ldsuttonjr Loc: ShangriLa

by Maureen Mullins


what-difference-does-it-make

One year ago, after several months of delay in testifying, excuses included having the flu and treatment for a blood clot contraindicated for the manner in which she claimed to have acquired it, Hillary Clinton finally appeared before one of the Senate committees investigating the armed assault in B******i. Not required to be under oath, it was during this testimony in which she uttered her now-infamous indignant, “What difference, at this point, does it make?” reply to one Senator’s question. I waited for him or any of the other Senators to explain so simple an answer, none was forthcoming. An unfortunate circumstance for it seems hardly anyone, from the president and his Administration to Members of Congress to television commentators (I call them the punditry) to random citizens posting comment on Facebook, seems to understand just what difference was that night of September 11, 2012. Allow me to write a kind of primer for Mrs. Clinton and anyone else who needs the edification.

As Secretary of State, Clinton tasked Christopher Stevens, the United States Ambassador to Libya, on a still-undisclosed diplomatic mission in the very dangerous city of B******i. Because the ambassador’s presence was required, the diplomatic compound his residence, it became adjunct to the embassy in Tripoli; it turned that little piece of Libya into sovereign U.S. soil. For those who are unaware, an embassy does not sit on the soil of the host country but in fact, the soil of the nation of the country represented. All over America there are pieces of the nations of the world; all over the world, there are pieces of America. That is what made the difference that night – not just American lives in mortal danger but America herself attacked, a fact known to U.S. Navy Seals then working as contractors at the local CIA Annex, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty. Both men disobeyed the Stand Down order from the president that was passed along the chain-of-command, they felt it was worth any punishment to get to the compound, to help defend America until more military assistance, they were certain, would arrive. Both were k**led by the attackers in that defense, heroes by any description of the word.

Of late I am reading comments and seeing lists of the incidents at embassies and diplomatic stations that occurred during the presidency of George W, Bush; the lists include the number of diplomatic personnel k**led. The tone of the comments imply that those of us upset and still demanding answers to important questions about B******i are only making a big deal out of the attack because Obama is president, Clinton an all-but-declared candidate for 2016. They seem to believe all the incidents can be compared apples to apples; this is not the case. Not to denigrate the loss of any of those American souls, but there is in fact a key difference between those attacks and what happened in B******i that night: In the case of those other attacks, a United States Ambassador was not assassinated.

Yes, I use that word specifically. In other news stories it is always written that four Americans died that night; that is inaccurate. Three Americans were murdered and an ambassador assassinated in a terrorist armed assault on a U.S. diplomatic compound. Again, for those who appear to be unaware of that significance, a United States Ambassador is the personal representative of the President. It could be described as his being the diplomatic shadow of Obama to the other nations of the world. Amb. Stevens was directly targeted that night, his diary and his security concerns made that quite clear. It was bad enough to have the President and the Secretary of State lie about the cause, the reason for the assault during the ceremony in front of the f**g-draped caskets holding the remains of the four Americans who lost their lives, a ceremony purported to honor their return home, but it is outrageous in the extreme to have some members of that punditry now attempt to blame Ambassador Stevens for the assault, his own death. In a Wall Street Journal opinion piece published January 22, 2014, former Deputy Mission Chief at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, Gregory Hicks lays out the details of the expressed security concerns, made in both written cable and video conference, by his former superior and late friend, Amb. Stevens. As Mr. Hicks notes, for some unknown reason his testimony was not included in the final draft of the report from the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, released last week. This glaring omission has allowed many political commentators on the left to attempt to blame Stevens for his own demise, and to absolve then-responsible for everything which occurred under her watch, Secretary of State Clinton. Yet one more question added to the ever-growing list: Why was such important information, provided under oath, not included in the committee’s report?

The whole narrative has been made much more complicated that it ever ought to have been, in part due to the lack of interest, focus on the part of Congress and the media. I have written this before and will repeat the following as often as necessary: Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty knew the difference it made, and they gave their lives for that difference.

JONDO

When does B******i make a difference,When will B******i make a difference. When will you quit talk, talk, talking, and doing something about it. I dont think your smart enough to do anything about it, or you would have already.

Unclet Loc: Amarillo, Tx

There is some merit to your post, but it has one problem. Like most posts of this type it has flaws - I quote "When will you quit talk, talk, talking, and doing something about it"; why does it have to be someone else doing something about it, WHY NOT YOU? I quote "I don't think your smart enough to do anything about it, or you would have already", your statement says that you're smart enough to critize another's ability, but choose not to offer up your idea about what to do, that is complacency. Which is worse, being "not smart enough", or no being willing to contribute?

