The Movie, “13 Hours.” My Take.

I saw the movie “13 Hours” yesterday.  It deals with the terrorist attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound at Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012.  I came out of the theater virtually shaking with anger from what our people at the compound had to endure over a 13 hour period because of security failures.  The attack on the compound was well organized, well coordinated, well planned, and supported by not only automatic weapons but mortar fire.    The attack cost the lives of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens.  Aside from the fact that the movie was a riveting, compelling,  action- packed true story, well worth seeing from that standpoint alone, the political implications from the lack of security have been and still are enormous.

It’s hard to believe that in this day and age our government was so inept.  It’s easy using 20-20 hindsight to fix blame for the security shortcomings there.  But then again the shortcomings were clearly visible and an attack was predictable.  So, hindsight is  not necessary; foresight was enough.  The trouble is, those responsible for security had none.  They were grossly incompetent.  That includes Obama’s White House and Hillary Clinton as the Secretary of State, among others.

Benghazi had been a hotbed of unrest, gripped by civil war and terrorist activities since Gadhafi had been toppled.  The environment was bad enough to force Britain and France both to close their embassies.   European security officials were worried that weapons and vehicles were being stockpiled in Benghazi, post Gadhafi and that al Quaeda was gaining a foothold.  The U.S. well knew the diplomatic situation there was dangerous, so dangerous in fact that it had to be labeled “critical,” according to the movie.  Yet, we did not pull out.  True we had no embassy but only a diplomatic compound.   Nevertheless, what we had there was grossly under- protected, and the failure to fully protect that compound, given the unstable environment, can only be ascribed to gross incompetence, even criminal negligence.

Wikipedia, while not necessarily the repository of the last word on anything, still is to be regarded as possessing some authority.  It does say that the Secretary of State, among other duties and responsibilities, “ensures the protection of the U.S. Government to American cities, personnel, and interests in foreign countries.”  That duty was flatly abrogated in this instance.

What has really aggravated the situation regarding the lack of protection for the Benghazi compound is the fact that both Obama and Hillary compounded their manifest failures by lying about how the attack originated.  Standing by the caskets of the four Americans killed in the raid, after the remains arrived in the U.S.,  Obama claimed, and Hillary knowingly acquiesced, in the bald-faced lie that the raid had been inspired by a video, when they both had information attesting to the fact that it was a terrorist attack.  Hillary emailed her daughter the night of the attack, telling her the raid was terrorist based, a fact which came out during her testimony at the last hearing.  The lie, repeated on Sunday talk shows by Susan Rice and others, was made in the time before Obama’s election, and undoubtedly helped in that regard quite a bit.

My distain for Hillary as a candidate for any public office, much less the presidency, is hardly a closely guarded national secret.  But after seeing this movie, my feelings have intensified dramatically.   She brings nothing to the table in terms of dealing with tough issues.  She has no proven track record of success at anything.   She is eminently inexperienced, unqualified, and incompetent.  She is also a world-class liar, one whose lies are a matter of record.  The Greek philosopher Aristotle put it nicely: “Liars when they speak the truth are  not believed.”  Serious questions also abound as to her character,  honesty, trustworthiness, temperament,  and judgement.   She is a power-hungry woman who is dangerous for this country.  The country made a terrible mistake by electing the present White House occupant; that mistake must not be repeated.

Copyright© 2016.  Arnold G. Regardie.  All rights reserved.

 

2 Comments

Filed under active voice, clear writing, good diction, sound sentence structure, Writing Improvement

2 responses to “The Movie, “13 Hours.” My Take.

  1. It’s only a movie, Arnold. I’m glad it moved you, but don’t assume it’s either what happened, comprehensive, or even truthful. That’s why the credits always say some version of “based on”. There’s no such thing as a historically accurate scripted film. Given that a film story MUST be told in under three hours, the requirements of dramatic structure (and budget) force filmmakers and writers to combine and invent characters, and alter events. They routinely make changes to matters of fact to fit and support a chosen editorial point-of-view.

    In the case of “13 Hours”, it’s a political op-ed disguised as a drama, obviously timed for release during an election cycle. Studios are pretty smart about what messages to send out when, to make money.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/former-cia-chief-in-benghazi-challenges-film-version-of-2012-attack/2016/01/15/9cf2defc-baf7-11e5-b682-4bb4dd403c7d_story.html

  2. I* can’t wait to hear what Hill has to say about it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s