Rand Paul Was Right In Getting Tough With Hillary ClintonSubmitted by emalvini on Thu, 01/24/2013 - 16:46
Rand Paul Was Right In Getting Tough With Hillary Clinton
Christopher McDaniel in Politics | National Security 2 hours ago
On Wednesday, Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) took to tending the fires of accountability in regard to the Benghazi attacks.
Several pundits have written articles calling Paul a grand stander and accusing him of asking unrelated questions. This tells me that many of our "pundits" don't understand the Benghazi attack beyond the "facts" as Rachel Maddow presents them. Paul did have precedent in the questions he asked, ranging from America's involvement in the Syrian civil war, to a complete administrative failure at the hands of the State Department regarding Ambassador Chris Stevens' death.
Here are some basic facts on the issue:
1. The compound in Benghazi that was attacked was not an embassy, or consulate. It was a Temporary Mission Facility.
2. As a TMF, the compound fell down the list when funding was appropriated, as is standard.
3. Chris Stevens requested additional funding directly through the Department of State several times before the attacks.
4. Chris Stevens' last meetings were with Turkish officials regarding then undisclosed topics. An unnamed source says those meetings were regarding the removal of heavy weapons systems from Libya - specifically SA-7 missiles.
5. Syrian rebels received a large shipment of humanitarian supplies, and apparently, SA-7 missiles. These Were the same anti-air missles used in Libya, and may point to a relationship between the American-supported Libyan rebels and the Syrian rebels. Could the Libya weapons have found their way to Syria? This was at the crux of the "Turkey" question Paul asked Clinton.
6. In May 2012 while the president was campaigning, "White House press secretary Jay Carney warned that (arming the Syrian rebels) would lead to more “chaos and carnage” and was “not the right course.”