Diana West has a must-read blog post that sheds further light on the Benghazi disaster. The focus is on the apparent mendacity of CIA Director Petraeus. West has been a thoughtful critic of the incompetence and deceit of the Obama administration’s Libyan policy from the beginning.
I found this post of special interest because West chronicles the lack of interest (to put it politely) or cover-up (to put it clearly) involved in the commentariat’s view of Petraeus’ role in the events surrounding the murders of four Americans on 9/11/12. She points out that the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal have both given Petraeus a free pass. Obama and Hilary Clinton have been rightly criticized in the conservative press for their false accounts and failure to act. Why should we let Petraeus off the hook?
The New York Times is interested in making sure that the Obama administration is not blamed. But why would the WSJ and commentators such as Max Boot want to ignore Petraeus’ part in this disaster? I suspect it is misguided admiration of our senior military officials coupled with sympathy for the nation-building projects they serve.
Petraeus could not be bothered to attend the funerals of the murdered CIA contractors (his employees); he did find time to attend the premier of Argo. This shows us something about the character of our ruling class. It was more important for Petraeus to hang out with Ben Affleck and Huma Abedin than to honor the heroic deeds of Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty.
The courage and decency of Woods and Doherty is not matched by any corresponding virtues on the part of decision-makers in the White House, the CIA, the Pentagon, or the State Department. Angelo Codevilla has pointed out that our Progressive ruling class includes the senior military officers who have been complicit in the largely unsuccessful policies pursued since 9/11/01. Here we see more proof to substantiate his argument.