Skip to comments.Who Conceived 'Protest Over a Video' As the WH Cover Story For Benghazi?
Posted on 11/16/2012 11:29:35 AM PST by Obama_Is_Sabotaging_America
After much thought and consideration of the fact that Hillary fled to Australia in advance of the Benghazi hearings, today it finally dawned on me who possibly brainstormed the White House' cover story for the terrorist attack in Benghazi. That person would be Hillary Clinton's top aide, Huma Abedin.
Huma: "Here. Try this idea.. How about a protest over a video on YouTube?"
It is known that Huma Abedin has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and as a Muslim would be the White House's logical choice when looking for propaganda to explain away the attack in Benghazi.
As a result of Petraeus' testimony today, we now know that someone in the White House changed his stated cause of the Benghazi terrorist attack to a 'protest over an Anti-Islam video'. It would seem logical that someone intimately familiar with Islam or Muslim culture be consulted to assist in developing the cover story that 0bama was looking for.
In brainstorming a cover story at the White House, "What are some things that could trigger a protest there?" would be the first question asked. Next, the first person to come to mind would be Huma Abedin. "Yeah, SHE would know!".. Hillary was probably involved at this point and with Huma's brilliant 'video' idea, a cover story was born. This set the stage for Susan Rice's appearances on all the Sunday news programs for a propaganda tour aimed at saving Obama's re-election.
that’s a good question
I bet even the Libyan Terrorists Attackers were scratching their head over that one:
“Hey, Abdul, Mo’- they are saying we were pissed over a video- what video? do you know anything about some video?”
I think Hillary Clinton did it.
..consulting her top aide, Huma Abedin, yes.
Good point. Round them all up for testimony before an Indepedennt Prosecutor. Watergate redux, only this is for an actual high crime.
Definitely the State Dept. The vid was tracked back to belonging to a contractor who works for the State Dept.
Valerie Jarrett , of course .....
Val Jar! Bingo!
That was exactly my first thought, too - Huma Abedin.
Obama had to approve the lie and cover up. He repeated it through the following two weeks including his big deal speech at the UN.
Just a side note on the Benghazi topic while I think of it.
Notice how...”fog of war” shows up in some articles on this topic?
Hillary was the first one I heard say that.
These 3 put their little brains together to hatch the cover story: Obama, Jarrett and Rice.
And, do you remember at first they were trying to tie the Terry Jones Koran burning guy from Florida to it? They were.
Look at this Daily beast article that was rather quickly published on Sept 12 with a link to the you tube video pushing this Terry Jones connection.
It was total ploy using known suspect/scapegoats and using a friendly media outlet, Daily Beast (and others) to get this make believe ruse story out immediately when it happened.
This stinks all over the place. This was probably an open ended ruse developed well before Benghazi to be used when needed.
Huma’s parents are respected muslim-brotherhood supporters in Egypt where we soaw supposedly ‘video protest’, not remotely related to Benghazi terrorist attack.
Did not the protest originate in Eqypt, where Huma’s muslim-brotherhood parents live?
You’re making the error of thinking that Hillary or State has any say in how things are done.
This decision came out of Chicago. It was, after all, primarily a political issue, not one of national security.
(did I forget the /sarc tag?)
Who's in charge of the State Department? Secretary of State
Who's the Secretary of State? Hillary Clinton
Who's in Australia right now? RUN, HILLARY RUN!!! (And I DON'T mean 'for office')
Not a chance.
No question, it helped to gin up protest demonstrations in a variety of wog locales. However, Benghazi was not among them, as any moron reading the New York Times or the Boston Globe would have known a day or two later. Benghazi was a military assault, not a protest demonstration gone out of control.
We have, for example, the testimony of Ethan Chorin, who was in Benghazi with Dr. Thomas Burke of Mass General, Boston. They were there to assist Libyan doctors in setting up an Emergency Room operation at the Benghazi Medical Center. They and the Libyan doctors were slated to meet with Ambassador Stevens Wednesday morning, the 12th.
On the evening of the 11th, Chorin was on the phone with the Ambassador's security detail arranging the meeting, when the call ended abruptly with a shout of "We've got a problem here". Then Chorin and Burke were left to hole up in their hotel listening to sounds of the distant violence. And the Libyan doctors ended up treating the Ambassador unsucessfully at the BMC for severe asphyxia.
IOW, no demonstration, no build-up. Just a sudden surprise attack by Al Qaeda. Which we now know would not have been a surprise, but for the incompetence of the Obama / Clinton State Department.
