Democrats now critical of Rice's Benghazi explanation, amid more damaging evidence

[LisaA]

Its shameful to use the body of Ambassador Stevens as a political hot potato and Americans sure didn’t appreciate it in the last election.

Apparently people didn’t think the 50 deaths resulting from the 12 embassy attacks between 2001-2008 were worth investigating. What’s the difference? Do you want those to be investigated too?

They were investigated and there was little or no question as to who attacked the embassies and why. Tell me which embassy attacks were other than Islamist extremists who proudly took credit?

Now this attack was ALSO done by Islamists but for whatever reason it was clear that the Obama administration wanted to deflect the blame or at least dis-associate the attack with Al Qaeda since the Obama Re-Election Mantra was Osama is dead and GM is alive. If the first successful operation resulting in the murder of an American ambassador were also attributed to Al Qaeda it would be difficult to maintain the ruse that Obama has vanquished the threat of Al Qaeda. All we’ve done is play Whack A Mole so they move from one country to another. The death of Osama did not result in the demise of the movement.

As to “truthers” what on earth do you dispute? That it was an attack by Islamists? That the real perpetrators of the attack were Islamists, some associated with Anwar Al Sharia which is said to be an Al Qaeda associated group? That Susan Rice’s Sunday show performance was orchestrated and not the truth? That Obama and Hillary didn’t continue the YouTube explanation for weeks after it was clear the video had nothing to do with it?

We can argue motivation all day long and not agree. But you surely recognize what happened and that we were not told the truth by Rice, Obama or Clinton. Obviously I believe it was politically motivated an I hope that Obama is effectively neutrallized until we can be rid of him. YMMV however.

Lisa

 

[ishii]

That anti-Islam video was very obscure and had nothing to do with the Terrorist attack in Benghazi, yet once it became publicized, there were riots in other parts of the Muslim world.

Hillary Clinton and Obama even made a video shown in Pakistan denouncing the video.

One has to wonder what this is all about? Was there an actual effort to inflame this sentiment in that part of the world?

I’m not sure what you’re getting at - could you elaborate? Are you saying that Hillary/Obama deliberately tried to inflame the situation by focusing on the video?

Ishii

 

[BroomWagon]

I hope we can get at the truth here, we got the pictures of Abu Ghiraib, lease-girl, all of those pictures. But now, we have a witch hunt? Where as a US Compound, not your usual embassy by any means was attacked, US personnel murdered but we are not suppose to be able to know anything about it?

This is why basically, the Left likes to censor what we know.

All this was sparked we were told by a hokey video to begin with?

 

[BroomWagon]

I’m not sure what you’re getting at - could you elaborate? Are you saying that Hillary/Obama deliberately tried to inflame the situation by focusing on the video?

Ishii

I’m not saying they deliberately tried to inflame the situation. However the situation did become additionally inflamed afterwards with riots in Egypt, elsewhere with reported loss of life which is something to consider if this video was not the cause of the Libyan attack in the first place, why bring it up? It is conspiratorial to wonder if it was brought up for that reason, though I would not believe that, it certainly makes one wonder.

 

[RACJ]

Just sayin’ it don’t make it so…there are actually any number of possibilities including that the people involved were doing the best they could under the circumstances…BTW…those four Americans were already dead…actions in the next days (post Sept. 11) have not one thing to do with their deaths.

Oldcelt, if these Americans died thanks to the gross negligence of a REPUBLICAN administration, you’d never consider any explanation but the obvious. And you’d be crying out for impeachment proceedings. BTW, waht are these other “possibiliities” which would cause Obama et al to order stoppages of rescue efforts, and subsequent lying about a film which no one had seen? You DO know they lied, don’t you? Rob

 

[colmywaykurtz]

bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19562688

This story, dated Sept 11, 2012, is proof that the protests over the video were already happening the day of the Benghazi attacks, and were not ginned up by statements about the film made after Benghazi.

newser.com/article/da658qeo0/former-us-official-in-tripoli-describes-confusion-call-with-clinton-during-benghazi-attack.html

