Motive was clear in Benghazi attack
A great deal of conversation is taking place about the tragedy at Benghazi. Cokie and Steven Roberts' recent column downplayed the issue in Hillary Clinton's favor. Let's put it into a historical perspective.
What happened in 1683? The Ottomans (Muslims) surrendered to the Christians. It is documented in an oil painting larger than life in the Vatican Museum.
On what day did it happen? 9/11/1683. There is a radical Muslim faction that is still fighting the defeat from 1683.
After the first twin tower bombing, the FBI told New York police that in all likelihood it was Osama bin Laden who was behind the attack. It is no coincidence that the towers were destroyed and over 3,000 lives ended on 9/11/2001. There were warnings prior to the attack that something was going to happen.
Since the 1970s there have been various attacks on Americans in many places before and after 9/11. Benghazi (9/11/2013) is just the latest expression of this holy war. Hillary Clinton made the following statement: "Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they'd go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and prevent it from ever happening again, senator."
It wasn't a protest - it was a planned attack on the United States. We don't need to figure anything out because the motive is clear.
It makes a great difference in how we are perceived in the Mideast when we don't have leadership in Washington. The Robertses should be telling the real story.
Thomas A. Braun
Mount Prospect