Admiral Lyons Questions The White House Story Over Benghazi

 by Doc Vega –

Never in the history of the United States has a major military commander of the rank and distinguished record of this gentlemen ever been compelled to intervene over a foreign diplomacy failure as has been demonstrated by the Obama White House, Four Star Admiral, James Lyons spoke out over a question of honor. In an interview in September within days of the massacre at Benghazi the former Navy commander made some excellent points that could only lead us to the conclusion that the deaths of American diplomatic employees at the consulate in Benghazi, Libya were not only unnecessary, but were intentional on the part of the Obama State Department.

Not since Truman forced General MacArthur to resign has there been such a major intervention between the oval office and the higher echelons of the American military with one big difference. This time it’s the other way around. We have a high ranking military official who is pointing out the folly and abuse of power being perpetrated by the White House and supposedly where the buck stops which is supposed to be with the Commander in Chief, President Obama.

Why does Obama never seem to know the facts?

Yet, our Commander in Chief never gives the public a straight, concise, or intelligible answer when it comes to the failure of our military assets to rescue the embattled Americans in Benghazi, the events that led to the massive attack that assaulted the American consulate, and the deception used by the administration over the events surrounding the fiasco that has enveloped the entire Libyan political landscape. Why would the very highest officer of the American executive government branch with the best sources of intelligence and the mightiest military machinery in the world be unable to give us the facts when it comes to the timeline over Benghazi? Why were we using our ambassador as a regional arms dealer, and what we were doing supplying rebels trying to overthrow Syria?

The assets were there to retaliate and intercede in the attack

James Lyons disagreed with the administration’s lame excuses that there was not enough time for neighboring US military assets to respond to a 7 to 9 hour siege when, as the Admiral pointed out, we had aerial combat assets at Aviano AFB as well as NSA Naples. With F-16’s that could have been deployed at speeds of Mach 2 to conduct ground attacks with C-130’s that could have been deployed from Tripoli with troops and attack gear, these were only a fraction of the resources available to reply to the terrorist attack raging against our diplomatic soil in Benghazi. Among other US assets capable of responding to a rescue alert by Ambassador Stevens was the mention of Siganello, Sicily where 130 Marines could have been airlifted to Benghazi and have been used to decimate the Benghazi attackers, but were ignored or ordered to stand down.

A legacy of accountability when the evidence is in

James Lyons points out that whoever gave the stand down order and under whose authority was the major question over the responsibility for the fiasco at Benghazi. Saying that President Richard Nixon felt the brunt of the consequences of lying to the American people and that this rule of thumb would be applied to the Obama administration reflects the views of a distinguished American Naval commander who spoke out for the good of is country, and refused to remain silent when an obvious cover-up was being undertaken by the White House for obvious reasons.

I personally will interject that Ambassador Stevens, used by the White House to proliferate arms acquisitions by Middle East and North African terrorist groups who sought to take over Libya and overthrow Syria, was a major witness to the Obama administration corruption, who needed to be liquidated in order that the threat of disclosure be obliterated. The President has everything to gain from the death of Ambassador Stevens, and everything to lose!

It is unprecedented that a Four Star Admiral such as James Lyons would make such illuminating commentary on a White House controversy that explains exactly why we should doubt the veracity of the federal government’s explanation of the fiasco as the gospel truth when Americans died for no good reason other than the obvious negligence of the State Department under Hillary Clinton and a President who has rarely shown any emotion over many tragedies suffered by US citizens but showed particular bitterness in his bogus explanation for the Benghazi attacks due to a disrespectful video filmed by an Egyptian producer that had only been viewed by 100 people. Using this unbelievably flimsy evidence as the reason that a heavy and well-coordinated attack that resulted in our Ambassador being dragged all over the streets of Benghazi for 5 hours and being beaten, tortured, and raped before his dead body was delivered to a hospital is unforgivable!

Lyons demonstrating his integrity

Aside from the heroic testimony of Admiral Lyons who refused to remain silent unlike General Carter Ham, who was relieved by a junior officer for intending to countermand stand down orders and rush to Benghazi anyway, who remained silent when he could have raised his voice and very well have stopped Obama from being re-elected. Regardless of the truth, regardless of his duty to defend the US Constitution despite the fact that it would have affected his benefits and his financial circumstance in the course of his forced retirement. Obviously General Ham was intimidated, but unlike Admiral Lyons, the Army General caved in and did not speak out when he should have regardless of the consequences!

Why an incompetent president is re-elected

That President Obama was re-elected because this terrible failure in foreign affairs resulting in the brutal deaths of 4 American federal employees, was ignored by the US media and suppressed by the federal government is one of the most reprehensible episodes in American history. That people in the military should have spoken out and did not, the fact that repeated requests for assistance by the US ambassador were ignored, that the attacks were not the product of a mob action as originally explained by the White House, and this disaster resulted in 20 US diplomatic facilities in North Africa and the Middle East being attacked and burned should be a clear demonstration of the implications of an administration that has refused to tell the truth and take responsibility for their criminal negligence is paramount in evaluating the extent of wrongdoing being covered up by a rogue administration who can certainly plan covert operations, but refuse to take the responsibility for the atrocities!

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply