Skip to comments.CNN hits hard on Libya: The only conclusion is that the White House tried to cover something up
Posted on 10/02/2012 5:20:06 AM PDT by chessplayer
You already knew that the White House had reason to believe that Benghazi was a bona fide terror attack within 24 hours of it happening, no matter what Susan Rice said four days later, but I want you to watch this for two reasons. One: After the post on media bias, lets give credit where its due. CNN has followed this story, and on primetime shows like this one and Anderson Coopers too. Two: Per Eli Lakes piece in Newsweek today, someone has started leaking preliminary intel assessments made by the CIA that pointed to a spontaneous attack. (I wrote about that here.) I think youre going to hear more about that from the White House in the next days and weeks, e.g., We were only telling you what the CIA told us. Read Lakes piece to see why that wont wash, then watch this clip as CNNs own foreign affairs correspondent reveals that her intel sources were pointing to a full-fledged attack on the consulate within the first 24 hours. Essentially, to believe that the White House had clean hands in this, you need to believe that the CIA is so inept that the medias contacts in the intelligence community are more astute than the people advising the president. Nothing would surprise me at this point, but given Os strong electoral incentives to downplay what happened, the cover-up theory seems more likely.
Exit question: Who made the decision to cherry-pick the intel in order to push the spontaneous protest theory?
Is CNN no longer Chicken Noodle News?
Rather surprized bump.
Cooper’s been on the story from the start.
Other outlets, like the NY Times, ABC, MSNBC etc. have none whatsoever.
Big deal - CNN reports, a month after the fact, what has become obvious to everyone. They first allowed the meme to be set. This is just an attempt to CYA so they can claim how neutral and unbiased they are.
Obama/Clinton/Holder are personally responsible for dozens of deaths including that of a US Ambassador - and the press is SILENT.
Knowing this administration’s past, we can’t rule out the likelihood that they knew about the planned attack and let it happen in order to blame the film so they could accomplish their goal of curtailing free speech in America. Think Fast and Furious ‘means to an end’. Dead people are just bumps in the road.
Be fair. They used the ambassadors diary weeks ago to point out he was concerned about a resurgent Al Quaida in Libya.
If they’re not going after Obama because he’s black, then that’s pretty insulting and condescending to blacks.
Funny, those of us with working intellects (apparently very rare in the White House) were worried about Al Qaeda in Libya even before Obama started (illegally) bombing Libya - IN SUPPORT OF AL QAEDA!
Arab Spring. The new definition of unintended consequences.
Fed up with having to continually eat crap sandwiches from the regime and yet still lose viewership, it seems as CNN wants to try to “differentiate” itself against its progressive competitors.
Was Ambassador Stevens killed by arms supplied by the Administration to Jihadists?
We did supply Ghaddafi’s opponents, who were known to include Al Qaeda members. Were the same guys and our arms used to kill the Ambassador who arranged the distribution of those same arms that killed him?
“There is more to the story of Nakoula Basseley Nakoula than what we are told by the media. Court documents reveal that Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, producer of the movie Innocence of Muslims, partnered in a scheme with Eiad Salameh, my first cousin, a Palestinian Muslim from Beit Sahour in the Palestinian district of Bethlehem.
To prove my claim, I revealed Eiad Salameh long before this whole fiasco eruptedin 2008 and the first real reportage of Eiad and Nakoula was revealed on September 14th, 2012.
Now do I have your attention?...................”
IF these claims are true, and thus far I have found no reason to NOT believe, why were the Coptic Christians smeared as being the source of making this video? Obama sure knew all about this video as he advertised it day in and day out. The murders in Libya were blamed on this very video and now some in government are going to fix the problem by controlling ‘speech’?
Why I just got a forwarded email that says http://nation.foxnews.com/freedom-speech/2012/09/27/american-muslims-launch-petition-limit-free-speech?cmpid=NL_FiredUpFoxNation
At this point this appears to be orchestrated from the highest levels of governments, maybe CNN can follow the well advertised trails back to the organizers.
She makes the claim the attack was spontaneous because of the video, but implies the attack was planned by someone intent on hurting the Obama administration.
This was set up to make it appear as if Romney and the repubs had collaborated with the terrorist to make Obama look like Peanuts Carter.
Hilary having another vast right wing conspiracy moment?
Who cares, who really cares? So an ambassador and 3 other Americans were killed unnecessarily. So what? If Obama is reelected, Ms. Fluck and her peers will have free birth control, and Steve and Bill can get married. THAT is what folks care about.
Her statements were intended to get the left wing rumor mill running.
There is no way possible for the terrorist to plan an attack against a particular person on a particular day at a particular location without having some guarantee the person would be at that particular location on that particular day.
The person that guaranteed Stevens would be there on that day was Hillary.
Being an attorney, Hillary was creating her own defense by implying someone else had done it. She did the exact same thing with 9/11/2001 when she made the claim "Bush Knew".
This causes us a problem. We hated Gadaffi because he gave the OK to blow up an airplane over Lockerbee.
We hated the rebels because WE knew they were many Al Qida in it.
Who to support?
Same for Egypt and all the other uprisings. I believe Moslems need a real dictator to keep the radicals in line. Democracy is unknown in the moslem world as, if given the chance, they will mostly choose a religious Iman to lead them.
That is actually VERY easy.
Daffy Gadaffi isn’t a problem RIGHT NOW; Al Qaeda is.
So “support” Daffy.
I think you’re probably right. There had to have been inside info for that and she’s used the VRWC theory before to cover for Bill. I just can’t see Romney or the VRWC colluding with terrorists or the MB to attack our own consulate just to embarrass obama. This sounds like obama and his crew. A false flag event that got out of control. Or there’s a mole in the State Dept. Maybe his name is Bill.
Had that not happened more than likely Stevens would have been taken hostage. a repeat of Carter and the Iranian hostages. Strictly from a terrorist perspective it's better to have a hostage for bargaining than a body.
I believe the plan was to take Stevens hostage and hold him hostage until the day Romney was sworn in, just like with Carter and Reagan. This would give credibility to the claim Romney was behind it.
Everyone above the level of idiot knows Obama’s economic policy is a complete failure. If he is reelected it's only going to get worse. In fact it's probably going to get worse with Romney, but for the dems it's better to have a repub in the WH to blame than having a dem in the WH to take the blame. Dems can then claim Romney undoing Obama’s policies is what caused the economy to crash.
They also have to create a cover for Hillary's foreign policy mess. By making a claim the repubs were collaborating with the terrorist they have that cover.
I have no doubt this attack was set up for Hillary to run against Romney in 2016.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.