Written by Col. Tom Snodgrass (Ret.)
His 'Protest and Terrorist Attack Not Mutually Exclusive' Assertion Is Preposterous
By Col. Tom Snodgrass (Ret.),Right Side News
The congressional testimony given by the former CIA Acting Director, Michael Morell, on April 2nd marked it as a disgraceful day for professional intelligence officers and the American people they are sworn to protect because Morell betrayed his willingness to sell out truth and professional ethics in order to protect the corrupt Obama regime.
Morell was testifying about the substance and manner in which the American people were informed of the September 11, 2012 Islamic jihadist attack by members of al-Qaeda international terrorist network on the Benghazi diplomatic facility that resulted in the murder of the U.S. Ambassador, Christopher Stevens, and three other American government employees. Specifically at issue was the official talking points memo that was the basis of U.S. UN Ambassador Susan Rice’s September 16th appearances on five national television Sunday news talk shows.
In a feeble attempt to deceive the U.S. public about the growing power of al-Qaeda in their worldwide jihad and the motivation of the jihadist attackers, the Obama regime had concocted a ludicrous false narrative that an unknown YouTube video parodying Mohammad was the cause of the Benghazi attack. According to the Obama regime’s absurd alibi, the obscure video, made by an Egyptian Coptic Christian in the United States, ignited a spontaneous protest at the U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi. The Obama regime’s fanciful story continued that the flash mob staging the protest demonstration grew into an out-of-control attacking mob that overran the facility’s security, killed the four Americans, and burned down the structure.
The Obama regime had two strong reasons to lie to the American people cover up the truth behind the Benghazi attack. The first reason was that just five days before the Benghazi assault, at the Democrat Party convention, Barack Obama made this assertion: “. . . in 2014, our longest war will be over. . . al Qaeda is on the path to defeat; and Osama bin Laden is dead.” Thus Obama had established himself as leading the U.S. to victory over al-Qaeda. This much over-inflated victory claim was Obama’s presidential campaign mantra, so naturally the fact that an al-Qaeda associated group had murdered American diplomats instead of being on the “path to defeat” was something Obama and his criminal accomplices were desperate to conceal from U.S. voters.
The second reason for the Obama regime’s cover-up was that Ambassador Stevens had made multiple requests to Hillary Clinton’s State Department for increased physical security personnel and resources because there was a “sea of al-Qaeda black flags” flying over Benghazi before the attack, and additionally there was more than ample warning of the dangerous, deteriorating security situation posed by al-Qaeda in Benghazi based on reporting by U.S. intelligence agencies in the months leading up to the attack. However, Steven’s requests, which could have prevented the attack by discouraging the jihadists, were turned down for still unexplained reasons.
So it is clear, the attack, if accurately reported to the American public, would have shown the voters that Obama was lying by downplaying the increasing danger posed by al-Qaeda and also would have incontrovertibly demonstrated the Obama regime’s incompetence anticipating and responding to national security threats. In view of these damning circumstances, it shouldn’t take the deductive powers of Sherlock Homes to deduce why the Obama spin-doctors quickly manufactured the faux cause for the attack featuring the improbable Internet video.
The calculated deception of the Obama regime is well illustrated by Susan Rice’s unequivocal statement on one of her five TV September 16th appearances: “ . . .”
Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN) questioned Morell during his appearance before the House Intelligence Committee, and her side of the exchange with Morell perfectly encapsulated the Obama regime’s conspiracy to lie to the nation:
“No one at any time, prior to the attack, gave any indication that there was a protest going on at the compound. . . yet, the Obama administration allowed its spokesman for the first time and the first public disclosure, five times on the Sunday morning shows, made a false narrative that a YouTube video was the reason that explained that there were protesters that we now know were apparitions that never existed were there.
“This is a false narrative. That is why this is not a small issue this is a big issue, Mr. Morell. Because we have emails in front of us, cables in front of us that don't lie . . . the emails and the cables are very clear about what we knew and when we knew it.
