The public deserves to know the facts about the Benghazi massacre in 2012 before approving the bombing of Syria sought by President Obama.
Persistent reports suggest the CIA was using Benghazi last year as a base to smuggle arms and foreign fighters to overthrow Syria’s government.
Was Benghazi President Obama’s version of the Iran-contra scandal?
We must know the truth about Benghazi before any vote for a dangerous new Mideast war, especially given the sordid history of previous congressional rubber-stamps for war based on exaggerated or false claims.
Iraq and Vietnam are previous examples of war based on false evidence: WMDs in 2003; the false claim in 1989 that Saddam Hussein’s forces had killed babies in Kuwait; and the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin Resolution authorizing Vietnam escalation.
This background was one of my major themes Sept. 3 during a nearly hour-long interview Sept. 3 on WWL AM/FM of New Orleans regarding my new book, Presidential Puppetry: Obama, Romney and Their Masters.
Garland Robinette, a longtime host on the 50,000-watt CBS affiliate, provided a probing interview on the book’s substance for some 50-minutes, interrupted by ads and a news break. That is a long session for a general interest station broadcast to five states.
I described the book’s beginnings as my attempt to solve real-life mysteries years ago as I noticed what appeared to be major gaps in news accounts of important events in Washington and elsewhere around the nation. The research led to astonishing findings about the president and his recent predecessors, I explained. The interview can be heard here. Station personnel later said the topics resonated well, based on audience reaction.
We shall explore these topics further in future blogs.
Related News Coverage
Washington Post, House leaders back Obama on Syria strike, Karen Tumulty, David Nakamura and William Branigin, Sept. 3, 2013. House Speaker Boehner says he will support the president and encourage colleagues to do the same.
AP/The Huffington Post, John McCain: Congressional Vote Against Military Action In Syria Would Be ‘Catastrophic,’ Sept. 2, 2013. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) warned that a Congressional vote against military action in Syria would be “catastrophic.” McCain sounded the warning after he and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) met with President Barack Obama on Monday. McCain made similar claims on Sunday, before his meeting with the president. Graham said he feels there is a “solid plan” from the Obama administration to “upgrade the opposition” in Syria. McCain agreed but still cited “concerns.”
Info Wars, Rush Limbaugh Suspects Obama Conspired With Al-Qaeda to Frame Bashar al-Assad, Julie Wilson, Sept. 3, 2013. If true, this is the setup of all time,” says Limbaugh. Conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh acknowledges building evidence that the chemical weapons attack in Syria was staged to frame President Bashar al-Assad. On Tuesday’s broadcast of the Rush Limbaugh show, the talk show host acknowledged reports from the Associated Press that the admitted intelligence on Syria’s chemical weapons attack was “no slam dunk.” He also announced he believes Obama may have been “complicit” in the attack and possibly helped plan it.
War Is A Crime, Who the Missiles Will Hurt, David Swanson, Sept. 3, 2013. Believe it or not — after John McCain played video games on his phone during a hearing on bombing Syria, and Eleanor Holmes Norton said she’d only vote to bomb Syria out of loyalty to Obama — there are decent people in the United States government who mean well and take their responsibilities seriously. One of them, who works on actual humanitarian aid (as opposed to humanitarian bombs) spoke to me. He said that, beyond those who will inevitably be killed by U.S. missiles in Syria, and those who will die in the escalated violence that is very likely to follow, a great many additional people may suffer for reasons we aren’t paying attention to.
New York Times, French Release Intelligence Tying Assad Government to Chemical Weapons, Scott Sayare, Sept. 2, 2013. The French government sought to bolster the case for military action against Syria on Monday, releasing a declassified summary of French intelligence that ties President Bashar al-Assad’s government to the apparent use of chemical weapons outside Damascus last month.
Guardian, Defiant Assad challenges west over chemical weapons evidence, Kim Willsher, Sept. 2, 2013. Bashar al-Assad warns military intervention in Syria could spark a ‘regional war’ and claims ‘Middle East is a powder keg. Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad, has challenged the west to come up with “a single piece” of evidence that he has used chemical weapons. He warned that any military intervention in Syria could spark a “regional war.” “The Middle East is a powder keg, and today the fuse is getting shorter,” he said in an exclusive interview with the French newspaper Le Figaro. Assad’s interview came just two days before the French parliament is due to debate Syria and the possibility of military intervention against Damascus in response to the chemical weapons attack. The Syrian president warned: “Whoever contributes to the reinforcing of terrorists, financially and militarily, is an enemy of the Syrian people.
FireDogLake, Preliminary Whip List – War With Syria, Jane Hamsher, Sept. 2, 2013. Senator Mark Begich (D-AK) is one of two Senate Democrats that openly oppose military intervention in Syria. Thanks to everyone for their help over the weekend in putting together a preliminary whip list. Below is a chart of the results. It is by no means definitive. We are still searching for public statements. The Senate is basically a lost cause — the only Democrats I could find who openly oppose action in Syria are Mark Begich (D-AK) and Joe Manchin (D-WV), and there is more than enough Republican support to get to 60 votes. The battle is going to be in the House. In deciding whether to assign someone to a “committed vote” or “leaning,” I looked for firm statements of opposition before calling someone “committed.” If they left any wiggle room I assigned them to “leaning.”
Guardian, Obama, Congress and Syria, Glenn Greenwald, Sept. 3, 2013. The president is celebrated for seeking a vote on his latest war even as his aides make clear it has no binding effect. It’s a potent sign of how low the American political bar is set that gratitude is expressed because a US president says he will ask Congress to vote before he starts bombing another country that is not attacking or threatening the US. That the US will not become involved in foreign wars of choice without the consent of the American people through their representatives Congress is a central mandate of the US Constitution, not some enlightened, progressive innovation of the 21st century. George Bush, of course, sought Congressional approval for the war in Iraq (though he did so only once it was clear that Congress would grant it: I vividly remember watching then-Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Joe Biden practically begging the Bush White House to “allow” Congress to vote on the attack while promising in advance that they would approve for it). But what makes the celebratory reaction to yesterday’s announcement particularly odd is that the Congressional vote which Obama said he would seek appears, in his mind, to have no binding force at all.