Jennifer Rubin, one of Washington Post’s neoconservative gate-keepers, is still trying to obfuscate the real issue behind what happened in Benghazi in 2011. Over the weekend, Rubin wrote:
“The biggest scandal regarding Benghazi may be that the president was not at the helm on 9-11-2011 and was not directing the response to an attack.”
Yet, one must look beyond the superficial to locate the heart of what happened in Benghazi.
As Ron Paul pointed out: "there was little extremism in Libya before the US attack on that country in 2011."
Is that not an important piece to the story?
Dr. Paul has also noted: “The Islamic radicals who attacked Benghazi were the same people let loose by the US-led attack on Libya. They were the rebels on whose behalf the US overthrew the Libyan government.”
It’s funny that Rubin doesn't point to the US’s unnecessary intervention in Libyan affairs, as well as the arming Islamic radicals as the real scandal! But we know the interventionists too well.
There is likely a reason these truths go unspoken: Rubin and many other war-hungry neocons are looking to do more of the same in Syria.