Benghazi: A Desperate GOP Attack

personally I have no clue what inspired the terrorists, for all I know it could of been the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, not like we can ask the terrorists why they did it and expect to get the truth

what do you think inspired them to attack this embassy?

terrorists saw hijackings and came up with a way to use a weakness they saw

could be terrorist saw the other protests and saw a weakness they could use to their advantage


.

 

So Republicans have been caught lying, not just taking quotes out of context but altering them.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_1...-have-different-quotes-than-earlier-reported/

I do believe we finally have a REAL scandal, but don't expect the rest of the corporate media to spend much time covering it.

And of course the whole charge that the WH or State Dept (an attempt to go after Clinton pre-2016) simply invented the idea that the attack may have been inspired by the Cairo protests was in itself an invention, but we already knew that.

 

You are so missing the point !!!

The point is: someone in our CIA wrote those words.

Those words were written Fri Sept 14 at 11:15 am.

Problem is, the whole entire rest of the world already knew the truth!!!

Here are two articles published by Reuters on the 12th. They are interviews with Capt. Fathi al-Obeidi, the CIA's "Libyan on the ground" in Benghazi. Capt. Obeidi is the one responsible for the successful rescue of our 30 CIA personnel and all their computers.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/12/libya-ambassador-battle-idAFL5E8KCMYB20120912

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/13/us-libya-ambassador-assault-idUSBRE88C02Q20120913

Here is President Magarief from Libya on the 12th: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/12/libya-attack-leader-apologizes_n_1876711.html

Now, you're going to tell me that our CIA which has a budget of 40 billion dollars a year, entirely failed to read the world papers for three whole days?

 

"GOP's Smoking Gun In Benghazi Scandal Turns Into Flaming Lie"

http://www.carbonated.tv/news/gops-smoking-gun-in-benghazi-scandal-turns-into-flaming-lie

GOP resorting to lies now?

 

Hardly.

Yep. The man sounds like a hardened misimpression all right.

(President Obama is probably a hardened misimpression too).

 

you can't defend the GOP now, the facts are out there, they lied, they were caught red handed

 

U.S. officials have noted it was "complex attack". Several Libyan officials and witnesses said an initial demonstration at the consulate appeared to be largely unarmed, though some elements of an Islamist militia were spotted.

At some point, the crowd became incensed, believing they were under attack from within the consulate, many fetched weapons and the consular villa ended up in flames, with most of the Americans fleeing to the safe house after two, including ambassador Christopher Stevens, had been fatally injured.

Why would it be so unreasonable, given the fact that riots and demostrations were breaking out all over the Muslim world, to suspect this was motivated by the same thing?

 

Why on earth would they lie about that? How does it matter whether it was a spontaneous attack or planned attack "get their butts out of a sling"?

This the part about the whole "cover up" nonsense I don't get.

That is what the CIA initial assessment memo said. How would it " to whip up a partisan frenzy in the middle of an election and disassociate themselves from the cluster (*)(*)(*)(*) they created in Benghazi."? That doesn't even make sense.

So what difference does it make? BFD.

 

Aren't you asking the wrong people?

You should direct that question to the liars themselves and see what their reasons were.

 

Because of context. The attack came in the middle of an election where Obama was using Bin Laden's death and the supposed degradation of Al Qaeda as an integral part of the rational for his reelection.
IF our consulate was attacked by a bunch of Muslim crazies angry over a video the administration had no control over or nothing to do with, then
how is that Obama's fault?

But IF an Al Qaieda offshoot attacked us (they did) and we had ample reason to be fearful of their resurgence (we did, Ansar Al Sharia had already attempted to bomb our consulate a couple of times and Red Cross and the Brits closed up their doors and left Benghazi due to the increasing danger represented by Ansar Al Sharia), and we did nothing about it (we didn't, repeated requests to increase security were ignored) then that's a tremendous failure staring Barry Obama in the face in the middle of a fight with Romney for his political life.

As already said, by the White House taking an initial and immediately contradicted assessment (Gregory Hicks and David Petraeus and others said it was apparent this was an organized attack from the start) and making that (video mob) the story of Benghazi, when it clearly was not, was a conscious and deliberate attempt to fool the public and relieve Obama of any culpability in a tremedous failure to defend ourselves from a growing and knowable threat.