This article (dated May 8) is one that refers to a “US facility” in an earlier version, and a “mission” in a later version. To clear up misconceptions, it should be pointed out that Benghazi didn’t even rate as a consulate, let alone an embassy. The EMBASSY was (and is) in Tripoli, the capital. That’s why the JSOC was told to stand down in Benghazi, because the Pentagon wanted the embassy in Tripoli guarded.

policymic.com/articles/14579/egypt-us-embassy-attack-live-riots-and-us-flag-burned-at-american-embassies-in-cairo-benghazi-libya

This one, which someone here linked to, mentions that its date is Sept 11, the day of the attacks on the Benghazi facility. This being the case, it was days before Susan Rice made her talk show circuit talking about the video, and couldn’t have been caused by that.

worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/13/13840461-anti-us-protests-over-islam-film-spread-in-middle-east?lite

This shows there a storming of the Yemen embassy two days after Benghazi, generated by anger over the film; once again, this was days before Susan Rice made the talk-show circuit on Sunday.

So, how can the Republicans (and the press) say that her TV appearances generated any of this? This makes no sense.

The House report is obviously a partisan-influenced document, taking no cognizance of any of this.

And THIS businessinsider.com/benghazi-stevens-cia-attack-libya-2012-11

suggests that the whole State presence at Benghazi was diplomatic cover for CIA dirty tricks that essentially involve an arms transfer and a covert foreign policy on the level of Iran-Contra—the difference being that the C-in-C himself may not have known about this (shades of Watergate “plumbers”).

Something big and fishy is going on, and it’s NOT what the House report would lead us to believe.

 

[RACJ]

I hope we can get at the truth here, we got the pictures of Abu Ghiraib, lease-girl, all of those pictures. But now, we have a witch hunt? Where as a US Compound, not your usual embassy by any means was attacked, US personnel murdered but we are not suppose to be able to know anything about it?

This is why basically, the Left likes to censor what we know.

All this was sparked we were told by a hokey video to begin with?

The leftists and Democrat are simply trying to intimidate squamish Republican “leaders” into silence. It is clear that no Democrat in Washington has any interest in the learning the truth, nor in bringing any justice to the slain, b/c Benghazi proves that THEIR team is incompetent and mendacious. If lightning were to strike every ethical Democrat Congressman dead tomorrow, there wouldn’t be an empty seat in the chamber. Rob

 

[RACJ]

bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19562688

This story, dated Sept 11, 2012, is proof that the protests over the video were already happening the day of the Benghazi attacks, and were not ginned up by statements about the film made after Benghazi.

newser.com/article/da658qeo0/former-us-official-in-tripoli-describes-confusion-call-with-clinton-during-benghazi-attack.html

This article (dated May 8) is one that refers to a “US facility” in an earlier version, and a “mission” in a later version. To clear up misconceptions, it should be pointed out that Benghazi didn’t even rate as a consulate, let alone an embassy. The EMBASSY was (and is) in Tripoli, the capital. That’s why the JSOC was told to stand down in Benghazi, because the Pentagon wanted the embassy in Tripoli guarded.

policymic.com/articles/14579/egypt-us-embassy-attack-live-riots-and-us-flag-burned-at-american-embassies-in-cairo-benghazi-libya

This one, which someone here linked to, mentions that its date is Sept 11, the day of the attacks on the Benghazi facility. This being the case, it was days before Susan Rice made her talk show circuit talking about the video, and couldn’t have been caused by that.

worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/13/13840461-anti-us-protests-over-islam-film-spread-in-middle-east?lite

This shows there a storming of the Yemen embassy two days after Benghazi, generated by anger over the film; once again, this was days before Susan Rice made the talk-show circuit on Sunday.

So, how can the Republicans (and the press) say that her TV appearances generated any of this? This makes no sense.

The House report is obviously a partisan-influenced document, taking no cognizance of any of this.

And THIS businessinsider.com/benghazi-stevens-cia-attack-libya-2012-11

suggests that the whole State presence at Benghazi was diplomatic cover for CIA dirty tricks that essentially involve an arms transfer and a covert foreign policy on the level of Iran-Contra—the difference being that the C-in-C himself may not have known about this (shades of Watergate “plumbers”).

Something big and fishy is going on, and it’s NOT what the House report would lead us to believe.

