Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Five myths about Benghazi
The Washington Post ^ | May 16, 2013 | Michael Hirsh

Posted on 05/16/2013 2:17:08 PM PDT by don-o

1.U.N. Ambassador Susan E. Rice gave a deliberately false account of the attack.
2. A faster military response would have saved at least some of the four Americans.
3.Obama and Clinton should not be blamed.
4. The Benghazi attack could not have been predicted.
5. Benghazi is a pseudo-scandal manufactured by the GOP.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: benghazi; fivemyths; petraeus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-84 next last
Interesting mix. Let's see what FReepers can do with this, besides drive by one liners.
1 posted on 05/16/2013 2:17:08 PM PDT by don-o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MestaMachine

for further pinging


2 posted on 05/16/2013 2:18:01 PM PDT by don-o (He will not share His glory, and He will not be mocked! Blessed be the Name of the Lord forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: don-o

Does the WaPo even bother to edit what the White Hut sends them?


3 posted on 05/16/2013 2:21:27 PM PDT by Uncle Miltie (WHO IS ON THE ENEMIES LIST?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: don-o
As to #1, subpoena Susan Rice and ask her who ordered her to say that? And, Did she agree to do it in exchange for a promotion by 0bama?

"She had nothing to do with Benghazi" - President Barack Obama

4 posted on 05/16/2013 2:23:21 PM PDT by GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: don-o

There were 37 Americans at the Consulate. When the Libyans went to evacuate them they were expecting only 10. That was from Reuters.


5 posted on 05/16/2013 2:23:46 PM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Miltie

My initial impression upon reading the whole thing is that, considering it’s the Post, it is fairly challenging to the regime on a couple of points and pretty weak on a couple - especially the military response.

If these ARE the Regime’s new talking points, might as well tackle them.


6 posted on 05/16/2013 2:25:48 PM PDT by don-o (He will not share His glory, and He will not be mocked! Blessed be the Name of the Lord forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: don-o
1.U.N. Ambassador Susan E. Rice gave a deliberately false account of the attack. Everyone of our people on the ground said "terrorist attack", Susan Rice said "Video." Explain how that is not a deliberate lie, you first graders.

2. A faster military response would have saved at least some of the four Americans. Our air-base in Sicily is 400 miles away, less than 1 hour for a scrambled jet. That was plenty of time to do several flyovers, drop bombs on the lased targets, etc. before the second two men died several hours after the first attack.

3.Obama and Clinton should not be blamed. The buck stops nowhere? See the two items above. Who is responsible for the lie and the deaths if not 0bama? 4. The Benghazi attack could not have been predicted. Except that Stephens did predict it, asked for better security, and got none.

5. Benghazi is a pseudo-scandal manufactured by the GOP. The Libyan Prime Minister agrees someone manufactured the "Video" excuse. It wasn't the GOP.

7 posted on 05/16/2013 2:26:44 PM PDT by Uncle Miltie (WHO IS ON THE ENEMIES LIST?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Miltie

Susan Rice lied. She ntentionally gave false information for her own benefit.

The video was a complete WH fabrication.

The “spontaneous protest gone bad” story is a complete WH fabrication.

The lie by omission is the failure to authorize any of the response options that were available and presented. (FEST, Sigonella, US Navy airpower, ect)


8 posted on 05/16/2013 2:28:31 PM PDT by Triple (Socialism denies people the right to the fruits of their labor, and is as abhorrent as slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: don-o

4. The Benghazi attack could not have been predicted.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Predicted? Hell this attack was FReepin’ PLANNED. By the White Hut. It’s not enough to know that the Obama Regime lied their Obama’s off after the fact - we need to know the truth of why they orchestrated this riot - gone - bad in the first place.

I’m in agreement with many experts who have insider info: This was a blind sheik for our kidnapped ambassador trade that went FUBAR. And FUBO knew from the get-got.


9 posted on 05/16/2013 2:31:23 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Miltie
3.Obama and Clinton should not be blamed. The buck stops nowhere? See the two items above. Who is responsible for the lie and the deaths if not 0bama? 4. The Benghazi attack could not have been predicted. Except that Stephens did predict it, asked for better security, and got none.

