Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CNN hits hard on Libya: The only conclusion is that the White House tried to cover something up
Hotair ^

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, let’s give credit where it’s due. CNN has followed this story, and on primetime shows like this one and Anderson Cooper’s too. Two: Per Eli Lake’s 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 you’re 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 Lake’s piece to see why that won’t wash, then watch this clip as CNN’s 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 media’s contacts in the intelligence community are more astute than the people advising the president. Nothing would surprise me at this point, but given O’s 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?


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bhocia; cia; coverup; libya

1 posted on 10/02/2012 5:20:11 AM PDT by chessplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

Is CNN no longer Chicken Noodle News?


2 posted on 10/02/2012 5:23:30 AM PDT by RexBeach (Mr. Obama Loves To Spend My $$$$$$$$$$$$)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

Rather surprized bump.

(bump)


3 posted on 10/02/2012 5:25:29 AM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network (America doesn't need any new laws. America needs freedom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RexBeach

Cooper’s been on the story from the start.


4 posted on 10/02/2012 5:32:34 AM PDT by chessplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer
It seems that CNN and CBS (post-Rather) sometimes have a limit to how much sh1t they'll shovel for Obama.

Other outlets, like the NY Times, ABC, MSNBC etc. have none whatsoever.

5 posted on 10/02/2012 5:35:44 AM PDT by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

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.


6 posted on 10/02/2012 5:37:22 AM PDT by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer
As usual in the MSM, everyone is to blame but Obama/Clinton.

Film's Fault
CIA's Fault
Intelligence Failure's Fault
OBAMA/CLINTON's FAULT!!!


All of the above followed by a coverup, lies and WHITEWASH!

7 posted on 10/02/2012 5:38:19 AM PDT by Bon mots (Abu Ghraib: 47 Times on the front page of the NY Times | Benghazi: 2 Times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer
The only acceptable outcome for the twin scandals of "Fast & Furious" and "Benghazi" is the firing of Holder and Clinton followed by either the resignation or impeachment of Oblamer.



Nixon was forced to resign for FAR less...
Nobody died at Watergate...

Obama/Clinton/Holder are personally responsible for dozens of deaths including that of a US Ambassador - and the press is SILENT.

8 posted on 10/02/2012 5:40:55 AM PDT by Bon mots (Abu Ghraib: 47 Times on the front page of the NY Times | Benghazi: 2 Times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

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.


9 posted on 10/02/2012 5:49:08 AM PDT by erkyl (We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office --Aesop (~550 BC))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer
** CNN hits hard on Libya: The only conclusion is that the White House tried to cover something up **



Barack Obama : " The only people who don't want to disclose the truth are those with something to hide. "




Low and Behold 40 years later someone speaks



August 9th 1974


Do you miss me yet ?

10 posted on 10/02/2012 5:51:57 AM PDT by American Constitutionalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: circlecity

Be fair. They used the ambassadors diary weeks ago to point out he was concerned about a resurgent Al Quaida in Libya.


11 posted on 10/02/2012 5:51:57 AM PDT by wiggen (The teacher card. When the racism card just won't work.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: erkyl
IF ( yes, that's spelled with a big if ) IF ?
This so called " Innocents of Muslims " film was the culprit that caused all the mayhem by these " Spontaneous " attacks in Libya and Egypt that the meme from this Administration says it happen,

How then ?

How can they explain all the other attacks in Benghazi in earlier months leading up to 9/11/12 ?


Other films maybe ?

If ? the reasoning and explanation of this administration stands,

Then ?

Would there not be other " FILMS " that would have cause a " spontaneous response " of those other earlier attacks in Benghazi ? right ?

So ? How can this administration explain the other earlier attacks in Benghazi ? other films that offended Muslims ?
Where are those other films ?
12 posted on 10/02/2012 6:06:30 AM PDT by American Constitutionalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: American Constitutionalist

If they’re not going after Obama because he’s black, then that’s pretty insulting and condescending to blacks.


13 posted on 10/02/2012 6:19:34 AM PDT by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: wiggen

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!


14 posted on 10/02/2012 6:24:55 AM PDT by Little Ray (AGAINST Obama in the General.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray

Arab Spring. The new definition of unintended consequences.


15 posted on 10/02/2012 6:32:53 AM PDT by wiggen (The teacher card. When the racism card just won't work.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

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.


16 posted on 10/02/2012 6:42:21 AM PDT by Hotlanta Mike (Resurrect the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HUAC)...before there is no America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

Better Question:

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?


17 posted on 10/02/2012 6:54:55 AM PDT by Uncle Miltie (You didn't build that. The private sector is doing fine. We tried our plan and it worked.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2936225/posts

“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 erupted—in 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.

18 posted on 10/02/2012 6:58:34 AM PDT by Just mythoughts (Please help Todd Akin defeat Claire and the GOP-e send money!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: erkyl
If you go back and listen carefully to what Hillary said, you will notice she contradicts herself in her statement.

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.

19 posted on 10/02/2012 7:10:52 AM PDT by IMR 4350
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: circlecity
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.

CNN - "We were for the film excuse before we were against it."


20 posted on 10/02/2012 7:20:45 AM PDT by canuck_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: IMR 4350

Hilary having another vast right wing conspiracy moment?


21 posted on 10/02/2012 7:33:35 AM PDT by virgil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

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.


22 posted on 10/02/2012 7:47:05 AM PDT by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: virgil
That's exactly what she was doing.

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".

23 posted on 10/02/2012 7:49:54 AM PDT by IMR 4350
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray

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.


24 posted on 10/02/2012 8:25:30 AM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar

That is actually VERY easy.
Daffy Gadaffi isn’t a problem RIGHT NOW; Al Qaeda is.
So “support” Daffy.


25 posted on 10/02/2012 11:57:07 AM PDT by Little Ray (AGAINST Obama in the General.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: IMR 4350

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.


26 posted on 10/02/2012 11:58:09 AM PDT by virgil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: virgil
The fact that there wasn't supposed to be any security, the one thing that wasn't planned in advance was the former Navy SEALs taking it upon themselves to provide Stevens protection.

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.

27 posted on 10/02/2012 1:47:57 PM PDT by IMR 4350
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson