Obama Failed: The Terrorist Murders of Americans in Libya

Obama Failed: The Terrorist Murders of Americans in Libya

Ambassador Christopher Stevens was assassinated on September 11th by al-Qaeda terrorists in Libya.  He and three other Americans were brutally and savagely murdered at the hands of America’s enemies.  The Obama Administration and the Clinton State Department were warned about the attacks. They should have seen it coming. Ambassador Stevens did.  

The death of these Americans and the projection of weakness and humiliation of the United States to the Middle East is a direct result of President Barack Obama’s fecklessness and incompetence.  The attacks happened on his watch and represent the biggest failure of his tenure as Commander-in-Chief.   

It has been ten days since the bloody attack on the United States mission in Benghazi, Libya that resulted in the assassination of Amb. Stevens, and the facts paint a bleak picture of a disengaged and aloof Commander-in-Chief and a Secretary of State more concerned about the United States’ image rather than the well-being of the diplomats in her charge.  

On September 10th, the eve of the 11th anniversary of the Sept. 11 terror attacks, a new video was released by al-Qaeda spiritual leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri calling Libyans to rise up against Americans and avenge the death of Al Qaeda #2 Abu-Yahya al-Libi, who had been killed by a US drone attack in June. Contemporaneous accounts of the video make no mention of any reference to the anti-Islam YouTube video that is now being blamed for the recent Middle East violence.  

The al-Qaeda video calling for revenge for the death of Abu-Yahya al-Libi is significant to the attacks in Libya because Abu-Yahya was from Libya.  Hence the suffix to his name “al-Libi.”  Libyan terrorists and Islamists knew Abu-Yaha well.  He was a hero to the Islamist extremists in that country.  The announcement of his “martyrdom” would surely have a significant resonance on the “Arab Street” of Libya. Add to that the built-in significance of the anniversary of the September 11th attacks, and even an amateur observer of world events would see a security concern brewing in Libya.  

According to a source close to Ambassador Stevens, the US diplomat was worried about his personal safety and “never-ending” security threats in Benghazi in the months leading up to the attack.  CNN reports that “Stevens specifically mentioned a rise in Islamic extremism and al Qaeda’s growing presence in Libya” to the source close to him.  

But, rather than respond to the obvious threats in a manner that emphasized the security and well-being of our American citizens serving in the most dangerous region in the world, our State Department’s official Rules of Engagement (ROE) in Libya was to “keep a low profile.”  To that end, rather than use the Marine Embassy Guard in Libya, the Clinton State Department employed a British firm, because they would accept the primary condition of the ROE in Libya which included a “no bullet” policy.  In other words, the objective to maintain a “low profile” was so paramount in Libya that the State Department sent un-armed security in despite the clear and present danger to our people and our interests as evidenced by the al-Qaeda video and Amb. Stevens’ own concerns.  

It is possible that President Obama was unaware of the threats facing our diplomats in Libya, considering the evidence that suggests he did not attend face-to-face intelligence briefings for the days leading up to the September 11th anniversary.  If he did read the briefings as his administration claims, there is no evidence that he did anything about the threats.  When the armed terrorists stormed the mission in Benghazi, Ambassador Stevens was left virtually undefended and abandoned by this President on a day when all Americans are instinctively on their guard and prepared for a reprisal of the horrific events from 2001.  The unspeakable horror that awaited Stevens and the three other Americans who relied on Obama and Clinton to protect them is now a matter of history, but the Obama White House continues to attempt to re-write that history with distractions and obfuscation.  

For days after the Libya attacks, the White House continued to conjoin the al-Qaeda inspired siege of our mission with street demonstrations in Cairo and Yemen over a YouTube video.  On Sunday the 16th, US Ambassador the the UN Dr. Susan Rice continued to claim that the Libya attack began as a demonstration against the video and then got out of hand.  Last night on Univision, President Obama continued to link the Libya attacks with the YouTube video by claiming, “What we do know is that the natural protests that arose over the video were used by extremists to see if they can also directly harm U.S. interests.” However, CBS News reports that eyewitnesses in Benghazi claim there were no protests at the mission, “natural” or otherwise.   


  • Amb. Stevens was aware and concerned about the growing terrorist threat in Libya.
  • Clinton’s State Department chose to use un-armed security from Britain rather than the US Marine Embassy Guard for protection.
  • On September 10th, al-Qaeda called specifically for Libyans to target Americans to avenge the death of an al-Qaeda leader.
  • On September 11th, heavily armed terrorists attacked the US diplomatic mission in Benghazi and murdered Amb. Stevens and three other Americans.

President Obama was either unable or unwilling to protect American Citizens who were under threat from Islamist Terrorists.  And now, despite all of those facts, he continues to deny they were even under threat, and instead attempts to scapegoat a YouTube video.

It seems clear that killing Osama bin Laden does not a foreign policy make.  


Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.