Reading comprehension is important, Perhaps you could use a remedial course to understand that the Post is saying it is a MYTH that:

3. Obama and Clinton should not be blamed. and
4. The Benghazi attack could not have been predicted.

10 posted on 05/16/2013 2:32:24 PM PDT by don-o (He will not share His glory, and He will not be mocked! Blessed be the Name of the Lord forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: don-o
2. A faster military response would have saved at least some of the four Americans.

A couple of F-18s and supporting aircraft buzzing the compound could have done some good.

But we owed it to the our people to roll at first report whether we thought we could do some good or not. The decision not to do so was political.

11 posted on 05/16/2013 2:33:53 PM PDT by Mike Darancette (Plan "B" is now Plan "A")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: don-o
Its actually sort of a balanced mix. They are saying that it is a myth that Obama and Clinton should not be blamed, and that it is a Psuedo scandal cooked up by the GOP. Also, number one is kind of true. Rice didn't give a "deliberately false account of the attack" per se, just a deliberately false account of the motivations for the attack.
12 posted on 05/16/2013 2:34:38 PM PDT by fhayek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: don-o

Michael Hirsh is on the official list of JOURNOLISTS.

Here is a link to the list for reference. So far, all the Obama apologists have been members of the JOURNOLISTS list.

Isn’t that just odd ?

http://www.nachumlist.com/journoli.htm


13 posted on 05/16/2013 2:35:11 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (The monsters are due on Maple Street)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: don-o

Based on my knowledge of the facts currently at hand, I would say that this is fairly accurate except for Myth 1. It wasn’t a binary choice between youtube demonstation and pre-meditated Al-Q attack. If they didn’t want to get ahead of themselves, they could’ve just as easily said - We’re working on who did this. Instead, the administraton mislead the public for political purposes. The irony is that this probably would not have made the difference in the election one way or another.

I know that many here feel otherwise, but I just don’t see Benghazi as impeachment material. Feckless foreign policy, yes. Lack of preparedness, sure. The misleading of the public was bad, but it wasn’t under oath and all administrations spin foreign debacles, especially 2 months away from an election.

Obviously if there was ever proof that 0bama gave a stand-down order or otherwise impeded rescue efforts, there would be some real teeth to the scandal.

To me, the IRS scandal is much more of a threat to the administration. You can tell how sensitive they are by their phony attempts to address it.


14 posted on 05/16/2013 2:36:15 PM PDT by Lou Budvis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
I’m in agreement with many experts who have insider info:

I'd like to see if this thread could serve as a repository of information. I think the five points provide enough of a framework to help organize info that's out there and on this board.

Can you provide source for your claim that this was planned in the WH?

15 posted on 05/16/2013 2:36:30 PM PDT by don-o (He will not share His glory, and He will not be mocked! Blessed be the Name of the Lord forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: don-o; Dave Mellon

Paula Broadwell, the biographer revealed as the woman having a secret affair with the now-former CIA director, gave a talk at the University of Denver on Oct. 26 in which she appeared to reveal sensitive, maybe even classified, information about the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.

The most interesting revelation is her claim that the CIA was holding several Libyan militia members prisoner, which may have prompted the attack.

http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/11/11/did_petraeus_mistress_reveal_new_benghazi_details

TEL AVIV – Did Paula Broadwell, the alleged mistress of ex-CIA Director David Petraeus, reveal a secret CIA detention center in Benghazi during a public speech she gave last month? http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2958286/posts

Freeper Dave Mellon http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:davemellon/index?tab=comments;brevity=full;options=no-change

http://www.flickr.com/photos/89009379@N04/8147136686/in/photostream

http://www.flickr.com/photos/89009379@N04/8147128385/in/photostream/

his youtube—

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNKRKHv742Y&feature=plcp

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kV55xRx_-7s


*”Soon after I made my calls, one of the guards told me that four men were detained in a building inside the compound who had been shooting at the demonstrators,” he said.

“By the time I arrived at the building the men had already escaped. At that point I left the scene and didn’t return.”*

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2012/10/2012101921132197668.html

Days before the demonstrators forced Ansar al-Sharia from their Benghazi headquarters, Al Jazeera interviewed a senior member of the militia, and visited a hospital where it was, until Friday, providing security.