“ . . . Ansar al Sharia, an al Qaeda linked terrorist group operating in Libya claimed credit for the attack. We also know that a cable that was sent on September 12th, by CIA station chief in Libya reported, eyewitnesses confirmed the participation of Islamic militants and made clear that U.S. facilities in Benghazi had come under attack, even your first draft from the CIA prepared, distributed internally showed, this was 11:15 a.m., we have date stamps on it, that the CIA and the U.S. government knew that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qaeda participated in the attack. All of that we knew. What changed is when the talking points, prepared again by your office, when those talking points intersected with the White House and those organizations within the White House, included senior State Department officials, senior national security officials.
“What's odd here is that the false narrative that was given on Sunday morning, on the Sunday morning shows, somehow it strangely added up with the view of the White House six weeks before the presidential election that al-Qaeda was nearly defeated and the global war on terror was over. Everyone knows that wasn't true. That al-Qaeda wasn't defeated. Everybody on this committee, both sides of the aisle knows that the global war on terror was not over. That was the narrative of the White House and the run-up to the presidential election. How weird that that ultimately was reflected in the talking points against all knowledge from people on the ground and knowledge that this committee had. That's why we're upset. Because the American people from my perspective, were intentionally misled by this administration as to what happened in Benghazi.
When Morell attempted to delude the committee by denying that the White House made the significant change to the talking points memo, which obscured the true nature of the jihadist attack by inserting the video as the assault motive, Congresswoman Bachmann correctly puts the deception right at Morell’s feet:
“Mr. Morell, they didn't have to change because you made the changes for them. That's the point. That's why you're in front of this committee today. You made significant, substantive changes for the White House, whether it was on behalf we don't know, but we know you are the one who made the changes.”
Congressman Jeff Miller (R-FL) asked Morell if he thought that changing the nature of the attack that began as a spontaneous protest but transformed into a coordinated jihadist attack was a major change in the nature of the violence. To which Morell responded: “we never thought that a protest and a terrorist attack were mutually exclusive.”
Then came the question-response that betrayed Morell was willing sacrifice all his personal credibility to be Obama’s obsequious sycophant by uttering a counter-logical sophistry that no rational intelligence officer would ever affirm. In response to Miller’s follow-up: “could it [the Benghazi attack] have been a terrorist attack that [instead] erupted into a protest?"
Morell answered, "sure."
It stretches credulity passed all believability that a man who had risen to the position of Acting CIA Director would actually believe that, at some point after initiating a terror attack, jihadists would suddenly lay down their weapons and take up protest signs and bullhorns! Morell’s ill-conceived attempt to backstop the unbelievable video-inspired-attack-motive shows he is not only willing to lie; he is willing to appear foolish in lying.
In light of Morell’s renunciation of his personal credibility to protect the Obama regime from public exposure of its lies about defeating al-Qaeda, as well as its incompetence anticipating and responding to national security threats, there is no other way to characterize Morell than as a co-conspirator in Obama’s national perfidy.
Col. Thomas Snodgrass Archive
Col. Thomas Snodgrass, USAF (retired) served over a year in Peshawar, Pakistan, working with Pakistani military intelligence. During his year in Vietnam he daily scheduled 130 U.S. Army and Air Force intelligence collection aircraft. In his final overseas tour he was the U.S. Air Attaché behind the Iron Curtain in Warsaw, Poland. In total, Col. Snodgrass was variously an Intelligence Officer or an International Politico-Military Affairs Officer serving duty tours in seven foreign countries, as well as teaching military history and strategy at the Air War College, US Air Force Academy, and USAF Special Operations School during a thirty-year military career. Additionally, he was awarded an Air Force scholarship to get a history master's degree in revolutionary insurgent warfare at the University of Texas, as well as being granted a year's educational sabbatical to teach and to write about international relations on a graduate school level as an Air Force Research Associate at the Center for Advanced International Studies, University of Miami, Florida. Following the Air Force, Col. Snodgrass was an adjunct professor of military history for ten years at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Arizona.