As best as I can tell the below is the first thread on the terrorist attack on Obama’s mission in Benghazi, Libya, September 11, 2012, posted on FR. Hillary gave a statement and she is the first one I have found officially that attributed the terrorist attack to some inflammatory material posted on the Internet.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2929584/posts
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19562692
Statement by Secretary Clinton on the Attack in Benghazi
Press Statement
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
September 11, 2012
I condemn in the strongest terms the attack on our mission in Benghazi today. As we work to secure our personnel and facilities, we have confirmed that one of our State Department officers was killed. We are heartbroken by this terrible loss. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family and those who have suffered in this attack.
This evening, I called Libyan President Magariaf to coordinate additional support to protect Americans in Libya. President Magariaf expressed his condemnation and condolences and pledged his government’s full cooperation.
Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.
In light of the events of today, the United States government is working with partner countries around the world to protect our personnel, our missions, and American citizens worldwide.
"Some have sought to BLAME the inflammatory material posted on the Internet FOR the vicious behavior.", is more like it. This "some" are Obama, Jarrett, Rice, Carney AND Hillary!
Don't forget, this is a Clinton, a protected species by the MSM. Just parse that sentence and she's in the clear wrt blaming the video. She didn't say SHE thought it was a response to something on the Internet ... just that ‘some’ have. I think you'll find they've all been pretty weaselly.
The cover up is bad. What actually went down is way worse ... from Stevens' mission to leaving him unprotected to not providing real-time support when he was under attack.
I don't think Americans will overlook the vision of the administration watching our guys fight for their lives in real time and not sending in backup when it was clearly available. That, I don't think we can stomach. Democrat apologists would be happy, I think, to focus on the ‘cover up’, since it deflects from something way worse.