The spokesperson, who asked to be quoted by the pseudonym Abu Mohammed, said that the militia had nothing to do with the attack. Ansar al-Sharia was against the killings and looting of the consulate, he said, denying reports from witnesses that its members were photographed at the September 11 protest.

“We are busy guarding our bases and the hospital [on the night of the attack]. We did not order our members to go to the protest,” he said. “We welcome all the Western countries that help us.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/09/201292218380199890.html


16 posted on 05/16/2013 2:37:41 PM PDT by Irenic (The pencil sharpener and Elmer's glue is put away-- we've lost the red wheel barrow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

The article agrees with you, the attack could be predicted. What is enumerated are myths (logical negations).


17 posted on 05/16/2013 2:39:34 PM PDT by Mike Darancette (Plan "B" is now Plan "A")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: don-o

1.U.N. Ambassador Susan E. Rice gave a deliberately false account of the attack.
2. A faster military response would have saved at least some of the four Americans.
3.Obama and Clinton should not be blamed.
4. The Benghazi attack could not have been predicted.
5. Benghazi is a pseudo-scandal manufactured by the GOP.

1. Susan Rice knew the talking points were a big lie.
2. Military Ready Response teams were on minutes alert and could have been there from the middle East, Africa or Europe....it doesn’t take 6-10 hours to get from Italy to Libya if you are on alert.
3. Obama and Clinton should be blamed for gun running, screwing up the gun running and then lying about it.
4. The attack was predicted by the CIA and other intelligence weeks and days in advance.
5. Benghazi is a real scandal of Obama, his lackey administration and MSM gross incompetence.


18 posted on 05/16/2013 2:40:07 PM PDT by RetiredTexasVet (You don't have to be stupid to become a Progressive, but it does speed up the process.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: don-o

Some of this can’t be called a myth and can’t be called fact either.

We are trying to get to the bottom of it.


19 posted on 05/16/2013 2:40:11 PM PDT by dila813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
JOURNOLISTS.

Forgive me, but so what? I'm interested in what he posted today, and what smart and knowledgeable FReepers might be able to do with the framework he made.

20 posted on 05/16/2013 2:40:21 PM PDT by don-o (He will not share His glory, and He will not be mocked! Blessed be the Name of the Lord forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: don-o

crap


21 posted on 05/16/2013 2:42:13 PM PDT by Jeff Chandler (People are idiots.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: don-o

20 hours to get F-18’s to Benghazi? Where the heck were they coming from, the factory? These are 1300 MPH jets! Even with refueling, they could go around the world in 20 hours.

Doesn’t pass the smell test.


22 posted on 05/16/2013 2:45:52 PM PDT by NTHockey (Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Irenic

Good. This is exactly the kind of post I was hoping for. I guess I have to register for Foreign Policy?


23 posted on 05/16/2013 2:46:25 PM PDT by don-o (He will not share His glory, and He will not be mocked! Blessed be the Name of the Lord forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Miltie

Circle the wagons. It doesn’t matter. You frauds have ZERO CREDIBILITY. I will tell you FIVE FACT not myths:
1) MRS. WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAY was asleep at the switch because of her WARPED IDEOLOGICAL belief that THE TERRORISTS WOULDN’T attack because we liberated from Khadafi
2) When the attack occurred she and THE FOREIGNER went into full defense mode not to protect americans but to protect their sorry anti american rearends from THE POLITICAL ATTACKS they knew would come because THEY SCREWED UP
3) This led directly to not responding to help our people and stand down to let them be slaughtered.
4) They have been LYING to the american people ever since again to PROTECT THEIR LEADERSHIP ROLL
5) They blocked access to the survivors again lying to protect their sorry rear ends.


24 posted on 05/16/2013 2:47:32 PM PDT by spawn44 (moo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
Was Rice the first one asked to do the five shows or quickly penciled-in after HRC laughed in Obama’s face when he asked her to do it?
25 posted on 05/16/2013 2:52:57 PM PDT by JPG (Stay strong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: don-o; Dave Mellon

I think most the Foreign Policy article is on FR, let me look and try and snag it for you.

I wish Dave Mellon would come back. He signed up at FR Sept 2, 2012, he started posting after the Benghazi attack with incredible information and work! It appears the last he posted was on Jan 1st.

Back in a few, will try and find the Foreign Policy thread on FR.


