I can understand the need for secrecy in some situations. Military intel is important during ongoing conflicts where we don’t know if there may still be an imminent threat; on 9/11, the government knew quite a few facts that they didn’t immediately disclose because they weren’t sure if the attack was over yet.
What they didn’t do on 9/11 was try to tell us a lie.
Bush was very measured in his immediate response when Andrew Card rushed up to him in front of the second graders at Emma Booker Elementary School to tell him that a second plane had hit the World Trade Center. Liberals make fun of it, but I know better. There are quite a few things that I didn’t like about George W. Bush, but the look on his face told us everything we needed to know about the man. He was not going to tolerate what was going on, and when a course of action was decided the action itself would be swift and decisive. He didn’t lie that day to protect a belief or make us feel better – he called it a premeditated attack, which is exactly what it was.
Obama didn’t do that. As Candy Crowley was so giddy to point out, Obama did use the words "act of terror" during his remarks in the Rose Garden the day after the attack on our embassy in Benghazi. He wasn’t referring to the attack itself, however, and it took a full two weeks before anyone in his cabinet agreed that it was a premeditated terrorist attack timed to coincide with a protest in Egypt. In the immediate aftermath, Obama and his entire staff tried to claim repeatedly – even vehemently on occasion – that the attack was spontaneous and split off from a protest over the video "Innocence of Muslims". Coincidentally other riots broke out in the Middle East and the MSM began painting us as the insensitive jerks of the world for so offending another culture that they’d riot and call for our destruction (as if jihadists the world over haven’t been screaming for American blood for a couple of centuries).
There are a number of reasons why Obama wouldn’t want to admit that the attack was carefully planned and executed, and none of them should be taken lightly. First, Obama and his liberal followers want America to believe that Islam is a religion of peace and there is no jihad. Unfortunately for that narrative Americans have been victimized by jihadists since the early days of our country, during the Barbary Wars. Second, they want America to believe there’s no reason to be at war – I might believe that when the TSA stops groping people at airports. Third, Obama hopes that by profusely apologizing for everything that offends Muslims he might be able to fix his legacy and win peace.
Worst of all is the now-known security issue. A month before the attack, Ambassador Stevens and his head of security, Lt. Col. Andrew Wood, requested more security only to be told that not only would they not get the added security they were requesting, but American security was being reduced at the embassy. Violent activity in the area had all of the people at our embassy worried, and Stevens himself raised concerns that the Libyan militia security had been compromised.
What on Earth could possibly make Obama and his staff do such a thing? Why would they carry out a security drawdown when the seasoned professionals at the embassy were sending warnings that it was almost suicidal to do so? When is the press going to wake up and start asking him the tough questions about this incident that they have, so far, refused to ask? When will they stop covering for him, and how many have to die before they admit he was a poor choice for the Presidency?
We the people should be outraged that a sitting president would be so flippant as to appear on The Daily Show and say that "if four Americans get killed, it’s not optimal." We should be beside ourselves that he would characterize the attack as a "bump in the road." We should be hearing both sides of the aisle demanding to know the truth, but liberals are protecting him. This is hardly Obama’s first scandal. Governor Palin was derided by liberals as having no executive experience, yet she had been a mayor, a commission chair and a governor. Obama had nary a day’s executive experience and not a single congressional accomplishment to his name and somehow he was the better choice. During his Presidency, he has proven just how inept he really is. How can liberals possibly still believe in this man?
It seems to me that Obama is making quite clear that he does not love America and wishes to see her destroyed. If we are so divided that we can’t agree on the fact that Obama needs to go, he may very well get his wish. The jihadists will get theirs, too. We cannot let that happen.