First, I renew my sorrow for those who were killed in Benghazi on September 21, 2012. I owe a debt to those Americans that I can never repay, and I honor them for their service to our country. As more information comes out about the manner of their deaths, I sympathize with the families. In addition to their grief, they must deal with the public manner in which they are discovering what happened to their loved ones.
The latest information that I have comes from Fox News. According to reporter Jennifer Griffin, Tyrone Woods, one of the former Navy SEALS who was killed in the attack, was at the CIA annex one mile away from the compound where the Ambassador was staying. At some point, those at the annex heard shots. They asked whether they could go to assist, and were told to stand down. An hour later, they asked again, and were again told to stand down. Tyrone Woods and others disobeyed orders and went to the aid of the people being attacked.
Though they were able to rescue many people (possibly up to 20), they were unable to locate Ambassador Stevens. Though they asked for military assistance, they were denied. Eventually they were unable to stay at the compound, so they evacuated everyone to the annex. They took Sean Smith’s body back with them. There Tyrone Woods, and Glen Dougherty, who had arrived from Tripoli, were killed by mortar fire.
It seems that Leon Panetta, Secretary of Defense, is the latest member of the Obama administration to fall on his sword. According to news.gather.com, Mr. Panetta says that he did not render aid because “the basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on, without having some real time information about what’s taking place.” (emphasis in the original).
If that’s the case, explain the presence of Glen Dougherty, who apparently was in Tripoli when the attack began, but somehow ended up at the annex. Why was a small contingent okay to send into harm’s way, but not a larger force?
And what was Leon Panetta doing, telling the CIA how to engage its people? The CIA proudly touts itself as an independent agency, tasked with gathering information and reporting to the Director of National Intelligence. First, you’d think that, if the problem was lack of information, the CIA people, one mile away, would be the people you’d send in to gather that information. Second, once they asked to render assistance, where did the Secretary of Defense get the authority to tell the CIA people what they could or could not do?
Through spokesperson Jennifer Youngblood, the CIA has issued a statement that says, in part, “…no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.”
Another troubling aspect of this story is that, again, according to Jennifer Griffin, during the fight, American operatives managed to take 3 of the attackers into custody. Those attackers were later transferred to Libyan authorities. By whose authority, and for what reason? Those attacked were Americans, on what should have been regarded by all involved as American soil–the embodiment of our nation on foreign soil.
THE HOTTEST JOBS:
For months, President Obama has been all about helping young people get into college, and then helping them manage their debt, because we all know that the jobs of the future will require a college degree. Along with, I am sure, millions of other people, I had no reason to suspect that that was not the case. We all “know” that the wave of the future is health industry, computers and engineers, right? Well…I happened to be researching the US Department of Labor for another reason entirely, when I stumbled across an interesting table, entitled “The 30 occupations with the largest projected employment growth, 2010-20”, last updated February 1, 2012. The table is too large to publish here, so I’ve linked the site:
I would assume that the Department of Labor has some means of communicating with the Obama administration, to tell them the information that’s reported in that table. Most notably are the 3 columns entitled:
Pre-employment: Typical Education Needed for Entry
Pre-employment: Work Experience in a Related Occupation
During Employment: Typical on-the-job Training
Out of the 30 occupations with the largest projected employment growth, 2010-20, only 6 require more than a high school diploma! Nine of the occupations listed don’t even require a high school diploma. And most of them require no training, or short-term on the job training.
So, of the 30 fastest growing jobs for the next 8 years, as projected by the U.S. Department of Labor, 24 do not require students to attend school for an extra four or more years, do not require them to take on mountains of debt, do not require the taxpayers to bail them out when they can’t finish college, or do finish college and can’t find a job that compensates them for the time and money they’ve put into their useless degrees.
We are telling our young people that they are failures if they don’t go to college, that there is something wrong if they can’t find a job that requires a degree, when the truth is that the economy doesn’t support the need for that kind of education! What a disservice to an entire generation. Those young people would be better off if they finished high school, got a job immediately (if there is one to be had), then went back to school if and when it became necessary for promotion.
Telling kids that they should continue with school just because the economy is bad, just to keep them out of the unemployment line so that the numbers look better, knowing that they will be saddled with enormous debt when they finally graduate, overqualified for what the market will bear, is more than shameful. It is just plain mean.