3 May 2013: It will be exactly 40 years ago this May 17th that the Senate Watergate Committee, a special, broad committee convened by the United States Senate, began hearings to investigate the Watergate burglaries and a criminal cover-up of those activities. At the epicenter of those hearings was then-President Richard Nixon. Just over a year later, the committee released its 1,254 page report of findings. When the dust settled, forty administration officials were indicted and several of Nixon’s aides were charged and convicted for obstruction of justice and other crimes.
A cover-up pointed directly to the White House. Facing impeachment proceedings, then-President Richard M. Nixon resigned, assuming his place in American history as the only president ever to resign. It was described as the worst scandal in U.S. history… perhaps until now.
If history tells us anything, it tells us that it’s not just about the crime, it’s also about the cover-up. It’s about seeking the truth but being stonewalled at every turn, and being treated as subjects undeserving of the truth rather than citizens asking reasonable questions but being denied answers.
The same level of inquiries that unraveled the complexities of the Watergate cover-up are required to unravel the ball of lies that surrounds the September 11, 2012 attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans, including a sitting U.S. Ambassador. Within this ball of lies, however, exists not only the covert agenda of an administration, but the fate of the world. Unraveling this ball of lies will reveal official government actions that have been and continue to be performed in our name but without our consent. It will reveal a government agenda that has have spun wildly out of control, leaving no one accountable as we stand at a very critical moment in world history. It’s about a cover-up of monumental proportions that is reminiscent of, but hardly in league with, the cover-up of a generation ago.
Today, the stakes are much higher, as we stand at the precipice of a global conflict because of deeds being done in our name under a level of unprecedented and unchecked deception. Ultimately, it’s about getting the truth, which has been kept from each of us through lies of commission and omission, clever semantics, and outright refusals to provide answers to important questions. We were force-fed a preplanned lie from day one, much like the thinly veiled cover story of the Watergate burglary, but with much greater consequences.
All investigations, however, must have a beginning. On
May 8, 2013, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform will conduct a single, day-long hearing on the events that took place in Benghazi that killed four Americans, including a U.S. ambassador. Interestingly, the hearing is being conducted under the title
Benghazi: Exposing Failure and Recognizing Courage.
This one day hearing is being convened to “examine evidence that Obama Administration officials have attempted to suppress information about errors and reckless misjudgments,” and will include some witness testimony. That seems to be a fairly ambitious agenda for a single day of investigation in Washington. It is, however, a start, and an opportunity for all Americans to see just how deep the lies go.
Demanding answers
The hearing is a result, in part, of the “interim progress report” released by the House committee on Benghazi last week. Clearly, the information contained in this and other reports illustrates that there is a much deeper, much larger, and much more sinister plan that is being covered up by administration officials.
Forty years ago the cover-up of the motives behind a burglary produced some 319 hours of televised testimony. By comparison, one day of testimony is hardly enough time to conduct a serious investigation, considering what is at stake for our nation.
The events in Benghazi must be understood in the context in which they occurred. A thorough, in-depth investigation will reveal that attack was the result of our broader foreign policy of taking down the leadership of other nations, especially in this case, Libya and Syria. An agenda that has ignited the fuse for World War III. An agenda of militarization of the diplomatic-military-industrial complex that puts us on the road to Damascus at excessive speeds and with reckless abandon.
Given the significance of events, a broader investigation is needed, much like a generation ago. The reason a broader investigation is necessary must also be understood. So too must the limitations of a single day of hearings.
The big picture
We know that the operations in Benghazi and throughout Libya were coordinated by a number of different government agencies and sub-agencies. Coordination of the activities of these agencies most likely occurred at the behest of persons outside of any individual agencies at an administration security council level. This results in compartmentalization, where one individual, group or agency only has information specific to their part in the operation.
Additionally, the money for the contractors involved in the operations taking place in Libya might have come from one agency or program, although the administration of the contractors might have been directed by officers or agents of yet another agency. When understood in this context, we see that there can be little accountability of the larger operation, especially within the limitations of a single day of testimony.
Due to this operational compartmentalization, various individuals involved in Benghazi have only a single piece of a much larger puzzle. While they might want or feel the need to come forward, they are hamstrung by not having the complete operational picture. Coming forward in a limited venue, without the benefit of inter-agency operational plans, would prevent the pieces of the larger puzzle from being connected. Given such limitations, the testimony of such witnesses could be improperly questioned or even impeached.
To be certain, this administration is very well aware of this compartmentalization and will fight any call for a broader inquiry of all the agencies involved. A broader investigation, or the seating of a Select Committee on the attacks and subsequent handling of Benghazi, would provide a proper venue where all agencies can be assembled and questioned so that the components of the bigger picture can be gathered.
Tugging at the ball of lies: Some questions requiring answers
What are some of the questions that need to be asked and answered in this hearing? To fully understand the nature of these questions, it is important to understand that Benghazi served as a logistics hub for weapons transfers out of Libya and into the hands of anti-Assad terrorists. Weapons were collected under a buyback program of sorts, to remove them from the hands of the terrorists. Is that what really happened? Important background about Benghazi can be found in the compendium of articles listed at the end of this report.
Meanwhile, here are but a few important questions that need to be asked and completely answered:
What purposes did the five-(5) Saudi/Qatari owned warehouses situated in and around Benghazi serve?
What was the disposition of the arms collected in Libya? Where did they go? Were the aforementioned warehouses used for arms storage, and if so, why?
Exactly who at the U.S. State Department was supervising this arms “buyback” program?
What is the relationship between the U.S. government and the shipping company that brought Ambassador Stevens to Libya, along with CIA assets?
At any time, were there weapons transferred between boats located about 12 miles offshore of Libya? If so, under what circumstances and conditions?
Were there any violation of international arms agreements committed?
This administration would be well advised to keep in mind the fact that lawyers in a courtroom setting know better than to never to ask questions to which they don’t already know the answers.
Where’s the media?
Forty years ago, investigative reporters and journalists sensed blood in the water and chased the blood trail until the bitter end. They operated with less information than today. Yet today, investigating exactly what transpired in Benghazi seems to be limited to the intrepid nature of Adam Housley and Jennifer Griffen, both of Fox News, and perhaps a few others. They are leading the pack, however, and seem to be the only modern day investigative journalists who could unravel the cover-up that is Benghazi, rivaling those who broke the Watergate cover-up a generation ago.
The differences between Watergate and Benghazi are as many as the years that separate the two events, and even more significant. The fate of not only our nation, but of all nations, hangs in the balance.
Compendium of reports
Click here to save this article in PDF format 
