The 'Security Leak Administration' and the Deaths in Libya

Do Americans feel safer today than they did four years ago?  Considering the many dangers in today's world: riots in Muslim nations against U.S. interests, a U.S. ambassador and three others dead at the hands of jihadists, an undetected Russian submarine in restricted U.S. waters, and China launching intercontinental ballistic missiles to possibly achieve a first-strike nuclear capability against the U.S.

Meanwhile, President Obama has created an atmosphere of appeasement and indecision regarding national security.  American Thinker interviewed national security experts to get their opinion on the Obama administration's explanations to the American people.

The Obama administration would like Americans to believe that these recent Muslim riots were due solely to a spontaneous response to a video.  The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations said the attack on the American consulate in Benghazi last week was not premeditated.  But all those interviewed by American Thinker agree with former CIA Director Michael Hayden in that they don't buy this explanation.

"I continue to believe," Hayden said, "that what happened in Benghazi, Libya was purposeful, planned, and pre-meditated.  You don't bring a rocket-propelled grenade launcher and mortar to a spontaneous demonstration.  The attack was complex and well-organized.  As the embassy people moved to the safe house, it came under mortar fire.  I am not willing to concede that it was just a demonstration that got out of hand.  Even though the administration is suggesting that there is no evidence that it was pre-mediated, more likely, it's just that we did not detect it.  The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.  More broadly in Libya, if you break it, you own it, especially since Eastern Libya is awash with weapons, full of dangerous gangs, and is a hotbed for fundamentalists.  All of this was predictable."

Fred Rustmann, Jr., a former CIA operative, who participated in the video "Dishonorable Disclosures," felt that the disclosure of the "safe haven" had to be a leak, since such information is among the closest and most heavily guarded secrets.  He speculates that the Foreign Service nationals who handle the nuts and bolts of the administrative duties of the embassy found out where the safe haven was and then passed the information on to extremists.

All the mass media were quick to jump on Romney for attacking the U.S. embassy's statement in Cairo condemning a movie by "misguided individuals who offend believers of all religions."  Romney said, "It's disgraceful that the Obama administration's first response was not to condemn the attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks."  After this statement, President Obama reiterated his claim at the Democratic Convention that Mitt Romney would return America's foreign policy to "an era of blustering and blundering." 

How could the Romney/Ryan campaign be blundering when they can't make any of the foreign policy decisions?  Those interviewed tallied the president's decisions and did not give the president a high mark: withdrawal from Iraq, accelerated withdrawals from Afghanistan, having a very light footprint in Libya, a series of concessions to the Russians during the Russian re-set, the embassies stormed with al-Qaeda's flag raised, American diplomats murdered, and the American flag burned.  In fact, they emphasized that the blunder is the current president's foreign policy, which has not brought friendship, but rather has emboldened America's enemies through weakness.

Pete Hoekstra, formally on the House Intelligence Committee, who is now running for senator in Michigan, cannot believe that Mitt Romney was "blasted for criticizing the embassy, considering that Hillary Clinton is still saying the same thing, and still apologizing."  Among her remarks, Clinton said that the rage and violence were prompted by "an awful Internet video that the American government had nothing to do with."  Hoekstra also wants Americans to remember that the president made a campaign appearance in Nevada the day after the U.S. ambassador to Libya was killed, and the president said this: "The sacrifices that our troops and our diplomats make are obviously very different from the challenges that we face here domestically but like them, you guys are Americans who sense that we can do better than we're doing[.] ... I'm just really proud of you."  Yet no criticism was given to President Obama for choosing to attend a campaign rally instead of showing leadership, nor for the absurd comparison comments he made.

Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, chairperson of the Foreign Affairs Committee, is surprised that President Obama has not tried to blame George W. Bush for what is happening in the Middle East today.  "Everybody is responsible but President Obama.  It is amazing to me how he could be so 'tefloned.'  He can get away with it because he has the liberal press going along with him.  They issue press releases as facts."

Of course, this administration has to blame the movie to show that it's not their failed policies at fault.  Even though the riots were initiated on 9/11, Libyan officials say the attack was planned in advance, and sources say the State Department had 48 hours' notice.  Yet the Obama administration is still saying these attacks were spontaneous.  Hayden told American Thinker, "My judgment is that the movie was a tool, a pretext, to manipulate these events and to get people to the streets.  That is the explanation for Egypt, Sudan, and Tunisia."

Both Hoekstra and Congressman Brian Bilbray (R-CA) are tired of this administration playing the political correctness game.  The Obama administration never mentions the words "jihadist" or "Islamist extremist," but instead talks about workplace violence, as in the case of those murdered at Fort Hood.  President Obama referred to the murderers of Ambassador Christopher Stevens as "them," "perpetrators," and "killers."  Regarding the murder of the ambassador, this administration once again could not find the words "terrorist act" in its vocabulary.

Maybe this has to do with Biden still going around saying Osama is dead and GM is alive, when in reality, al-Qaeda is alive and GM is on the verge of another bankruptcy.  Or as Congressman Bilbray sarcastically stated, "obviously they hate us because we have not been sensitive enough.  The more you bend over trying to please or love them, the more they will despise you.  This administration supports tolerance of intolerance."

The Democrats and mass media were quick to fault President Bush for his "mission accomplished" statement.  Today, President Obama goes around bragging that "the tide of war is receding."  Congressman Bilbray summarized it best: "Instead of taunting, 'I am the guy who got bin Laden,' he should be concerned that he is the guy who just created another 10,000 bin Ladens.  I don't want people feeling sorry for my nation again; I want people respecting my nation."

