Death in the Spotlight



By Mr. Curmudgeon:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recovered sufficiently from an alleged head injury to testify before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee regarding the attack on the American diplomatic compound in Benghazi four months ago, which ended the life of U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three others.

As you may recall, Clinton claimed the September 11 attack was a protest gone wild, an angry result springing from an anti-Muslim video posted by an American to YouTube. In a statement made shortly after the attack, Clinton said, “Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet … The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.”

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, continued to toe the administration line when she spoke to Fox’s Chris Wallace, “… What sparked the recent violence [in Benghazi] was the airing on the Internet of a very hateful very offensive video that has offended many people around the world.”

And President Obama added the considerable weight of his office to the story in a speech before delegates at the United Nations, “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam,” and reiterated, “I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity. It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to Americans as well.”

To add a touch of legitimacy to the narrative that the deaths in Benghazi resulted from spontaneous riots sparked by an American-made anti-Muslim video, the State Department produced a $70,000 commercial broadcast in the Arab world in which Clinton and Obama apologized for the video’s vilification of Islam, saying they rejected “all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.”

For many in the Islamic world, it was the first they had ever heard of the video. Needless to say, they rushed to their computers to see for themselves – and riots erupted in cities from Pakistan to Malaysia. The violence resulted in many injuries and deaths – mostly Muslim.

Soon thereafter, Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies brought Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, who wrote and produced the anti-Islamic video (“Innocence of Muslims”) in for questioning. Eric Holder’s Justice Department even sent representatives to ask a few questions as well. It turned out Nakoula committed a technical violation of his probation – he was convicted in 2010 for check–kiting. Today, Nakoula is serving a one-year sentence for the horrendous crime of uploading his video to YouTube using a fictitious user name.

In reality, Nakoula’s imprisonment served two purposes: it reinforced the narrative that intolerant Americans are responsible for Islamic violence around the globe and, more importantly, proved that Obama could act just as autocratically in the defense of Islam as any self-proclaimed Saudi prince.

The Benghazi attack, it turned out, was perpetrated by an Al Qaeda-affiliated terrorist group determined to remind America that despite Osama bin Laden’s death, his minions live on to kill.

At Wednesday” Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) asked Clinton if Americans died in Benghazi “because of a protest, or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they’d go kill some Americans?”

“What difference, at this point, does it make?” asked an incensed Clinton.

As they used to say during her husband’s scandal-plagued administration, “Mistakes were made.”

As far as the Obama administration is concerned, just because innocent people died due to the president’s incompetence or wrong-headed policies is no reason for self-reflection. Whether Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is asked to explain American deaths in Benghazi, or Attorney General Eric Holder is asked for details regarding the carnage unleashed by Operation Fast and Furious, Obama administration thralls get downright testy when asked to explain how they ended up with so much blood on their hands.


  1. hilarity clinton suffers from self denial, a liberal disease. She isn't to blame, though now she issues mea culpas. Incompetence and stupidity are forever. Big deal. What's the difference now. Those people were slaughtered and this Yale graduate could have helped and CHOSE to do nothing and further the lie. Good riddance to bad rubbish..

  2. I did not watch all of the hearing, but questions I would have asked (which someone may have):
    Who is responsible for the allocation of State Department funds to diplomatic missions in dangerous regions?
    On the several occasions that Ambassador Stevens requested more security, who is responsible for saying yes or no, you Secretary Clinton or President Obama?