Framing the Dialogue

I’m imagining a high school kid sitting in the principal’s outer office waiting for his sure to be angry parents to arrive.  They were summoned by the school because of the student’s misdeed.  The tiny little brain is churning, trying desperately to come up with an excuse; any reason to wiggle out of this tough spot; as if this couldn’t be helped; as if it wasn’t their fault.  What kind of a whopper would they come up with?

So now imagine that you are a disgraced, former war hero, former four-star general, former CIA director, probably formerly married and sitting and waiting to testify to Congress about events that transpired on and after the 9/11 attacks in Benghazi, Libya which led to four Americans, including the U.S. Ambassador, being brutally murdered.  Imagine that instead of hours to think up an excuse you had over two months and the likely help of the Obama Administration.  Maybe it was Romnesia?  No that is too flip for these events.  Maybe he could channel Erkle and simply say “Did I do that.”  No Obama uses that too much.  Well how about this doozie as reported to the Adulterated Press!

“references to terrorist groups suspected of carrying out the violence were removed from the public explanation of what caused the attack so as not to alert them that U.S. intelligence was on their trail.”

So the official story of this Keystone Cop Administration is that “we didn’t want the bad guys to know we was on to them.”  Seriously?  General Patreaus may have served his country honorably, but this seems too much and to quote a famous woman discussing the former general’s testimony a few years earlier;

…I think that the reports that you provide to us really require a willing suspension of disbelief.”

– Sen. Hillary Clinton to Gen. Petraeus, September 11, 2007

 It does strain credibility when many news outlets (at least those not pandering to Obama) reported that the attack was in fact an “organized, military-style” attack and not actions of an unruly mob which wasn’t even there.  I seem to remember that the term “al Qaeda” was used as a likely organization behind the murders.  I guess that this explanation would make sense if the actions took place maybe thirty years ago when al Qaeda got its news from camel express delivery and news could be “withheld.”  Unfortunately for Mr. Petraeus and President Obama that is no longer the case.  They watch the news!  They are on Facebook!  They are on Twitter!  The cat was out of the bag within days if not hours of the attack.

We should wonder if the following was not the real reason for the testimony and the lies;

“Democrats said Petraeus made it clear the change was not done for political reasons during President Obama’s re-election campaign.  ‘The general was adamant there was no politicization of the process, no White House interference or political agenda,’ said Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif. “He completely debunked that idea.”

Yeah Petraeus pissed on our legs (allegedly) and told us it was raining outside and the RINOs in Congress will probably slink away in the face of negative press from the Obama media fearing they’ll be called racists.  He’ll probably get his hefty pension and write a book about his experience so that he can tell “his side.”  Perhaps he can find a sexy co-author to help him write it.