Benghazigate: Day 477

Formaldehyde

Both Fair And Balanced
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
33,999
Location
USA #1
And very little has changed. The NY Times just released a comprehensive report stating that the Al Qaeda were not involved. That the actual ringleader, if there was one, was a local chieftain who claims to have not even been present.

A Deadly Mix in Benghazi

In this case, a central figure in the attack was an eccentric, malcontent militia leader, Ahmed Abu Khattala, according to numerous Libyans present at the time. American officials briefed on the American criminal investigation into the killings call him a prime suspect. Mr. Abu Khattala declared openly and often that he placed the United States not far behind Colonel Qaddafi on his list of infidel enemies. But he had no known affiliations with terrorist groups, and he had escaped scrutiny from the 20-person C.I.A. station in Benghazi that was set up to monitor the local situation.

Mr. Abu Khattala, who denies participating in the attack, was firmly embedded in the network of Benghazi militias before and afterward. Many other Islamist leaders consider him an erratic extremist. But he was never more than a step removed from the most influential commanders who dominated Benghazi and who befriended the Americans. They were his neighbors, his fellow inmates and his comrades on the front lines in the fight against Colonel Qaddafi.

To this day, some militia leaders offer alibis for Mr. Abu Khattala. All resist quiet American pressure to turn him over to face prosecution. Last spring, one of Libya’s most influential militia leaders sought to make him a kind of local judge.

Fifteen months after Mr. Stevens’s death, the question of responsibility remains a searing issue in Washington, framed by two contradictory story lines.

One has it that the video, which was posted on YouTube, inspired spontaneous street protests that got out of hand. This version, based on early intelligence reports, was initially offered publicly by Susan E. Rice, who is now Mr. Obama’s national security adviser.

The other, favored by Republicans, holds that Mr. Stevens died in a carefully planned assault by Al Qaeda to mark the anniversary of its strike on the United States 11 years before. Republicans have accused the Obama administration of covering up evidence of Al Qaeda’s role to avoid undermining the president’s claim that the group has been decimated, in part because of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden.

The investigation by The Times shows that the reality in Benghazi was different, and murkier, than either of those story lines suggests. Benghazi was not infiltrated by Al Qaeda, but nonetheless contained grave local threats to American interests. The attack does not appear to have been meticulously planned, but neither was it spontaneous or without warning signs.

And the usual suspects responded as they have since nearly day one:

Fox News: 'Completely false': Sources on ground in Benghazi challenge NYT report

Fifteen months after the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi which killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, the narrative of the attack continues to be shaped, and reshaped, by politicians and the press.

But a New York Times report published over the weekend has angered sources who were on the ground that night. Those sources, who continue to face threats of losing their jobs, sharply challenged the Times’ findings that there was no involvement from Al Qaeda or any other international terror group and that an anti-Islam film played a role in inciting the initial wave of attacks.

“It was a coordinated attack. It is completely false to say anything else. … It is completely a lie,” one witness to the attack told Fox News.

The controversial Times report has stirred a community that normally remains out of sight and wrestles with how to reveal the truth, without revealing classified information.
Of course, only Fox News is properly equipped to know ahead of time what is "the truth". That their own anonymous sources would divulge everything to prove it if only they could.

Is anybody really surprised? Do you think it will ever end?
 
So then, we cannot start a war with Iran?
 
Only if you can find an anonymous government official who claims it is based on "the truth".
 
This does not change the fact that the Obama administration assisted by the mainstream media continued the totally false story of the video causing the attack for several weeks. Then during the election the story was buried, even when brought up in a debate. In a close election having a resurgent Islamist terror threat would have gone against Obama's narrative that he killed Osama and that Al Qaeda was gone. Having it come out that the Obama administration knowingly lied and covered up the facts of the attack would have been bad at the polls. This might have changed the election.

It does not change the totally inept lack of response that could have sent military assets to assist the people on the ground. They were left to die.

It does not change the fact that Sec of State Hillary said why they died does not matter and who cares. Since she wants to be President the story will continue to be buried and marginalized as it makes Hillary look incompetent, which she is. I am amazed that the feminists on the left can champion a women whose only achievement was not leaving her cheating husband and for which she was rewarded with a Senate seat as a carpet bagger.

It is just one more cover up of an incompetent and corrupt administration that acts like a junta in a banana republic.

I was in Kabul when it happened, our neighbors were Agency guys and they were over for a few drinks the day after. They told us that the attack was over the attempt to round up armaments such as anti-air missiles that were falling into the wrong hands after the fall of Qaddafi. What I heard immediately afterwards jives more with the Fox news info than from the NY times.

Whether you believe me or not I do not care, I just get tired of the Party approved narrative that many here spout off as the unquestionable truth.
 
Only what you just posted is clearly the "party approved narrative" of many Republican congressmen. Or as Fox News calls it, "the truth".

As the NY Times article makes quite clear, it has no real basis in fact. It is just so much partisan nonsense which was concocted even before the rudimentary facts were known about what occurred.
 
How do you explain the lie about the video causing the attack which was repeated for weeks?

If you can't see how the Obama administration lied and manipulated the media to cover up the truth then there is just no reason to continue this. This could have swayed an election but you are OK since your guy won.
 
You mean what turned out to quite obviously not be a "lie" at all? That the video did indeed foment dissent all across the Middle East, including in Libya.

The only "lies" and "manipulation of the media" I see are by the usual suspects, i.e. Fox News.
 
The attack on Americans in Benghazi was an unfortunate rout by a local warlord against a CIA operation. I'm sad some of our best and brightest were lost in the event, but as a US intelligence agency mission, it's not now, nor will it be for some time the general public's "business" what was "going on" there. They knew the risks.

They were not, somehow, alone with no backup, either.

"Sources now tell CNN dozens of people working for the CIA were on the ground that night, and that the agency is going to great lengths to make sure whatever it was doing, remains a secret."

http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/0...ratives-on-the-ground-during-benghazi-attack/

Is there a coverup? Of course. Is it because of a bureaucratic mistake? I doubt it.

edit: Can I prove Chris Stevens was a CIA operative? I can tell you he was our political officer in Damascus when we sent terror suspects to Syria for "extraordinary rendition". The pic in the lower half of this page depicts him posing for a pic in the 2001 Damascus Marine Ball.

http://www.rememberingchrisstevens....he-rat-pack-embassy-damascus-marine-ball-2001

The guy was an amazing diplomat. I don't think it's a stretch to say he was aware of US policy in the region.

further edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maher_Arar
 
Back
Top Bottom