US consulate attack in Benghazi: a challenge to official version of events

UK Guardian ^ | September 9, 2013 | Chris Stephen

[Deb]

I hate having to reference ANYTHING thru the ‘60s Marxists at the Guardian, but seeing that it’s Obama... what the heck.

[Girlene]

Very interesting article.

What's surprising is the Guardian's claim about the lack of bullet holes in the buildings. From the article:

The testimony of heavy fighting is hard to reconcile with the lack of bullet holes in the buildings. The villa's sandy walls are still blackened by the smoke from the fire, but there are few bullet marks here or on the other buildings, nor are there spent casings visible, at least on the paths and asphalt. The front gate has no sign of damage except two bullet holes. The only sign of heavy firing is at the rear gate, with holes from 23 rounds fired into the compound and six fired out. This gunfight is not mentioned in accounts made public. From the time of the attack to the time they were summoned, four of the five DSS agents were in hiding.................

And then at the CIA compound

........... The lack of bullet marks on the walls of the facility does not square with reports that it was assaulted. Rockets were fired at one wall, and mortar bombs struck the roof, suggesting the firing was opportunistic and from a distance, rather than an attempt to overrun the CIA compound.

Where were the heavy firefights?

[XHogPilot]

In a normal world, all the Benhghzi players would now be in prison.

This isn't cops-n-robbers. It's war. The "rebels" who we assisted in the Libyan overthrow were the same men who attacked the US in Benghazi. Obama will never admit that. And he (Obama) is trying for a repeat in Syria. This time, he'll indirectly arm Al Qaeda with Syrian chemical weapons. Guess what comes next.