And no need to muddy the waters with bogus conspiracy theories. The facts are good enough!
Of course she would have to have known about a nondescript video to blame it on.....but if you have commissioned such a vid to be made,it would be right in your back pocket when you needed it.
That would mean collusion..hmmmmmmmmm
One of three things happened at Benghazi:
1) Muslims, irate over a YouTube video, attacked the embassy and killed Americans.
2) Muslims planned an executed a terrorist attack on the embassy, killing Americans.
3) Muslims attacked our embassy and killed four Americans for yet-unknown sinister reasons.
We can discount reason #1, since it’s been completely and factually debunked. That leaves us with two options, both of which are devastating for Obama. If #2 is the likely scenario, that means Obama was asleep at the switch, spending his time golfing, vacationing and fundraising, all while the terrorists were planning. His actions may not be criminal but there’s no doubt what the American people would’ve thought of it (if the MSM had done their job). Obama knew it could very well cost him the election, so the blame/deflection game began.
But then there’s scenario #3. Possible gun running through Libya? A planned “October surprise” kidnapping that went wrong when two American heroes defied orders and fought back? Right now the facts have us somewhere between options #2 and #3. If it unravels and #3 is revealed, Obama will be impeached by the House. Whether or not the Senate goes along with it is another story.
Drip, drip, drip. A little more is coming out everyday.
Interesting.. I hope the investigative committeess delve more into the failed security beforehand, the denials that day for more security, the denials by 0bama for a rescue attempt, and 0bama’s DISINTEREST in attending his security briefings. He just wants to look the other way while America ROTS, just as he did in Iraq after all our blood and sweat and now in Afghanistan.
Could be why the ‘maker’ of the video is STILL in jail, under the guise of probation violation. Who gets ONE YEAR for probation violation on non-violent crime? Anyway, he’s locked up because the regime DOESN’T WANT HIM INTERVIEWED OR QUESTIONED.
I doubt it. How convenient that the video was made in Hollywood... My personal opinion is that this video was made by persons loyal to the Obama team as cover for an October Surprise and that is why the mystery surrounding the film maker.
In the 3rd debate, OBAMA ENTRAPS HIMSELF; His passion in insisting he said 'act of terror' in the Rose Garden and Romney was WRONG and WITH Crowley's backing, DOES NOT COMPUTE with him saying in his news conference on Wednesday that he ordered Susan Rice AFTERWARDS to go on her 'protest over a video' propaganda tour on national TV. So her chose her for the mission but didn't know what she was going to say?? HELL NO!!!
Your theory is apparently shared by others:
Note the speculation that the guy that made “the video” may have connections to DoJ.
He's locked up because the Regime wants to make nice with the muzzies.
“My personal opinion is that this video was made by persons loyal to the Obama team as cover for an October Surprise and that is why the mystery surrounding the film maker.”
I’ve always thought the video was created by the White Hut in case they needed an ace up the sleeve at some point in time. It seemed obvious to me when Hillary mentioned the video and stressed “... an awful internet video that WE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH.” It’s how a little kid lies. Why would she think that would enter someone’s mind? Only a guilty person would make that statement.
And the filmmaker is now behind bars. He’ll probably die of arsenic poisoning, similar to the Coroner Forensic Tech who worked on Breitbart’s body. It happened the same day L.A. officials released their preliminary autopsy report on Breitbart’s death.
According to early reports, Michael Cormier was seemingly healthy, yet suddenly stricken with a fatal condition just like Andrew Breitbart.
I think the filmmaker will “get disappeared” so he can’t talk.
They have already destroyed Canadian speech and murder europeans that practice free speech.
Kansas City Muslims Want Limits on Free Speech - Sept 27, 2011
Islamic leaders in Missouri and New Jersey are calling for lawmakers to limit free speech after an anti-Muslim film sparked outrage across the world.
The guy is a total flake. No way would they have trusted such a person to pull off such a scheme. Chicago is evil but not incompetent.
There was an article or two by Walid Shoebat about this; the video maker (or whatever he is) was business partner with Shoebat’s cousin, a Palestinian jihadi. Very shady fellows. The Coptic Christian thing is no doubt a lie, Shoebat explains.
Who financed the Innocence of Muslims video?
Go from there...
I wouldn't be surprised if it was this administration -- for the express purpose of creating a cover for a subsequent action (not necessarily this one).
Any "Select Committee" should put the Palestinian schlub who's in federal prison on their witness list.
They pissed on the 1st Amendment. And all the bitches whom normally exploit the 1st Amendment to advance their bilge said nothing.