MORE TRUTH ABOUT BENGHAZI ATTACK.

Voters must be made aware of it.

A new phase of the Benghazi attack has developed, with one senior intelligence official giving a new timeline report to refute what FoxNews.com has been broadcasting for weeks that the United States government was at fault in handling the situation.

"According to a Fox News report last Friday, citing an unnamed source, CIA officers working at an annex about a mile from the mission were told by officials in the CIA chain of command to "stand down" after receiving a call from the mission asking for help." an article on CNN Internet front page stated.

The official commented that there was no "stand down" order of any kind to CIA operatives; however, what was happening was under surveillance as a terrorist attack.

Meanwhile, there were a mixture of circumstances that prevented the scope of the attack to be realistically observed, and disorganization (and not disorientation) would set in, due to those circumstances, such as the CIA in an annex a mile away trying to get to the site of the attack. In other words, there was little or no time to really organize.

In a state of confusion, Ambassador Chris Stevens got lost, and was found dead later on, while the two officers, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty got killed by mortar fire in an intense attack lasting 11 minutes on the mission compound. There was no description of the last American diplomat's death, but there was ample reason to believe that he came under fire at the same time as his colleagues.

Some media reports have diverted the incident to the political arena in an election year, to chastise President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of concealing information from the American people, and even charging them of negligence of duty.

"The attack has become part of the political debate as the Obama administration has been harshly criticized by many Republicans for initially describing the incident as a spontaneous protest against an anti-Islamic video on the web and evolved into an assault on the mission." the article continued.

The senior intelligence official's assessment of the whole situation in Benghazi debunked those accusations, and to an extent made it clear that a mark of sensationalism was involved in the reporting of the attack by some news outlets in the country.

He defended the intelligence community by stating in parts of the article thus, ".... there was a need to address this issue now because some of the media mischaracterizations of what was done that night is a disservice to the men who had to make decisions under fire." (CNN, 11/02/12).

It was a good thing that former Gov. Mitt Romney, the Republican candidate for the 2012 presidential election has not taken up or spoken too much of the Benghazi attack, for the obvious reason that foreign policy was not his specialty.

He was still preaching "Reaganomics", and his supporters were applauding him; however, it was those same policies of rewarding the so called "job creators", plus the Bush era tax breaks for the wealthy, as well as paying for two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, that have brought the country to its present condition economically.

If only he could go back and read his green book (history book), he would realize that his planned policies were outmoded; and that they would work for some, but not all Americans. (Meaning the elite and the wealthy, and not the middle class and ordinary working men and women).

Yet, for some of the media to back his campaign by maligning the Obama administration with the Benghazi attack as a pretext was downright dishonest. Whatever they (media) did, his campaign was totally the opposite of that of the president, as it did not deal with specifics.

Obama has made provision for education, scientific research, health care, future training for a workforce that would be ready for new, modern and innovative technological developments, a versatile energy policy to harness solar, wind and other renewable sources to make the U.S. independent from foreign countries, some of whom were not friendly, with respect to oil; etc. etc.

Romney, on the other hand, has turned to joking on the campaign trail and making a mockery of himself; with his media backers, and some Republican members of the U.S. Congress using excuses for him for his shortsightedness, by attacking the White House and the State Department on the assault in Benghazi.

Astute voters would want specifics before they would vote for any candidate; yet, Romney did not seem to have any, in many people's view.

Comments

No comments yet.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working