26 posted on 05/16/2013 2:54:12 PM PDT by Irenic (The pencil sharpener and Elmer's glue is put away-- we've lost the red wheel barrow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Lou Budvis
We agree on 3, 4 and 5.

I would respectfully disagree on "2" because we simply do not know what assets were available and where they were located, At this time I do not even know how many trained potential combatants the U/S had in Benghazi. We do know that two of the dead were ordered to stand down and did not do so.

What evidence do you have that a bunch of thugs loaded with small arms and with access to mortars were driven to attack by a very silly video? Personally I prefer Hillary's inane “just out for a pizza” farce explanation to the spontaneous protest theory.

27 posted on 05/16/2013 2:54:49 PM PDT by R W Reactionairy ("Everyone is entitled to their own opinion ... but not to their own facts" Daniel Patrick Moynihan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Miltie

So how are any of the bullet points not mythical in nature?

Target-rich environment.

But then, we are not dealing with rational, logical people here. The scramble inherent in any CYA action must necessarily be chaotic and lacking in any kind of accuracy, rather like a sawed-off shotgun with no kind of choke on the muzzle.

Shooting themselves in the foot, not once, but repeatedly and with seemingly maniacal ferocity, is a frightening thing to watch.


28 posted on 05/16/2013 2:55:12 PM PDT by alloysteel (If you want to see the true measure of a man, watch how he treats his inferiors, not his equals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: spawn44

LOL! What you said.... :-)


29 posted on 05/16/2013 2:56:40 PM PDT by Uncle Miltie (WHO IS ON THE ENEMIES LIST?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: don-o

Well, considering my usually sparkling mind, I’ll just have to blame that on poor writing by the WP. ;-)


30 posted on 05/16/2013 2:58:09 PM PDT by Uncle Miltie (WHO IS ON THE ENEMIES LIST?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: don-o

1.U.N. Ambassador Susan E. Rice gave a deliberately false account of the attack.

Clearly the account given by Ambassador Rice was deliberately false. But do any of us know with certainty that she participated in doctoring the talking points? Perhaps the deliberation was not on her part. Remember the adage that one should not rule out incompetence as a motive. She may have been truly clueless.

2. A faster military response would have saved at least some of the four Americans.

What was the timeline? How long after phone calls were made did the four remaining Americans survive? Without a timeline everyone is simply guessing.

3.Obama and Clinton should not be blamed.

True. This IS a myth.

4. The Benghazi attack could not have been predicted.

True. This IS a myth.

5. Benghazi is a pseudo-scandal manufactured by the GOP.

True. It is a REAL scandal of unplumbed depth.


31 posted on 05/16/2013 2:59:14 PM PDT by the_Watchman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Irenic

No problem. I went ahead and registered. The Patreus / Broadwell connection is a good thing to bring forward.


32 posted on 05/16/2013 3:00:33 PM PDT by don-o (He will not share His glory, and He will not be mocked! Blessed be the Name of the Lord forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: don-o

Here’s the thread, just in case anybody wants to revisit it.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2958473/posts

Saw this one whilst hunting...interesting...

CIA denies it detained militants in Benghazi
CBS News ^ | November 12, 2012, 1:58 PM | (Associated Press)

Posted on Monday, November 12, 2012 1:44:56 PM by Olog-hai

The CIA is denying an assertion made by David Petraeus’ biographer and girlfriend that the agency held militants in Libya before the Sept. 11 attack. …

President Barack Obama issued an executive order in January 2009 stripping the CIA of its authority to take prisoners. …

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2958666/posts


33 posted on 05/16/2013 3:09:00 PM PDT by Irenic (The pencil sharpener and Elmer's glue is put away-- we've lost the red wheel barrow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: don-o

I’m not going to bother reading his stupid article. But his five myths are five FACTS. When did facts become myths?

Even a kindergartner knows the difference between facts and stories, if you give them a bit of time to think about it.

It takes a stone-blind leftist to come up with this junk.


34 posted on 05/16/2013 3:15:26 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: don-o

Are these this weekends talking points?


35 posted on 05/16/2013 3:17:16 PM PDT by uncitizen (Drip drip drip)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R W Reactionairy

Oh, I think Rice lied in a ham-fisted manner for political purposes. I just think that they could’ve gotten by with ‘we’re working on it, fast-moving circumstances, etc.’

