A confusing array of contradictions concerning the murders of four Americans, one of which was a U.S. ambassador, was made worse by Vice President Joe Biden‘s remarks during the debate with Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan Thursday evening.
Today the confusion only worsened yet again when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told reporters that her agency was not the source of misinformation concerning the attacks, charging instead that the White House was the source of the false mantra that the murders were spurred by an anti-Muslim film made in the United States.
Clinton told reporters that when Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, made her rounds on every Sunday morning news show to claim the film motivated the attacks, the information had been fed to her by the White House and not the intelligence community in the State Department or the CIA.
Not only does Clinton’s statement contradict early White House accounts but directly contradicts statements made by Vice President Biden during the debate.
Biden claimed that the White House had only repeated the information provided by the intelligence community and that no one had been informed of the facts concerning the nature of the attacks and their connection to al Qaeda terrorism.
The claims of Biden are further debunked by the testimony of State Department officials before Congress, who stated that the situation on the ground in Libya had been monitored in real time and that no protests against the film had been noted prior to the assassinations.
In addition, State Department officials state that U.S. ambassadors are appointed by and operate under the jurisdiction of the White House, not the State Department. For the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations to go on national television to claim that the attacks were motivated by Muslim outrage over a film is a direct indication that the White House itself is the source of the false mantra that the film led to the assassinations.
Ambassador Rice would not have the authority to speak for the administration in such a sensitive matter of national security except under the specific direction of the White House.
The confusing blame game being played by the administration took yet another odd turn when Obama Deputy Campaign Manager Stephanie Cutter claimed that the only reason the Libyan assassinations are a major issue is the fact that the Romney-Ryan campaign is stirring it up.
Cutter’s remarks were immediately condemned by those who note that Ambassador Chris Stevens was the first U.S. ambassador to be assassinated in over 30 years and that the families of the slain diplomats deserve answers concerning the events that led to their deaths.
The seriousness of the situation is compounded by the fact that intelligence officials report that on at least three separate occasions Ambassador Stevens and others had made official requests for added security in light of growing anti-American sentiment in the region.
The administration’s retort concerning the requests is that the reason such added security was not provided was due to budget cuts the House made to the overseas security of U.S. embassies.
However, no budget has been approved by Congress in nearly four years due to the failure of the Democrat-controlled Senate to pass a budget. Thus, there was no budget that supposedly cut anything. Senate Democrats also signed off on the reductions in funding to overseas security for diplomats.
The administration further had no problem finding the money to provide Chevy Volts for diplomats overseas. Yet it claims it had no money to provide extra security for a U.S. ambassador who felt his life was in danger for months prior to the assassinations.
Look, I don't have nothing against women diplomat's like H. Clinton and S. Rice dealing with U.S. foreign affairs but in the middle east where you have men who don't have respect for women/woman in general! Even though our U.S. women diplomat's represent us in the middle east those P.M.'sters there aren't going to listen and/or pay attention to "A Woman" diplomat! It would be DEGRADING in the 'eyes' of the muslin constituent for a Middle Eastern P.M. to associate with a woman diplomat! What we see on mainstream media showing H. Clinton with Middle East P.M.'s sitting together is all "show an tell." Those P.M.'sters in the Middle East won't deal with a "woman" diplomat…Its obvious that the U.S. don't get the big HINT! Don't send a woman to the middle east to deal with U.S. foreign affairs and maybe our embassies would be alot more safer in that part of the world.