

September 24, 2012:

• Hillary Clinton told Libyan President Magariaf, “…Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the terrorist assault on our consulate…”

September 25, 2012:

• On ABC's The View, President Obama said, “…a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. Now I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video…”
• Libyan President Magariaf said in his speech to the U.N. General Assembly, “It was a preplanned act of terrorism directed against American citizens.”

September 26, 2012:

• Jay Carney was questioned in a news briefing as to why, when asked point-blank on The View if the incidents in Benghazi constituted a terrorist attack, Mr. Obama did not answer with a straight up yes or no. Carney said, “He answered the question he was asked…we need to await further information that the investigation will uncover. But it is certainly the case that it is our view as an administration, the president’s view, that it was a terrorist attack.” (Jay seems very confused; could that be the result of mixed signals from his boss?)

So, is that clear now?

Crystal!

Finally, I know there are those out there who will say, “He didn’t say that,” just like they say, “He didn’t say that,” to Mr. Obama’s “You didn’t do that” comment. It does, however, bear your attention so that you might make your own judgment call about Mr. Obama’s statement on Benghazi after Steve Kroft of 60 Minutes asked Mr. Obama, during a September 23, 2012, interview, whether the events that had transpired at our embassies around the Muslim world, especially in Benghazi, Libya, had changed his mind concerning his positive view of the Arab Spring. Mr. Obama reminded Mr. Kroft that he had stated up front that the events transpiring in the Muslim world would be unsettling but that there was no real indication we could have changed the outcome of what became known as the Arab Spring. The president reiterated his belief that aligning ourselves with democracy was absolutely the right thing to do and said, “But I was pretty certain and continue to be pretty certain that there are going to be bumps in the road because, you know, in a lot of these places the one organizing principle has been Islam.”

No, Mr. President, actually, I don’t know. In fact, it sounds an awful lot to me like you are casually referring to the brutal rape and/or murder of four American diplomats as so-called “bumps in the road.” Frankly, I am offended and see it as a lot more serious than that. In fact, I would ask, if these countries cannot control their own citizens and provide us with the security we need to operate an embassy in their country, why are we there? Additionally, Mr. President, exactly why are we giving the new Egyptian leadership, controlled by the radical Muslim Brotherhood, $450 million?

Finally, word is now circulating that whistleblowers are charging that repeated calls for more security at the Benghazi consulate were refused. In light of such accusations, can anyone explain to me why Valarie Jarrett, a personal friend and senior advisor to the president, who reportedly “introduced them (the Obamas) to a wealthier and better-connected Chicago than their own,” was accompanied by a full Secret Service detail for a vacation on Martha’s Vineyard while Ambassador Chris Stevens was refused needed security?

If this doesn’t all stink to you yet, I suggest that you require surgery for a deviated septum. Something is definitely rotten in Washington!