Small showing of leadership

I have to give President Barack Obama his due: Finally, at the second presidential debate, he said the words that he was responsible for the events leading up to the terrorist attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound at Benghazi, Libya, in September.
Of course, he did dodge the question as to who was responsible for declining the requests for additional security forces or why there was the charade about it being a protest against a stupid YouTube video that turned into senseless violence. The latter took a lot longer for the administration to admit, and had various members of his cabinet trying to fall on their swords to absolve him of said responsibility.
The interesting thing to me is that the president’s whole artificial construct about who knew what, where and when came crashing down in the testimony of Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Charlene Lamb before the House Oversight Committee in Washington on Oct. 10 (almost exactly a month after the events in Libya).
Assuming Ms. Lamb was giving honest testimony before the committee, then some people in the administration either are flat out lying or they really failed their jobs to keep the president in the loop.
The Smoking Gun
My jaw dropped when I read the first paragraph on page five of her prepared opening statement. How could she be saying that when the president, the vice president, the secretary of state, the U.N. ambassador, all had been saying they didn’t know what was happening at the time.
Ms. Lamb said:
“When the attack began, a Diplomatic Security agent working in the Tactical Operations Center (at the diplomatic facility) immediately activated the Imminent Danger Notification System and made an emergency announcement over the PA. Based on our security protocols, he also alerted the annex U.S. quick reaction security team stationed nearby, the Libyan 17th February Brigade, Embassy Tripoli, and the Diplomatic Security Command Center in Washington. From that point on, I could follow what was happening in almost real-time.”
Ok, alarms are going off all over the place and no one bothers to tell the president that the facility where an ambassador is under attack and there is an ensuing eight-hour running gun battle, complete with mortars, rocket-propelled grenades and other heavy weapons.
Somehow, this seems to defy understanding. And yet, the president, his press secretary, the vice president, the secretary of state and the U.N. ambassador who is sent out to represent the face of the administration on the talking heads circuit on television, all disavow any knowledge of this being an “attack”. Even Candy Crowley, the moderator at the presidential debate had to walk back her defense of the president when Gov. Mitt Romney posed the question why it took the president so long to use the words “terrorist attack.”
It really draws into question the competence, not just of the president (who really is a captive to his advisors) but of the whole national security establishment. I mean, basically, it was like a re-run of the 1979 assault on the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, Iran.
I know a whole lot of people have no memory of that debacle, and the ensuing 444-day standoff that basically ruined Jimmy Carter’s presidency.
It left me with a bitter taste in my mouth, and I felt it again, when I read the deputy’s testimony.