JONDO

These are just comments not the ten commandments. nor a spelling contest or a judgement call from you.If a person could do something about what he comments on, He wouldn't have to comment would he ?

Ricko Loc: Florida

Unclet-Jondo is just another liberal running his mouth as that is all they are qualified to run. We know that attempts have been and continue to be made to get at the t***h as relates to B******i but the administration is stonewalling at every turn. The democrats cannot handle the t***h so they will continue to obfuscate until the clock runs out. This administration has to be the slimiest group of incompetents ever gathered in one locale led by the biggest fraud ever perpetrated on our country. The Mob could learn a few tricks from this group. Good Luck America !!!

alex Loc: michigan now imperial beach californa

they are not even qualified to run that but they won't stop

ldsuttonjr Loc: ShangriLa

Jondo: You are part of the problem.....Collectively, as a society, our actions prove that we value style over substance,
celebrity over principal, and victimization over self reliance,..see when a well packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations,the t***h will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic. These scandals are all by design..... To quote Bernard Lewis "We live in a time when great energies are being dev**ed to the falsification of history - to flatter, to deceive or to serve some sectional purpose. No good can come of such distortions, even when they are inspired by unselfish motives. History is the collective memory and if we think of the social body in terms of the human body, no history means amnesia, distorted history means neurosis".

Unclet Loc: Amarillo, Tx

I made no judgement of or about you or your post. I merely pointed out the implied complacency and absence of validity of your post. Since you don't seem to be able to understand that my use of "you" is metaphoric, let me declare, from this point on - You is metaphor for Liberals, Them, They. Hopefully, anyone that has your intellectual capacity can put the metaphors in the right place. Read on.

You want someone else to do something, that you feel you are more intellectually competent to accomplish, and yet you want others to do for you. You can't have it both ways. Either you are smart enough to do something about the problem and choose not too - complacency. Or, you have the brains, but not the balls to make a stand and work toward solving this nation's problems - cowardice.

JONDO

My, What big sophisticated words you use, Are you trying to tell me your smart. Professor

Unclet Loc: Amarillo, Tx

No, not at all - just using words that clarify my post. Is this a big problem? Just asking?

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

I think it may be time for someone to get into this thread talking about a part of the opening post that nobody seems to want to talk about. I will try to get the topic turned from personal attacks to the subject of B******i.

I remember Gregory Hicks talking to a House committee several months ago and haven't heard a lot about what he said other than from the people at Fox. I do wonder why his testimony, given under oath, wasn't part of the Senate Committee's decision, but I am sure I know why. The House committee was dominated by Republicans and the Senate committee by Democrats although much noise was made by the media about the bi-partisan Senate committee. Committees in either house are always dominated by the majority party. At any rate, I am pretty sure that the one man still alive who could know most about B******i, Hicks, had to be left out by the Senate committee for obvious reasons.

The words from that opening post that I was most concerned about were: former Deputy Mission Chief at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, Gregory Hicks lays out the details of the expressed security concerns, made in both written cable and video conference, by his former superior and late friend, Amb. Stevens. As Mr. Hicks notes, for some unknown reason his testimony was not included in the final draft of the report from the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, released last week. This glaring omission has allowed many political commentators on the left to attempt to blame Stevens for his own demise, and to absolve then-responsible for everything which occurred under her watch, Secretary of State Clinton. Yet one more question added to the ever-growing list: Why was such important information, provided under oath, not included in the committee’s report?

I have to wonder why Hicks, the number 2 man in Libya back then, wasn't included in any of the Senate committee work. Actually, I don't wonder at all, I know.

Raylan Wolfe Loc: earth

B******i H**x Debunked For Umpteenth Time

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/attytood/The-B******i-h**x-completely-unravels.html

The NYT reports that everything you think you know about B******i is wrong!

Comment Loc: California

That's absolute , stinky Bull. Just look at the hole that dropped it. My 2 yr old great grand child could do better.

ldsuttonjr Loc: ShangriLa

Oldroy: We are wasting our time on impeachment charges! A Grand jury needs to be assembled....and at that; the only thing that will come out of it is perjury charges for lies!!!!

Unclet Loc: Amarillo, Tx

Sorry Roy, you are absolutely correct, I did get off topic. I was being somewhat of a deterrent to serious conversation. Obviously, it was a waste of time and effort to explain myself, and to question Liberal's intentions.