Indeed, an attempt by the White House to pertetuate and ingrain this misinformation as the "truth" in the public's mind (Susan Rice and her
media blitz and an address by Obama at the UN reinforcing the lie) when they knew better show the White House's complicity in a lie and responsibility for that lie.

What difference does it make?
Are you, like Madame Clintong, saying what difference does the truth make? Really?
Fortunately most people recognize there is value in the truth whereas there is considerably less in a partisan coverup manufactured for political gain.
You have severely compromised yourself and apparently you feel no compunction about backing a campaign of disinformation and cover up as long as it represents partisan victory (as you perceive it).

 

the gop is trying to manufacture scandal and obstruct the ongoing recovery

click on the youtube logo or the 'watch on youtube' link in the screen, to see the video

[video=youtube;6_hoP-mdGzo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_hoP-mdGzo&list=UU8p1vwvWtl6T73JiExfWs1g&index=10[/video]


How The Full Benghazi Emails Undermine The GOP’s Cover-Up Claims

On Wednesday, just days after Congress held hearings claiming that the Obama administration misled the public in the aftermath of the Sep. 11, 2012 attack on an American consulate in Benghazi, Libya, the White House released 100 pages of emails that seem to undermine GOP claims that the White House orchestrated a “cover-up.”
The e-mails between the White House, CIA, State Department, Justice Department, and the FBI were part of an effort to draft unclassified talking points for lawmakers to use during media appearances and formed the basis of U.N. Ambassador’s Susan Rice’s prep for the Sunday morning talk shows. The CIA wrote the first draft of the talking points, before sending it out to the rest of the government. Click the pictures to view larger versions of the emails that debunk the basis many of the Republican’s claims of a conspiracy.

see email here: http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/05/15/2019431/white-house-emails-benghazi/

 

How is it Obama's fault either way?

No one every said that muslim extremist groups were not capable of attacking us and no one thought that couldn't happen.

Obama's initial statement:
Obama, one day after the attack:

We're still investigating exactly what happened," Mr. Obama said. "I don't want to jump the gun on this. But you're right that this is not a situation that was exactly the same as what happened in Egypt. And my suspicion is, is that there are folks involved in this, who were looking to target Americans from the start."
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57584252/benghazi-timeline-how-the-probe-unfolded/

How is that an immediate and contradictory statement:

The statements made by the administration on the weekend following the attack were based on the CIA's assessment, which from the get go stated:
We believe based on currently available information that the attacks in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the U.S. Consulate and subsequently its annex.

It is not a lie to make a mistake if you do not believe what you are saying is untrue.

Really!

I note you were not able to explain the "really".

- - - Updated - - -

What liars? No, I am properly asking the people who claim they are liars why someone would engage in a massive conspiracy to lie about that.

It doesn't make any sense.

- - - Updated - - -

What liars? No, I am properly asking the people who claim they are liars why someone would engage in a massive conspiracy to lie about that.

It doesn't make any sense.

- - - Updated - - -

What liars? No, I am properly asking the people who claim they are liars why someone would engage in a massive conspiracy to lie about that.

It doesn't make any sense.

 

What liars? No, I am properly asking the people who claim this was a big conspiracy lie why there would be any reason to create such a lie.

 

Dint the Gnome Senator { Call be Senator not Ma'am } forget a little something.
That the house vote on spending { appropriations like to Embassy's } had
more Democrat Nay's than Republicans.More Democtrats voted to cut spending
than did Republicans.Which really speaks volumns since the Republicans are
the majority.I'll get back to what percent that works out to.
What % of the democrat party in the house voted to cut spending to Embassy's.

 

Oh yeah and another thing thar Madame Gnome. Obama claimed that he
sent Olsen up to address congress as if speaking for the Administration.
Obama did no such thing.Olsen WASN'T sent up by Obama.LIE.
Olsen was Called Up by Congress.Just another in a steady stream of
white lies that are actually Whoppers.

