Was reduced security an Obama campaign strategy?

I mentioned this idea to Dearest … that the reduced security at our embassies could have been a perverse Democrat plot to produce a winning October Surprise for Obama … and he was amazed that anyone could even think such a thing.

I defended myself by citing this November 4, 2010, interview on MSNBC:

Mark Penn tells Chris Matthews Obama Needs Another Oklahoma City Bombing [:26]

Now … if you only look at approval numbers, Penn’s statement makes some sense. But you’d have to be a really twisted excuse for humanity to see approval numbers instead of dead bodies.

As much as I hate to believe my fellow Americans could be so warped, I have to admit these are the same people who lionized Ted Kennedy, the only man with a confirmed kill in the war on women.

Kevin DuJan at Hillbuzz blogged about this “October surprise” idea as if it was a lot more than a horrible possibility:

“Folks, more people are going to eventually go to jail for what happened at Benghazi than went to prison for Watergate. This is a coverup that goes directly to Barack Obama himself. I have friends who lived through Watergate and who repeatedly tell me they had no idea in the initial days after a ‘break-in was reported in Democrat offices’ that it would eventually topple Nixon and bring down so many powerful people. I love the woman on a personal level, but if Hillary Clinton knew about any of this and didn’t stop this scheme for a ‘hostage-taking October Surprise’ then she belongs in prison too…along with Barack Obama, Susan Rice, Valerie Jarrett, and a host of other women and effeminate men who thought lowering security at consulates so ‘something would happen that we could use in October’ was a good idea.”

I hadn’t considered the hostage situation scenario. But when I looked at Carter’s post-Iranian hostage bump, I could see his point. In the long run, Carter made a total hash of that situation. But in the short run, he got enough of a boost that, if Obama had been able to score the same so close to Election Day, he’d have walked away with a second term in his pocket.

Obama has said his goal is to bring to justice those involved in this:

If that’s true, Obama may have to bring himself to justice. According to the news report below, his own people did not merely refuse requests from our Libyan embassy to send additional security; they actually ordered security that was already there to LEAVEright before the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks!

August 2012: Obama State Dept. Withdrew 16 Member Security Team From Libya Before Attack


October 12, 2012: Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and ranking member Susan Collins (R-Maine) announced the committee will investigate the events surrounding the death of four Americans in Libya, including the U.S. ambassador, Chris Stevens.

October 13, 2012: The President of the United States phoned in to the Michael Yo Show where he and Yo discussed the Big Issue, what Yo called “the elephant in the room” … could Barack Hussein Obama do ANYTHING to heal the rift between Nicki Minaj and Mariah Carey?

I am so sickened by all this, my stomach hurts and I want to weep.








Filed under Barack Obama, Benghazi, Chris Stevens, Elections, Jimmy Carter, Libya

6 responses to “Was reduced security an Obama campaign strategy?

  1. I’m kinda ashamed that I laughed out loud at your mention of:
    “Ted Kennedy, the only man with a confirmed kill in the war on women.”
    But your comment that “I am so sickened by all this, my stomach hurts and I want to weep,” quickly brought me back to reality. I’m truly sickened, too, Chrissy. And with apologies to your Hub, I don’t think you are off base here. These people really are, provably, that sick. Unfortunately.


  2. Chrissy, like I wrote to Kevin, I do not subscribe to the kidnap theory. However, I do subscribe to the theory that the White House Administration could have been setting up a situation.

    They must have known that Benghazi was extremely dangerous. It is well known that people affiliated with Al Qaeda were in that region. The group that is considered responsible is Ansar al-Sharia.

    I have my own theory that is tied to the c- grade documentary; I do think that there was supposed to be an attack, but people were not meant to be killed. I think that there was meant to be a protest at the embassy and that there was meant to be an incident which would end by Obama being considered as the great negotiator. To me, there is something very wrong in the way in which this terrible documentary was highlighted. Even the Syrians had a say on the subject, pointing out that it is more perverse that so many of their number are being killed.

    However, I am extremely worried about the possibility that the White House might have set it up so that Obama could show that he is a cowboy by sending in the drones to attack the Al Qaeda training camp that is in the desert.

    According to one report that I saw (probably from an English source), the intelligence community had seen some chatter. There had been drones keeping an eye on the militia camp in the desert. It is not like they did not know these people existed. Considering that they knew of the existence of the group, and that the group was in training, I am totally shocked that nothing was done to break up the activities, or to further tighten security, rather than allowing security to be so slack.

    More than the 4 Americans died that night. There were Libyans who were killed and injured in the hospital where Chris Stevens was found. Very little is being said about them, but the truth is that those Libyans were trying to protector the Americans. It was a frightful situation, and no, they did not have the right kind of training to deal with the situation (sheesh, anyone who had read about the progress of their civil war would know that the Libyans were easily frightened off).

    On top of that I am worried about the way in which weapons are being channelled to rebel Syrians. There are rebels, and then there are the jihadists. The jihadists are getting hold of the weapons.

    I worry about the situation in the M.E. because the region is far from safe these days. Egypt is one of the biggest worries. I am less concerned about the Libyan government than I am about the Egyptian government. However, should Obama be stupid enough to send in the drones to the training camp in Libya, then I will be extremely worried, because that would be tantamount to an act of war on a sovereign nation. Such action cannot be taken without first getting permission from the Libyan government, and I suspect that Obama would act in a very cavalier fashion, considering his liking for drone warfare.


  3. Pingback: Did 4 Americans die because Obama wants a second term? | PoliNation

  4. GP

    I caught a little bit of Rush yesterday and he mentioned how he has read all the conspiracy theories about why this happened in the first place.
    He said not to get too wrapped up in that because the big story is that they did not try to protect these people once they were under seige and then tried to cover it all up by tromping out some obscure video that 10 people had seen.
    It is always the coverup.
    Exposing this should do them in.
    But then again, how many times have we thought that a story would finally bring down this gang of theives. It is almost impossible with the media being just as corrupt as this admin.
    Speaking of media-has anyone else experienced trouble with conservative blogs loading? Some of them, especially Drudge seem to take forever for pages to load. I wonder if there is an intentional slow down to squelch the flow of information.