Difference between revisions of "An October Surprise"

Latest revision as of 15:30, 25 June 2017

An October Surprise
by Phyllis Schlafly
October 24, 2012

Political pundits have been warning about an October Surprise that could affect the outcome of the presidential election. But this year’s October Surprise may have been the 9/11 murder of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens plus three other Americans, and President Obama’s deceitful, cowardly response.

The fallout is the collapse of the false narrative that the assassination of Bin Laden brought finality to Muslim threats, the proof of the failure of President Obama’s Middle East policy, and the coverup. A coverup is a bad act or false statement followed by an effort to conceal or mislead public knowledge.

Obama got away with his war on Libya without congressional approval because no Americans were killed. Now four Americans have been killed.

The 9/11 attack in Benghazi, Libya was a preplanned, calculated, organized, military-style assault on U.S. territory and personnel. But the Obama Administration persisted for two weeks in spinning the fairy tale that it was just the spontaneous outburst of a mob angry about an anti-Muslim video.

On Sept. 16, the Obama Administration sent UN Ambassador Susan Rice onto five Sunday TV programs to redundantly present the party line that the torching of the consulate and murder of the U.S. Ambassador were merely an angry mob reaction to an anti-Islam video made in the U.S. Rice called the event “spontaneous, not a premeditated response” that seemed “to have been hijacked” by “extremists who came with heavier weapons.”

White House spokesman Jay Carney insisted on Sept. 14 that the attack was all about an anti-Muslim video, saying, “We have no information to suggest that it was a preplanned attack.” He spent eight days denying the obvious before he admitted that the label of terrorism was “self-evident.”

When Obama spoke to the United Nations on Sept. 25, he announced “the vision we will support.” Expressing “outrage” at the anti-Islam video (which he mentioned six times), but not at the terrorists or violent enemies of the United States, Obama proclaimed that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”

In an emotional pitch to the UN, Obama announced that it’s the world’s duty to condemn the video. Obama and Administration spokesmen almost sounded like they were empathizing with the rioters, and that it must be our fault for allowing a video to be shown that hurt the rioter’s feelings.

Mitt Romney challenged Obama on the Libyan attack in the second presidential debate on Oct. 16. Obama responded by claiming he had called it a “terror” event the day after it happened, after which moderator Candy Crowley showed her bias by immediately backing up his statement.

Fact checkers emphatically pointed out Obama had made a vague reference to unspecified “acts of terror” in his Sept. 12 Rose Garden remarks, but he absolutely did not apply the “T” word to the fatal Benghazi attack. It took Obama two weeks to admit that we had suffered another deliberate enemy attack, meanwhile whining that suggestions that he would “mislead is offensive.”

Obama spent more time discussing the evils of the video than castigating any particular violent attack from the Muslim world. He said Ambassador Stevens was “killed” in Benghazi without mentioning who murdered him, much less labeling them as terrorists.

Obama is deeply committed to the myth of a liberating “Arab Spring” and “the forces of change” to bring about democracy in the Middle East. He seems oblivious to the reality of how his policy of dislodging dictators friendly to the United States, such as in Egypt and Libya, has resulted in rule by Islamist forces who attack and kill Americans.

The evidence is overwhelming that Ambassador Stevens and his tiny security staff had made repeated requests to the Obama Administration for enhanced security and more security staff. Fox News reported 230 prior security incidents in Libya.

Assistant Secretary of State Charlene Lamb, who was in charge of diplomatic security, testified on Oct. 10 that she had placed “the correct number of assets in Benghazi at the time of 9/11 for what had been agreed upon.” That doesn’t square with the denials of repeated requests for enhanced security measures and staff.

Obama revealed his messianic self-importance in this interview given on New Hampshire Public Radio on Nov. 21, 2007: “The day I’m inaugurated, not only the country looks at itself differently, but the world looks at America differently…. If I’m reaching out to the Muslim world, they understand that I’ve lived in a Muslim country, and I may be a Christian, but I also understand their point of view.”

We hope congressional investigations will keep digging. We still want to know, what did Obama and other Administration officials know and when did they know it.