Real Motive for the Libya Cover-up?Submitted by jschackai on Wed, 05/08/2013 - 10:26
If Libya had been just about the presidential election, Obama and the State Department (apparently) could have sent special forces in, rescued our people, won the day and turned this into a PR victory for Obama and the administration. Instead they cut the counter-terrorism unit out of the loop while the event was ongoing, refused to allow special forces to rescue our ambassador, and blamed it all on a protest and a youtube video. Why?
It seems to me that what the State Department was really trying to cover-up wasn't their failure to respond to the event in an appropriate manner, but the actual motivation of the perpetrators of the event itself. And if the motivation wasn't the youtube video, then what was it?
I'd bet it was Obama's unconstitutional and unauthorized bombing of Libya in the first place! This attack was blowback, not from a war our congress approved and authorized, but from a war the president started on his own, against the will of the Congress, the Constitution, and the American people. That's why they needed to make it look like a spontaneous event.
In other words, Hillary was covering for Al Qaeda(!), because it was in Obama's best interest that this not look like a terror attack in response to the illegal Libya bombings. What do you think?
I apologize if this has been reported or discussed elsewhere, It just hit me so I figured I'd throw it out there.
EDIT: Obviously this is pure speculation on my part. I don't know anything about the terrorists' motivations for sure; this is just my attempt to connect the dots before, during and after the event.