As for No. 2, you’re right we don’t have enough info yet on what assets were avialable and how effective they would’ve been. If none were avialable, that leads to the question of why not?

At then end of the day, though, barring some bombshell I just don’t see this as enough to bring down 0bama. 0bama could always default by saying that sometimes mistakes are made on security, the mission, etc. and people die like what happened in Beruit under President Reagan.’ That may be innacurate, but it would be enough to let him walk.


36 posted on 05/16/2013 3:25:21 PM PDT by Lou Budvis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: don-o
Can you provide source for your claim that this was planned in the WH?

 

This is the most recent thread. There are dozens like it going all the way back to 9/12.

Retired 4 star Admiral Blows Whistle on Benghazi new Evidence (1/17/2013)

Thursday, May 16, 2013 2:45:55 PM · by stockpirate · 124 replies

 

Gossip? Conspiracy theory? Truth? Who knows? This is why we need Congressional Hearings and even a Special Prosecutor to uncover the truth.

 

37 posted on 05/16/2013 3:47:59 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Lou Budvis
As for No. 2, you’re right we don’t have enough info yet on what assets were avialable and how effective they would’ve been. If none were avialable, that leads to the question of why not?

I just posted Benghazi scandal is an affront to the American military ethos

38 posted on 05/16/2013 3:52:09 PM PDT by don-o (He will not share His glory, and He will not be mocked! Blessed be the Name of the Lord forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Thanks for that. Yes, there is a LOT here on FR. Finding it after a time is a problem. I thought maybe we could get some consolidation in one thread.


39 posted on 05/16/2013 3:56:40 PM PDT by don-o (He will not share His glory, and He will not be mocked! Blessed be the Name of the Lord forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Mike Darancette

My sentence structure in post 9 was wacky. I was trying not to write a double positive. Or something like that.

To be clear - yes, the Benghazi attack could have been predicted. My argument is the WH schemed up this plan, not expecting it to go wrong, and so anything planned could be predicted.

Even if this was not a bungled up White Hut scheme, just the basic facts as we know them now lead us to realize this was gross incompetence with predictable results.


40 posted on 05/16/2013 3:57:53 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: don-o
Lie:

He says it's a myth that Rice gave a misleading account:

"And there is little doubt that Rice’s taped remarks reflected the best intelligence assessment of the attacks at the time."

Really? The video was the best intelligence assessment at the time? And Rice really thought it was true? Blatant lie.

41 posted on 05/16/2013 4:13:46 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: don-o
They're trying to find things to blame both sides for.

Muddying the waters so Obama doesn't stand out so much.

Typical media trick.

42 posted on 05/16/2013 4:15:27 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: don-o; onyx

One thing that came out of the hearing the other day with Holder was an exchange with Chaffetz over an investigation of General Petraeus. Freeper Onyx summarized a few of the questions posed by Chaffetz here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3019843/posts?page=491#491

I could not listen to the hearing, but it sounds like there was an attempt to nail down some times about “what did they know and when did they know it.”

It would be impossible to say for sure, but the speculation that Petraeus might testify could be the additional “shoe” to drop in the Benghazi scandal suggested here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3019263/posts

There was some posting to that effect on the thread.


43 posted on 05/17/2013 3:48:00 AM PDT by Cap Huff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cap Huff

Petraeus is obviously the elephant in the room. The WH is locked in on assigning responsibility for the talking points to CIA. His testimony, in light of what we know today, is vital. I can’t find ant mention of additional hearings, beyond getting Pickering and Mullen to testify about the ARB, While I can understand this approach in challenging the credibility of State, I want substance on what happened on 9/11/12 especially from the military.

One thing I have not seen mentioned goes to the standard boilerplate that the Admin is using “...can’t comment because it’s under investigation”

In the 100 emails, it is stated that the FBI had no problem with the Talking Points 1.0. The CIA obviously has no problem with what they had composed. So, by process of elimination, that leaves only two entities who had a problem - The State Department and the White House.