Give me a break. You would not believe for one moment that the Americans were slaughtered for any reason but malfeasance if Bush was in office. The video had had only several hundred views on youtube on Sept. 11. Rob

 

[colmywaykurtz]

Give me a break. You would not believe for one moment that the Americans were slaughtered for any reason but malfeasance if Bush was in office. The video had had only several hundred views on youtube on Sept. 11. Rob

YOU give ME a break. All it would take would be one person picking up a cellphone in this country and calling a relative over there to direct lots of peoples’ attention to it over there.

"You would not believe for one moment that the Americans were slaughtered for any reason but malfeasance if Bush was in office. " That’s a pretty thin, threadbare ploy. Meh.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Case in point. The Benghazi truther movement already decided what the end result would be before the testimony even began and they wont accept facts to the contrary.

Would you describe the families of the 4 dead Americans as as part of a ‘Benghazi truther movement’ because they want answers?

Greg Hicks said he spoke at Hillary Clinton at 2:00am on the night of the attack and he never told Hillary Clinton that it was a protest or that it was responding to a video. Hicks said twitter were being monitored and that it showed Ansar al-Sharia had control of the hospital where Ambassador Stevens was taken and that Ansar al-Sharia took credit for the terrorist attack.

Hillary Clinton stood in front of the caskets of the dead Americans and blamed the anti Islam video for the attack in Benghazi:

We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful internet video that we had nothing to do with. It is hard for the American people to make sense of that, because it is senseless and totally unacceptable.

Around 6 minutes: youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=K10ioQdEv80

The State department of which Hillary Clinton was then head of, then spent $70000 on an ad that aired in Pakistan apologizing for the anti Islam video.

Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice went on five different talk shows on sunday and blamed the anti Islam video for the attacks.

Obama continued to blame the anti Islam video for the attack at the Benghazi attack and other attacks: youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2vSzdOPz1X0

Barack Obama, Susan Rice and Hillary Clinton, when there was evidence going against the claim that it was because of an anti Islam video, blamed the video and there deserves to be continued investigations as to why they did.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Case in point. The Benghazi truther movement already decided what the end result would be before the testimony even began and they wont accept facts to the contrary.

Would you describe the families of the 4 dead Americans as as part of a ‘Benghazi truther movement’ because they want answers?

Greg Hicks said he spoke at Hillary Clinton at 2:00am on the night of the attack and he never told Hillary Clinton that it was a protest or that it was responding to a video. Hicks said twitter were being monitored and that it showed Ansar al-Sharia had control of the hospital where Ambassador Stevens was taken and that Ansar al-Sharia took credit for the terrorist attack.

Hillary Clinton stood in front of the caskets of the dead Americans and blamed the anti Islam video for the attack in Benghazi:

We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful internet video that we had nothing to do with. It is hard for the American people to make sense of that, because it is senseless and totally unacceptable.

Around 6 minutes: youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=K10ioQdEv80

Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice went on five different talk shows on sunday and blamed the anti Islam video for the attacks.

Obama continued to blame the anti Islam video for the attack at the Benghazi attack and other attacks: youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2vSzdOPz1X0

Barack Obama, Susan Rice and Hillary Clinton, when there was evidence going against the claim that the attack was because of reaction to an anti Islam video, blamed the video, and there deserves to be continued investigation to find out why they did.

 

[RACJ]

YOU give ME a break. All it would take would be one person picking up a cellphone in this country and calling a relative over there to direct lots of peoples’ attention to it over there.

"You would not believe for one moment that the Americans were slaughtered for any reason but malfeasance if Bush was in office. " That’s a pretty thin, threadbare ploy. Meh.

Every single day the prophet Muhammed and Islam are insulted millions of times on the internet. Obama went to bed after a short briefing, then flew to a fundraiser the next day. Hillary was AWOL. All of them brazenly lied. All of them rejected pleas for protection from the Libyan government and Stevens. YOU defend the indefensible. Unbelievable.

 

[HappyCatholic01]

YOU give ME a break. All it would take would be one person picking up a cellphone in this country and calling a relative over there to direct lots of peoples’ attention to it over there.

