Skip to comments.CIA documents supported Susan Rice’s description of Benghazi attacks (Obama CYA leaks)
Posted on 10/19/2012 8:20:06 PM PDT by kristinn
...Romney campaign may have misfired with its suggestion that statements by President Obama and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice about the Benghazi attack last month werent supported by intelligence,...
Talking points prepared by the CIA on Sept. 15, the same day that Rice taped three television appearances, support her description of the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate as a reaction to Arab anger about an anti-Muslim video prepared in the United States. According to the CIA account, The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the U.S. Consulate and subsequently its annex. There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.
The CIA document went on: This assessment may change as additional information is collected and analyzed and as currently available information continues to be evaluated. This may sound like self-protective boilerplate, but it reflects the analysts genuine problem interpreting fragments of intercepted conversation, video surveillance and source reports.
The senior intelligence official said the analysts judgment was based in part on monitoring of some of the Benghazi attackers, which showed they had been watching the Cairo protests live on television and talking about them before they assaulted the consulate....
...It was a flash mob with weapons, is how the senior official described the attackers. The mob included members of the Ansar al-Sharia militia, about four members of al-Qaeda in the Maghreb, and members of the Egypt-based Muhammad Jamal network, along with other unarmed looters.
...official said the only major change he would make now in the CIAs Sept. 15 talking points would be to drop the word spontaneous and substitute opportunistic. He explained that there apparently was some pre-coordination but minimal planning.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Amb. Rice on ABC's This Week on September 16:
But our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous -- not a premeditated -- response to what had transpired in Cairo. In Cairo, as you know, a few hours earlier, there was a violent protest that was undertaken in reaction to this very offensive video that was disseminated.
We believe that folks in Benghazi, a small number of people came to the embassy to -- or to the consulate, rather, to replicate the sort of challenge that was posed in Cairo. And then as that unfolded, it seems to have been hijacked, let us say, by some individual clusters of extremists who came with heavier weapons, weapons that as you know in -- in the wake of the revolution in Libya are -- are quite common and accessible. And it then evolved from there.
We'll wait to see exactly what the investigation finally confirms, but that's the best information we have at present.
Contrary to this CIA leak and Rice's statement, there was no demonstration in Benghazi. And the administration knew that in real time on September 11.
That’s the real point. It really doesn’t matter why the consulate was under attack starting 9pm local time. The point is that 100s of American watchstanders at State, the Pentagon, CIA, and the White House (if they cared) were watching and hearing the attack in real time.
But only one man could order a rescue or do anything involving American force, either from Tripoli, southern Italy, or ships at sea, and that man, Obama, instead of a rescue mission, dreamed up the video story to cover his ass.
I do not believe the washingtom compost.
They have their collective heads so far up owebama’s arse they can see pinch sulzberger’s ankles.
Oh my god they are building a cover up right before our eyes in PLAIN SIGHT and the media is complicit! WOW!
Nothing there to indicate that there had been warnings FOR MONTHS that trouble was brewing and the Ambassador had been begging for more security. He got less.
We knew here a year ago that Benghazi was a center of al Queda and had been a main source for fighters in Iraq. Are we supposed to believe that the CIA was not aware of this?
Should the Agency join FR in order to get an idea about what it happening?
It appears that different stories are being “leaked”...Hannity had information that is quite different from what is being “leaked” here. What Romney should focus on is Obama’s handling of the crisis....when did he talk PERSONALLY with his National security council? Axlerod would not answer a direct question about this. If he is saying he identified the attack as “terror,” why not meet with State and CIA, etc. to nail it down?
We know the answer....he went to Las Vega...he “phoned” it in like he does everything...
Hold on a second, they claimed the mob was caused by the video which is false.
In Obama's CIA I couldn't rule out either possibility.
Thanks to Fox News for the special. It would be helpful to give the times in Benghazi time and in Washington, D.C. Time. “This happened at 10:15pm Benghazi time and ??:?? Washington, D.C. Time.” Gives us a reference.
Gee, I don’t know—a WaPo-viewed 9/15 “CIA [unattributed] report” vs. sworn testimony from real-time observers and actual tapes. That’s a tough one. Bret Baier’s report didn’t come a moment too soon.
IIRC, Libya six hours ahead of D.C.
If the cia will paint iranian nukes as an issue of the past in 2007 to prevent bush from having evidence to act, why wouldn’t it be possible they would write talking points to make obama look less pathetic?
And this seems to differ with other reports which stated they knew the next day that it wasn’t the video. I watched the video, by the way. I thought it was spot on.
What?! So did Issa and Chaffetz get to look at those docs in the closed door sessions prior to the public hearings? If not, who’s withholding them?
Time for a subpoena. Let Bambi invoke exec privilege.
As long as folks focus on the attack being monitored in real time by the Obama administration, the rest will become clear.
Aiding and abetting TREASON. (thanks for posting, kristinn)
If career CIA agents are willing to sacrifice for this guy, one, he’s got more power than I even thought and two, this nation is officially over. All that has to happen now is someone turn out the light.
My current best assessment is that you'd kick the truth to the bottom of a well to help your chosen presidential candidate who just can't quite seem to get his campaign up lately.
You ****ing syphilitic whores.