44 posted on 05/17/2013 4:24:54 AM PDT by don-o (He will not share His glory, and He will not be mocked! Blessed be the Name of the Lord forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Cap Huff

Added keyword fivemyths


45 posted on 05/17/2013 9:10:59 AM PDT by don-o (He will not share His glory, and He will not be mocked! Blessed be the Name of the Lord forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: don-o

Quote from the article:”On Sunday talk shows five days after the attack, Rice gave interviews based on talking points supplied by U.S. intelligence agencies; she suggested that Stevens’s death resulted from “spontaneous” protests that spread from the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, provoked by a movie trailer lampooning the prophet Muhammad.”

The talking points never mentioned the video. The word video does not appear in the talking points.


46 posted on 05/17/2013 9:17:55 AM PDT by csmusaret (Will remove Obama-Biden bumperstickers for $10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: csmusaret

bump for more FReeper participation. We cannot let Benghazi get overshadowed.


47 posted on 05/17/2013 1:15:54 PM PDT by don-o (He will not share His glory, and He will not be mocked! Blessed be the Name of the Lord forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd; don-o
From the Rush Thread today, here's my Post #118 comment on that article, which I believe is the real "there, there". JMO.

"Cintoon was covering-up our real mission in Benghazi. It was a *kidnap US Ambassador to exchange for blind shiek* scam, that went very wrong, when 2 SEALS fought back and ruined the plan. They didn’t want any defense back then; the 4 deaths have now forced them to arm the Consulate extension bldgs. Stevens, and his homo Libyan boyfriends, were running guns to murderous islamists and trying to buy-back MANPADS w/ CIA-supplied cash. CIA also had a rendition/holding facility for terrorists. There was so much going on there in Benghazi and throughout the ME, I’m thinking they’re glad that only some small parts of it’s come out, so far. If America heard the entire story, so many heads would explode that we’d run out of duct tape.

Many articles have carried all the pieces, but no single article has put it all together, yet, and it sure won’t come out during the BS “hearings”, which’ll go nowhere and net nothing. 0traitor is untouchable on any of this. Like his life, his part in this is sanitized, sealed and secured."

Also, As I said on that thread, they KNEW (and planned) this, but didn’t want any interference in the kidnap-exchange plan, so they had all avail assets - near and far - stand down, twice ordered by 0traitor. Fired Gens and Adms attest to that. SEALS Woods & Doherty messed-up the original plan. (Post #122)

On the same thread, remember the WH SitRoom pics of the OBL raid? Why nothing like that, on this? Because it wasn’t supposed to happen. It was to be a kidnap-exchange op, pre-Nov 6 GE, to blow air up 0traitor’s dress. If all had gone as “planned”, 0dirtbag would have “handled it” from AF1 on way to Vegas fundraiser, next day.

Where’d he go after 5pm call/mtg w/ Hitlery. Sanitized, sealed & secured. Forever. I can imagine 10-20 scenarios, though... (Post #134)

48 posted on 05/17/2013 2:33:43 PM PDT by carriage_hill (AR-10s & AR-15s are the Muskets of the 21st Century. Free men need not ask permission.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: carriage_hill
It was a *kidnap US Ambassador to exchange for blind shiek* scam,

So you are lining up behind post 37?

I have not looked at that closely. My initial reaction is that it's a little "out there" but, I started this thread to accommodate all POV's.

49 posted on 05/17/2013 2:48:17 PM PDT by don-o (He will not share His glory, and He will not be mocked! Blessed be the Name of the Lord forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: don-o

I am.

I think at that point, they were afraid of Nov 6 GE, and were plotting it as a ‘fallback’, since Stevens was now arming the murderous MB/islamists, and trying to get the MANPADS back so US and allies’ planes, worldwide, wouldn’t get shot down, a la TWA 800, and others.

Sure, it’s more complex and convoluted than I would expect, but the MB and other 0traitor muzzie allies wanted the blind sheik released. That would have been a huge symbolic victory over the West, for them. And 0liar was more than willing to accommodate; with Valerie Jarrett in on the planning.

Gen Petraeus could shed some serious reality on this, if he wasn’t destined to wind-up like Vince Foster. I’d think, though, he’d have more than enough SF people to protect his/family’s butts.

JMO.


50 posted on 05/17/2013 3:02:16 PM PDT by carriage_hill (AR-10s & AR-15s are the Muskets of the 21st Century. Free men need not ask permission.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-84 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson