Obama lied: ...social media in Libya on day of Benghazi jihad... no reference to Muhammad video...

Atlas Shrugs ^ | December 19, 2012 | Pamela Geller

[Perseverando]

Obama's selective sympathy concerning Newtown is political exploitation at its most cynical and debased. Where was Obama's concern, empathy and calls for thorough investigation of Fort Hood and Benghazi? Obama's knee jerk opportunism to exploit the horrible death of these children to pursue his political end (harmful gun control legislation) is in sharp contrast to his reponse to the Fort Hood mass murder. He attempted to silence concerns about jihad when he declared that no one should "rush to judgement" (despite the fact that Hasan was wearing the garb of the shaheed the morning of his jihad, was giving out qurans that same morning, and was screaming allahu akbar when mowing down those precious Americans). And the fact that soldiers could not carry weapons on base led to the high number of casualties.

And his perfidy on Benghazi was even worse. Obama blamed the First Amendment for the slaughter of our people in Benghazi. Free speech was to blame for the jihadist murderering actions. And it was a lie.

He lied. Big, fat, bold-faced lied.

Analysis of social media in Libya on day of Benghazi jihad massacre finds no reference to Muhammad video that Obama blamed for attack Jihadwatch

Not only did Obama Administration officials lie when they blamed the attack on the Muhammad video, but by fixing upon it as the cause of the attack, they were obliquely blaming the freedom of speech, and adding to the case for restricting it. "Analysis of social media in Libya finds no reference to anti-Islam film on day of attack," by Catherine Herridge for FoxNews.com, December 18:

As the State Department began Tuesday to circulate a highly anticipated report into what happened in the Sept. 11 Libya consulate attack, a separate analysis found that the first reference to the

[Perseverando]

Actual title, snipped because it's too long:

Obama lied: Analysis of social media in Libya on day of Benghazi jihad massacre finds no reference to Muhammad video that Obama blamed for attack

[Logical me]

King Obama is a radical Muslim and they lie.

[MestaMachine]

Taqqiya has become the new normal. The liar in chief and the artful dodger in the state department have taken it to a whole new plane of existence...theirs. The arabeasts are inside the walls.

Anyone wanting on or off this ping list, please advise.

Benghazi Index

[justa-hairyape]

In the case of Fort Hood, Obama made the US military less safe, but not allowing current Islamic Jihadist within the US military to be investigated.

In the case of Benghazi, Obama made the world less safe for Americans citizens staying within countries that have significant Islamic populations. He did this by falsely accusing an anti-Muslim video, which gave the video more publicity further enraging Muslims.

In the case of Sandy Hook, Obama will attempt to make America less safe for American citizens by taking away their only defense from domestic attacks.

See the commonality in these three cases ?

[brookwood]

25 years ago Salman Rushdie published “The Satanic Verses”, which was denounced by Muslim clerics and resulted in the declaration of a “fatwah” calling for his murder. The reaction in the non-Muslim world was outrage - at the Muslim world for having such hyper-sensitivitiy and intolerance that they would urge murder on an otherwise innocent man for saying what he believed. Americans were united, left and right, in the belief that freedom of speech was as sacred as the Koran. So it is odd that in September, we found the State Department condemning and arresting an American for producing a movie (actually he was in violation of parole but would have skated if not for the movie and outrage). The protest in Benghazi on the 11th anniversary of 9/11 had nothing to do with the movie, but more outrageous is the fact that our government would throw the First Amendment under the bus on a worldwide apology and self-humiliation crusade in a lying attempt to deflect attention from the cold-blooded murder of an ambassador which they could have prevented.

[popdonnelly]

There was no demonstration. Just an organized attack on the “consulate”.

[justa-hairyape]

You would expect such behavior from a country that is no longer the leader of the Free World. Right now the countries that are the leaders of the Free World are Israel and Texas.

[Texas Songwriter]

I have asked myself many times, 'Why did the defense dept. not send in any contingent to rescue the 30 + 4 (died).' They claimed they did not have enough time. But as these events unfolded how could Panetta, Clinton, or Obama have know that? They could only know post facto. It might have been that they could have held out 8 days, instead of 8 hours. So now, what are we to make of these decisions? It seems, from the behavior exemplified since then, that the decision not to rescue has only one plausible rational conclusion. That is this. Obama, Clinton, and Panetta, looking toward the upcoming election, wanted all 34 people to die. But when these men of valor, against orders, did not abandon these people, but extracted them to the 'safe-house' where it became impossible to maintain the illusion of video induced attack. For Political reasons this bunch of leaders wanted these 34 dead. They wanted noone to be questioned. They wanted a blank page to write their putrid fiction to cover their posterior. Nothing else makes sense. They wanted them dead.

Now, the State Dept. will not allow the names of these people to be made public. Hannity and Chenowith tonight, despite being told not to talk, said (both men) said they had spoken to one man who was in the attack and they told the Congressman and Hannity that the American people had been lied to since the first report.

This Administration wanted ALL of them dead. Dead people do not talk. That only leaves speculation and the lies of the Administration to mold a historical report.