Do Americans feel safer today than they did four years ago?  Considering the many dangers in today's world: riots in Muslim nations against U.S. interests, a U.S. ambassador and three others dead at the hands of jihadists, an undetected Russian submarine in restricted U.S. waters, and China launching intercontinental ballistic missiles to possibly achieve a first-strike nuclear capability against the U.S.

Meanwhile, President Obama has created an atmosphere of appeasement and indecision regarding national security.  American Thinker interviewed national security experts to get their opinion on the Obama administration's explanations to the American people.

The Obama administration would like Americans to believe that these recent Muslim riots were due solely to a spontaneous response to a video.  The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations said the attack on the American consulate in Benghazi last week was not premeditated.  But all those interviewed by American Thinker agree with former CIA Director Michael Hayden in that they don't buy this explanation.

"I continue to believe," Hayden said, "that what happened in Benghazi, Libya was purposeful, planned, and pre-meditated.  You don't bring a rocket-propelled grenade launcher and mortar to a spontaneous demonstration.  The attack was complex and well-organized.  As the embassy people moved to the safe house, it came under mortar fire.  I am not willing to concede that it was just a demonstration that got out of hand.  Even though the administration is suggesting that there is no evidence that it was pre-mediated, more likely, it's just that we did not detect it.  The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.  More broadly in Libya, if you break it, you own it, especially since Eastern Libya is awash with weapons, full of dangerous gangs, and is a hotbed for fundamentalists.  All of this was predictable."

Fred Rustmann, Jr., a former CIA operative, who participated in the video "Dishonorable Disclosures," felt that the disclosure of the "safe haven" had to be a leak, since such information is among the closest and most heavily guarded secrets.  He speculates that the Foreign Service nationals who handle the nuts and bolts of the administrative duties of the embassy found out where the safe haven was and then passed the information on to extremists.

All the mass media were quick to jump on Romney for attacking the U.S. embassy's statement in Cairo condemning a movie by "misguided individuals who offend believers of all religions."  Romney said, "It's disgraceful that the Obama administration's first response was not to condemn the attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks."  After this statement, President Obama reiterated his claim at the Democratic Convention that Mitt Romney would return America's foreign policy to "an era of blustering and blundering." 

How could the Romney/Ryan campaign be blundering when they can't make any of the foreign policy decisions?  Those interviewed tallied the president's decisions and did not give the president a high mark: withdrawal from Iraq, accelerated withdrawals from Afghanistan, having a very light footprint in Libya, a series of concessions to the Russians during the Russian re-set, the embassies stormed with al-Qaeda's flag raised, American diplomats murdered, and the American flag burned.  In fact, they emphasized that the blunder is the current president's foreign policy, which has not brought friendship, but rather has emboldened America's enemies through weakness.

Pete Hoekstra, formally on the House Intelligence Committee, who is now running for senator in Michigan, cannot believe that Mitt Romney was "blasted for criticizing the embassy, considering that Hillary Clinton is still saying the same thing, and still apologizing."  Among her remarks, Clinton said that the rage and violence were prompted by "an awful Internet video that the American government had nothing to do with."  Hoekstra also wants Americans to remember that the president made a campaign appearance in Nevada the day after the U.S. ambassador to Libya was killed, and the president said this: "The sacrifices that our troops and our diplomats make are obviously very different from the challenges that we face here domestically but like them, you guys are Americans who sense that we can do better than we're doing[.] ... I'm just really proud of you."  Yet no criticism was given to President Obama for choosing to attend a campaign rally instead of showing leadership, nor for the absurd comparison comments he made.

Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, chairperson of the Foreign Affairs Committee, is surprised that President Obama has not tried to blame George W. Bush for what is happening in the Middle East today.  "Everybody is responsible but President Obama.  It is amazing to me how he could be so 'tefloned.'  He can get away with it because he has the liberal press going along with him.  They issue press releases as facts."

Of course, this administration has to blame the movie to show that it's not their failed policies at fault.  Even though the riots were initiated on 9/11, Libyan officials say the attack was planned in advance, and sources say the State Department had 48 hours' notice.  Yet the Obama administration is still saying these attacks were spontaneous.  Hayden told American Thinker, "My judgment is that the movie was a tool, a pretext, to manipulate these events and to get people to the streets.  That is the explanation for Egypt, Sudan, and Tunisia."

Both Hoekstra and Congressman Brian Bilbray (R-CA) are tired of this administration playing the political correctness game.  The Obama administration never mentions the words "jihadist" or "Islamist extremist," but instead talks about workplace violence, as in the case of those murdered at Fort Hood.  President Obama referred to the murderers of Ambassador Christopher Stevens as "them," "perpetrators," and "killers."  Regarding the murder of the ambassador, this administration once again could not find the words "terrorist act" in its vocabulary.

Maybe this has to do with Biden still going around saying Osama is dead and GM is alive, when in reality, al-Qaeda is alive and GM is on the verge of another bankruptcy.  Or as Congressman Bilbray sarcastically stated, "obviously they hate us because we have not been sensitive enough.  The more you bend over trying to please or love them, the more they will despise you.  This administration supports tolerance of intolerance."

The Democrats and mass media were quick to fault President Bush for his "mission accomplished" statement.  Today, President Obama goes around bragging that "the tide of war is receding."  Congressman Bilbray summarized it best: "Instead of taunting, 'I am the guy who got bin Laden,' he should be concerned that he is the guy who just created another 10,000 bin Ladens.  I don't want people feeling sorry for my nation again; I want people respecting my nation."

RECENT VIDEOS