"You would not believe for one moment that the Americans were slaughtered for any reason but malfeasance if Bush was in office. " That’s a pretty thin, threadbare ploy. Meh.

So even though the White House and State Dept said immediately it was Islamic extremeists, likely Ansar Al Shariah, and crafted a narrative on paper to that end, and even though it was a a planned attack using RPGs and despite it occuring on the 11 year anniversary on 9/11(what a coincidence!!) we should have believed it was a random brawl stirred up from a video…

Not even they believe that…

 

[LisaA]

bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19562688

This story, dated Sept 11, 2012, is proof that the protests over the video were already happening the day of the Benghazi attacks, and were not ginned up by statements about the film made after Benghazi.

newser.com/article/da658qeo0/former-us-official-in-tripoli-describes-confusion-call-with-clinton-during-benghazi-attack.html

This article (dated May 8) is one that refers to a “US facility” in an earlier version, and a “mission” in a later version. To clear up misconceptions, it should be pointed out that Benghazi didn’t even rate as a consulate, let alone an embassy. The EMBASSY was (and is) in Tripoli, the capital. That’s why the JSOC was told to stand down in Benghazi, because the Pentagon wanted the embassy in Tripoli guarded.

policymic.com/articles/14579/egypt-us-embassy-attack-live-riots-and-us-flag-burned-at-american-embassies-in-cairo-benghazi-libya

This one, which someone here linked to, mentions that its date is Sept 11, the day of the attacks on the Benghazi facility. This being the case, it was days before Susan Rice made her talk show circuit talking about the video, and couldn’t have been caused by that.

worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/13/13840461-anti-us-protests-over-islam-film-spread-in-middle-east?lite

This shows there a storming of the Yemen embassy two days after Benghazi, generated by anger over the film; once again, this was days before Susan Rice made the talk-show circuit on Sunday.

So, how can the Republicans (and the press) say that her TV appearances generated any of this? This makes no sense.

The House report is obviously a partisan-influenced document, taking no cognizance of any of this.

And THIS businessinsider.com/benghazi-stevens-cia-attack-libya-2012-11

suggests that the whole State presence at Benghazi was diplomatic cover for CIA dirty tricks that essentially involve an arms transfer and a covert foreign policy on the level of Iran-Contra—the difference being that the C-in-C himself may not have known about this (shades of Watergate “plumbers”).

Something big and fishy is going on, and it’s NOT what the House report would lead us to believe.

You’ve pulled a rabbit out of a hat. Who said Rice’s appearances ginned up the protests?
That is one I’ve NEVER heard. Please source this, it’s utter baloney.

The video, like the false tales of Koran’s in the toilet, could have easily stirred up a bunch of loony Islamists. It may have been the inspiration for the Egyptian protests but was never related to Benghazi until someone in the Obama administration decided that they couldn’t risk such a foreign affairs blunder to endanger Obama’s re-election. And that’s what it was, a tragic blunder of the highest order. Benghazi was a potential disaster and should have been an issue but thanks to the media, the truth was hidden long enough to get him past November 6. Realize folks that Nixon was re-elected after Watergate. Had the public known the truth during the election, it might have gone a different way.

As to why the stand down order, to guard the Tripoli Embassy when there was no protest or attack? Yeah right. Better to hunker down and wait than actually go where they are needed? You truly believe this because…?

There have been a lot of conspiracy theories and speculation why Stevens and the others were in Benghazi that day despite a long history of violence and attacks on this as well as other diplomatic and NGO facilities. But I think it’s a real stretch to claim that it was some renegade CIA operation done without knowledge and agreement by Obama. You have some evidence of this or are you merely speculating?

The most plausible story I heard was that Hillary was seeing the end of her tenure as SoS and an undistinguished tenure it was. She saw the Libyan revolution as a potential swan song and I heard Stevens was in Benghazi to determine if the facility could be upgraded to provide American influence to prop up the shaky new government. Stevens open meeting with the Turkish ambassador hardly appears to be a covert operation of gun running.

At any rate your inferences are totally off the reservation with respect to anything I heard prior to yesterday’s hearings or during the hearings themselves. This appears to be just another presidental a** cover operation, something that has characterized the office since the beginning. Too bad four lives were lost and we have lost by re-electing a man whose incompetence is exceeded only by his arrogant belief that he has something to offer this country. God help us.

