Follow by Email

Friday, October 12, 2012

Thomas Pickering Is Heading the Benghazi Investigation?: Say It Ain't So, Joe!

From the Biden-Ryan debate (see:

RADDATZ: What were you first told about the attack? Why -- why were people talking about protests? When people in the consulate first saw armed men attacking with guns, there were no protesters. Why did that go on (inaudible)?

BIDEN: Because that was exactly what we were told by the intelligence community. The intelligence community told us that. As they learned more facts about exactly what happened, they changed their assessment. That's why there's also an investigation headed by Tom Pickering, a leading diplomat from the Reagan years, who is doing an investigation as to whether or not there are any lapses, what the lapses were, so that they will never happen again.

The intelligence community told Obama that the Benghazi consulate was under siege by "protesters"? Sorry, Mr. Vice President, but we both know this is a bald-faced lie.

Thomas Pickering is performing the investigation as to whether there were any "lapses" at Benghazi? Please tell me that there has been some mistake.

As I wrote in November 2009 (

Following the execution by hanging this past week of Ehsan Fattahian, a 26-year-old Iranian Kurd, have a look at the website of "Campaign for a New American Policy on Iran" ("CNAPI"): [the website has long since vanished]. More specifically, note that there is not a single mention of Iranian human rights abuses on their home page.

Now go to their "Campaign Mission Statement":

Supporters of the Campaign for New American Policy on Iran (CNAPI) believe new U.S. diplomatic leadership is urgently required to resolve tensions between the U.S. and Iran.

A military confrontation with Iran would have enormous human and financial costs and would plunge the Middle East into further chaos. Just the threat of military conflict elevates oil prices and fosters global insecurity.

While serious concerns regarding the Government of Iran's statements and behavior persist, we believe America must pursue new, far-sighted and responsible policies towards Iran aimed at stabilizing the region and bolstering America’s safety, economic security and international standing.

CNAPI supporters believe sanctions cannot replace diplomacy as a means of resolving differences between nations. They also decry hostile official rhetoric which exacerbates tensions and reinforces misunderstandings and false animus between people in the United States and Iran.

Effective U.S. diplomacy with Iran, coupled with more open engagement between Iranian and American societies, could yield progress on all outstanding issues and foster mutually beneficial cooperation in efforts to stabilize Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and other conflict zones.

Supporters of CNAPI call upon the governments of both the U.S. and Iran to honor international human rights obligations and abide by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They believe mutual respect for human rights and civil liberties should be intrinsic to any negotiations between the U.S. and Iran.

Supporters of CNAPI believe sustained, direct, bilateral, and comprehensive talks without preconditions between the governments of the United States and Iran represent a realistic way to resolve long-standing conflicts that destabilize the Middle East and by extension, threaten the global economy.

We invite you to join us in our efforts.

. . . .

CNAPI lists among its "experts" "who endorse the goals of the Campaign for a New American Policy on Iran and provide the Campaign with invaluable analysis and advice":

- Flynt Leverett, who, together with Hillary Mann Leverett, wrote two op-eds for The New York Times in 2009, calling for rapprochement with Iran.

- Thomas Pickering, former U.S. Ambassador to Jordan, Nigeria, El Salvador, Israel, the United Nations, India and Russia.

- William H. Luers, former U.S. Ambassador to Czechoslovakia and Venezuela.

- Dr. James Walsh, described by the website as "a Research Associate in the Security Studies Program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology where he is leading two series of dialogues on nuclear issues, including one with leading figures in Iran."

Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett's May 24, 2009 New York Times op-ed, "Have We Already Lost Iran" (, and September 28, 2009 op-ed, "How to Press the Advantage with Iran" (, do not discuss Iranian human rights violations.

Luers, Pickering and Walsh authored a March 20, 2008 article in The New York Review of Books entitled, "A Solution for the US–Iran Nuclear Standoff", which begins by stating:

"The recent National Intelligence Estimate's conclusion that Tehran stopped its efforts to develop nuclear weapons in 2003, together with the significant drop in Iranian activity in Iraq, has created favorable conditions for the US to hold direct talks with Iran on its nuclear program."

"Tehran stopped its efforts to develop nuclear weapons in 2003"? "Favorable conditions to hold direct talks with Iran on its nuclear program"? Sorry, but you don't have an inkling of what's happening here or why.

Subsequent to this blog entry, I sent an e-mail to Tom Pickering:

"You are listed as one of CNAPI's "experts who endorse the goals of the Campaign for a New American Policy on Iran and provide the Campaign with invaluable analysis and advice."

Could you please inform me who is funding and managing this organization? This is not at all apparent from CNAPI's website. Thank you for your kind assistance."

Pickering's response:

"Jeffrey: Thank you for this information. I am not sure what CNAPI is. I will find out. In the meantime I have no recollection of having given them permission to use my name. Tom"

I never heard back from Pickering.

The nature of Pickering's association with CNAPI, if any, needs to be urgently determined before he continues his investigation of the Benghazi disaster.

Regardless of any association with CNAPI, his naivete, as evidenced by his belief in 2008 that Iran had halted its efforts to develop nuclear weapons in 2003, should preclude him from managing this sensitive inquiry.

1 comment:

  1. Last week, we saw a disciplined man facing a total mess of dishonesty and rudeness. What was Joe Bidden laughing about? Was it because of the fact that our State and Treasury departments are full of Iranian government agents dictating our foreign policy? Or the fact that the economy is going downward? Congressman Paul Ryan should have said to this partner of the Mullahs that you and your boss are the only ones in the world sending happy birthday message to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The reason this administration can not take a solid stance against the situations in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and Libya is the fact that they do not want to offend the regime in Iran. The Iranian regime is the main source of funding and arming terrorists groups. We do not forget the time that Vice President Joe Biden was in the Senate, and was the only one lacking a strong position against the Nuclear activities in Iran. He also hosted Khatami's group during their trip to New York in 1997. Thus far, to simplify, this administration has given an extra 4 years to the Mullahs to work on their Atomic Bomb. NOW READ THE BOTTOM.

    After being pressured by every one, the Obama administration was forced to act on and get the facts out about the killing of our ambassador in Libya. They have appointed a man to lead this investigation in Benghazi who himself is a close partner to terrorists. His name is Thomas Pickering. He is the previous VP of Boeing who now is the head of a lobbying organization called "HILLS". This organization works very close with another lobbying group called "NIAC". Both of these organizations are Iranian government agents whose mission is to ease the tension between the MULLAHS and USA, So the sanctions would drop, and the regime can maneuver better in the world to finish it's atomic project. This year, he and the previous Iranian ambassador to Germany, Hossain Moosavian, have been holding seminars everywhere to gain grounds for the #1 terrorist government and this administration knows it all. By the way, Khamenei said yesterday that "if Romney is elected, we will be in trouble."