Well, after rattling on about gun control for a few days, I thought I’d do a flashback to Benghazi. The President wants to protect Americans from guns, but he couldn’t even be bothered to protect his own ambassador in Libya. So, let’s face the hypocrisy straight on, what the heck was Ambassador Stevens doing in Benghazi? All clues lead me to believe that President Obama had Ambassador Stevens engaged in gun-running for the Syrian opposition. What are the odds these guns turn out to be more of those infamous “assault weapons”? So, this administration wanted to do a end run around Congress and funnel weapons to some rebels, no problem. The press suffered collective amnesia and didn’t bother to investigate or question. I must have missed their calls for an Iran/Contra type investigation. Why didn’t the State Department do a better job protecting the ambassador? Why didn’t the White House or anyone in our national security chain lift a finger to help the ambassador and those former Special Forces operators who begged for help when they were attacked by Al Qaeda thugs? The press never wanted to touch this story and they kept burying this shameful display of dereliction of duty. Now, with the media ready to whip up the public sentiment about gun-control, the mainstream media will avoid the Benghazi story.
The Washington Post reports (here) that the commission Hillary Clinton appointed to investigate Benghazi presented it’s report to lawmakers today. Serendipitously, Hillary faints, suffers a concussion and dodges appearing before Congress Thursday. What amazingly convenient timing……. She can make her exit, reputation intact, and dust off any lingering specks of Benghazi desert sand from her coattails. Expect more tightly scripted responses, a’la Susan Rice’s “there’s no terrorism here” style, from the minions who will testify in Hillary’s place.
This President’s administration has let guns walk into the hands of Mexican drug cartels. He let his own ambassador die at the hands of terrorists while said ambassador appears to have been engaged in arranging arms transfers to Syrian bands of rebel (some of who are Al Qaeda affiliated). Now, when a radical Islamist opened fire on innocents at Fort Hood, well, his administration did nothing about that. They insist on calling that act of terrorism, simply “workplace violence”. Funny thing, I don’t know off-hand what type of weapon MAJ Hasan used and I am sure if the press had emphasized that detail, I would remember. I’m wondering if it was an “assault weapon”. I found this ( a hand gun and another weapon) from The New York Times. A quick search and alas, here’s the UK Telegraph report. I must have missed the President’s concern about that mass shooting in the barrage of wailing about how our troops needed to not use this incident to denigrate Islam. And in the wake of that our military launched, not an investigation into radical Islamist activity within our military, but instead they rammed into place Islamic sensitivity training for the military. So, our troops will know that when Islamic radicals try to kill them in the name of Allah, never fear, Islam means peace and it’s our troops failure at sensitivity and that instigated the murder…. They’ve hired on Islamic “experts”, many with dubious backgrounds, to re-educate our troops about Islam…….. I recall the many reports about how in Afghanistan this President insisted on very restrictive rules of engagement, placing more concern on Afghan sensitivities than on our soldiers’ lives. Yes, President Obama likes battlefield gun control too. No talk of victory or neutralizing the enemy – no, no, none of that. We were on a mission to win the hearts and minds…. Even when it became obvious our troops faced a serious threat from the very Afghan recruits they were training and arming, this administration still downplayed this and emphasized that our troops lacked enough awareness of Afghan sensitivities. No word about the dangers of placing “assault weapons” into the hands of people with a culture decidedly geared toward barbarism. Nope, it was our troops fault for angering them.
So, putting guns into the hands of Al Qaeda affiliated rebels in Libya and Syria is okay. Putting guns into the hands of Mexican criminals is okay too. Putting guns into the hands of Afghan recruits, with an alarming propensity to turn them on our troops was okay too. But this President wants to make sure he limits access to guns by law-abiding American citizens??? What is wrong with this picture??? Oops, I detoured back to gun control again. I promise tomorrow I’ll talk about something different.
On a more serious note here are links to very thoughtful pieces on the school shooting. The first piece, by Pat Buchanen will make you think about evil. The second piece offers a straight-forward take on this tragedy by Thomas Sowell.