Lisa

 

[BroomWagon]

The Real Benghazi Story: U.S. Op to Arm al-Qaeda in Syria

Last November, we reported that the murder of ambassador Christopher Stevens wasn’t about a lame anti-Muslim video. It was connected to an arms shipment as part of the on-going “creative destruction” of the Middle East and North Africa.

During an interview with CNBC’s Larry Kudlow, radio talk show host John Baxter said the resignation of CIA Director David Petraeus had nothing to do with an extramarital affair with his biographer, reserve Army officer Paula Broadwell, but was related to U.S. policy in the Middle East, ongoing “color revolutions” in the region, and specifically the operation underway to arm al-Qaeda in Syria and overthrow the al-Assad regime.

 

[estesbob]

Its shameful to use the body of Ambassador Stevens as a political hot potato and Americans sure didn’t appreciate it in the last election.

Apparently people didn’t think the 50 deaths resulting from the 12 embassy attacks between 2001-2008 were worth investigating. What’s the difference? Do you want those to be investigated too?

They were investigated and the results of the investigations was that the embassies were well protected , response was quick when they were attacked the end result being only the attackers and innocent bystanders, killed by the attackers, died in the attacks. No Americans died.

 

[oldcelt]

The Real Benghazi Story: U.S. Op to Arm al-Qaeda in Syria

Hmmm…it is InfoWars, but the interview is in line with other rumors of Benghazi being used as a base for covert ops.

 

[BroomWagon]

They were investigated and the results of the investigations was that the embassies were well protected , response was quick when they were attacked the end result being only the attackers and innocent bystanders, killed by the attackers, died in the attacks. No Americans died.

I felt ashamed about the photos at Abu Ghiraib, the prison in Iraq but it is what it is.

Now, we have Benghazi, and a good portion of the press doesn’t want us to know what happened and all kinds of excuses are trodded out, there have already been hearings, etc.

The thing is, a lot of this we don’t know, we still don’t know. The former Secretary of State of course, embarassed herself with her “What difference does it make”.

We could have had planes there as they are saying over and over in the media, quickly just to buzz the area and that might have kept militants away but as it is, no kind of external aid was given, not the slightest.

 

[oldcelt]

They were investigated and the results of the investigations was that the embassies were well protected , response was quick when they were attacked the end result being only the attackers and innocent bystanders, killed by the attackers, died in the attacks. No Americans died.

Three hearings total…no media frenzy…no military action…no endless calls for more hearings. Try to slice it as you may Bob…the standards have been changed to a ridiculous extent in this case and many people can see it.
If I was the one writing talking points for the Democrats I would go on the offensive at this point and use these cases as my base line. It could no no harm, because the people supporting the current hearings are highly unlikely to vote Democratic at any point in the future.
I might even enlist ole Bill to be the attack dog.

 

[LisaA]

Three hearings total…no media frenzy…no military action…no endless calls for more hearings. Try to slice it as you may Bob…the standards have been changed to a ridiculous extent in this case and many people can see it.
If I was the one writing talking points for the Democrats I would go on the offensive at this point and use these cases as my base line. It could no no harm, because the people supporting the current hearings are highly unlikely to vote Democratic at any point in the future.
I might even enlist ole Bill to be the attack dog.

FWIW Rep Elijah Cummings was obviously very much against the hearings with a five minute tirade at the beginning. By the end of the hearing, HE was suggesting more hearings are needed. The father of former SEAL Tyrone Woods said he spoke to him after the hearings and thanked him for having an open mind and being committed to getting the truth.

You can continue to pretend that no one cares oldcelt, but I think that many Democrats are realizing that continuing to block efforts to learn more about Benghazi only makes them look MORE suspicious. If the truth is that there was no systemic failure, no attempt to cover up a foreign affairs debacle, and the Administration handled the matter appropriately then they have nothing to fear from continued investigation.

How long did Watergate last? I recall spending nearly an entire summer watching the proceedings. The Dems wanted the truth then, so hopefully someone has enough integrity to be as committed to finding the truth now.

Lisa