 

Gnomester Boxer lied about Olsen being sent to Congress as if by Obama.
Olsen was called-up to Congress.Again ... Obama lying to act as if he should
take credit for Olsen's appearance.
Obama never called Benghazi an " act of terror " in name.He used the
phrase to refer to terror as like on the World Trade Towers.
Plus Obama did not use the word " Terrorism " as he insinuated.
Obama was asked by CBS Steve Croft on 60 minutes { the segment was edited
and shown later } directly about benghazi and why Obama never used the word
" Terrorism ".
I guess what George Will said is true.They actually Do think we are that Stupid.

 

More - ThinkProgress - commie talk.Their as bad or worse than Media Matters who
live to Smear any opponent of Obama's.

 

Sept 12
"As for the ones we lost last night: I want to assure you, we will bring their killers to justice. (Applause.) And we want to send a message all around the world -- anybody who would do us harm: No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America." (Applause.)

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/12/remarks-president-campaign-event-las-vegas-nv

Sure doesn't sound like he is talking about the WTC to me.

 

Heres Hillary leading the charge.....

[video=youtube;AR3XTOjZPfg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AR3XTOjZPfg[/video]

Hillary doesnt need to know what happened to prevent it from happening again....

She knows what happened, and shes lying about it.

 

President Obama, 9/12/12, the day after the attack:

"As for the ones we lost last night: I want to assure you, we will bring their killers to justice. (Applause.) And we want to send a message all around the world -- anybody who would do us harm: No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America." (Applause.)

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/12/remarks-president-campaign-event-las-vegas-nv

Do you read what Obama's saying as talking about the World Trade Center as Foolardi claims?

Does anybody read what Obama is saying here about an act of terror as possibly talking about anything else but Bengazi?

 

I think you know why.Stop playing dumb.The Obama Adm. and Clinton
ran around all summer and especially at their Convention touting Obama's
foreign affairs policies as just special.There's no one like Obama when it comes
to stopping Terrorism.After all it was Obama who got Bin Laden,a feat President
Bush was incapable of mastering.
To have the original CIA Intel { talking pts.} be sent out to the public
where 5 previous attacks are mentioned along with specific naming of
al Qaeda affiliate Ansar al-Sharia before an elction would totally raise
eyebrows. Anyone paying close attention to the Democrat Party's claim
of nipping in the bud any threat of al Qaeda type terrorism.
This is so apparent it is almost not worth mentioning.It is a given.
Obama and his White House had to scrub in the most manipulative of ways most all the
original CIA talking pts. report which David Petraeus signed onto.Later Petraeus was
very troubled about the final draft which ended up airing 5 days later on a Sunday with
5 appearances by Susan Rice mentioning repeatedly a YouTube Mohammad video.
No mention of any Video was in any of the 12 CIA revised talking pts.
This is cut & dry.No finer example of tinkering to bamboozle the american people
in such a ridiculous fashion in my Life.This was Brazen and IN YOUR FACE.
And the really insane part is Hillary whispering to a Victims Father where a draped
coffin sat that she'll get the person who made that Video as she and Obama shed
faux concern in front of a Live TV with their accompanying little spiels.
This is Banana Republic Sh!t.

 

Dont care dont care dont care....

They knew our embassy was under attack, they did nothing to help. nothing....

then they lied about it.

and now youre defending them.

shame on you.

 

The unanswered question.

 

Hicks wasn't at the compound when the attacks began. He did not have personal knowledge of how it started. He simply assumes there was no spontaneous gathering.

"For there to have been a demonstration on Chris Stevens's front door and him not to have reported it is unbelievable," he said. "I never reported a demonstration; I reported an attack on the consulate. Chris - Chris's last report, if you want to say his final report - is, 'Greg, we are under attack.'

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3460_16...ghazi-was-a-terrorist-attack-from-the-get-go/

Even Hicks does not say that he reported a "terrorist attack" and neither does Ambassador Stevens, according to Hicks.

 

I appreciate you cannot deny Obama called the attack on Benganzi an act of terror the day after the attack.

But if you didn't care about the subject of my post, why did you post a response to it?

No one ever denied there was our attack, and our brave military and security did everything they could to help them.

You're accusing our military and defense people of letting people die unnecesarily.

Shame on you.