Welcome to the official, independent student-run newspaper of Hofstra University!

Terrorist attack in Libya, college Republicans

By Amber Qalagari Columnist

Click here for the other side

The death of the American ambassador and three American Navy SEALs during the attacks in Libya recently have brought foreign policy to the focal point in the political world. The deaths of United States officials that Obama referred to as just a “bump in the road” brought on by an anti-Muslim YouTube video, he is now admitting were a result of terrorist attacks in affiliation with Al Qaeda.

It’s hard to believe a 14-minute video trailer posted in July would cause Muslims to retaliate on the anniversary of one of the worst terrorist attacks in America history on Sept. 11. Coincidence? That’s what the Obama administration would like the public to believe. U.S. foreign policy spokesperson Susan Rice claims the attacks were spontaneous resulting from a protest that “spun out of control.” Appearing on several television talk shows, she made sure to inform the public that the administration was given no warnings or further information on the assault.

U.S. intelligence officials claim released information that said the administration knew of the true circumstances leading up to the attacks within 24 hours of the incident. They go even further to say they were given a warning 48 hours before the actual assaults on facilities in Benghazi. Who other than a man with an ulterior motive would bring a grenade to a demonstration? The weapons used were indirect fire mortars which require much skill to aim. There were also two attacks that would have required proper timing and premeditation to fulfill. The first attack was rocket-propelled grenades on the Consulate and the second mortars on the safe house.

Ambassador Steven’s journal, which was found on the scene, revealed his express concerns for his safety before entering Libya. Why wasn’t there more security at Benghazi when it was known that it had extremist activity? The State Department hired Libyan guards to protect the U.S. Consulate but only let six of the men carry loaded firearms. In downplaying the tragic events, the State Department could be trying to cover up for their incompetency in providing security for a U.S. official.

Obama is forced to own up to the information he knew from the start. But why cover it up in the first place? Simply put, the attacks epitomize the administration’s lack of foreign leadership. Obama has no relationship with any foreign leader and he has proven his lack of knowledge in foreign issues, especially those concerning threats to the American public.

What does it say about Obama’s foreign policy when the President of Libya, Mohammed el Megarif, has to inform U.S. citizens about the truth of what happened in the Libya? He claims that the idea this video caused a spontaneous attack “is completely unfounded and preposterous.” Megarif told NPR, “We firmly believe that this was a pre-calculated, pre-planned attack that was carried out specifically to attack the U.S. Consulate.” It took two weeks to inform the American public about information that the U.S. government knew within 24 hours. The problem is not that the administration withheld information; it is that they completely changed the story and gave the American public a different perspective of the attacks. The real reason behind the lie reveals what Obama is trying to hide: that his lack of foreign policy has endangered the United States. With the election weeks away, Obama will do all in his power to cover up his ineptitude and fabricate serious threats as “bumps in the road” on his path to “change.”

Go Greek! Fall 2012 Rush

Terrorist attack in Libya, Hofstra Democrats