Skip to comments.U.S. description of Benghazi attacks, at first cautious, changed after 3 days.
Posted on 10/19/2012 9:41:28 AM PDT by WashingtonSource
WASHINGTON In the first 48 hours after the deadly Sept. 11 attacks on U.S. diplomatic outposts in Libya, senior Obama administration officials strongly alluded to a terrorist assault and repeatedly declined to link it to an anti-Muslim video that drew protests elsewhere in the region, transcripts of briefings show.
The administrations initial accounts, however, changed dramatically in the following days, according to a review of briefing transcripts and administration statements, with a new narrative emerging Sept. 16 when U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice asserted in a series of TV appearances that the best information available indicated that the attack had spun off from a protest over the video.
(Excerpt) Read more at mcclatchydc.com ...
Exactly which “senior administration officials” publicly called it a terrorist attack? Obama and Hillary were right out there immediately saying it was a response by the poor offended Muslims to a “heinous” (please, get a grip, Susan Rice!) video.
As usual, history is being rewritten before our very eyes.
Some CIA people apparently did refer to it right away as a terrorist attack, but they were ignored and then silenced. And their boss, Petraeus, went before Congress and referred to - you guessed it, the video.
What we are seeing now, I suspect, is a refusal by some of them to be thrown under the bus by Obama, so we’re getting more and more leaks that senior people in the CIA did in fact consider it a terrorist attack immediately and that this information was suppressed by Obama, State and people at the top (including the head of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff - remember his call to that Florida preacher about the dread video?) .
Besides....Obama doesn't want a second term. He wants his pension and a place in Hawaii and a little choom. HE HATES WORKING....Let Michelle go to work....
This article points out anonymous and named officials who did not make the connection between the video and the attacks early on and correctly reports that Jay Carney, the President's spokesman on Sept. 14 went in to great detail in stating these were not pre-planned terrorist attacks and were due solely to reaction to the offensive video.
This is the three day window of change the article is talking about.
But it was September 12, when the President's first statements on the murders were as follows:
The United States condemns in the strongest terms this outrageous and shocking attack. We're working with the government of Libya to secure our diplomats. I've also directed my administration to increase our security at diplomatic posts around the world. And make no mistake, we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people.
Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts.
That is taken verbatim from the transcript available ate the White House web site.
It was President Obama who first made the argument that the murders were "senseless violence", not pre-planned terrorist attacks, attributed to "denigrat[ing]the religious beliefs of others." Who was responsible for the made up story that they told for weeks until the lie couldn't stand anymore? This is the smoking gun -- it came from the highest levels of the White House.
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.