You must be registered to comment and vote on comments.
"an act of terror" as President Obama described it the very next morning. What Susan Rice said based on CIA talking points: "we'll want to see the results of that investigation to draw any definitive conclusions. .. we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals, joined in that—in that effort with heavy weapons of the sort that are, unfortunately, readily now available in Libya post-revolution. And that it spun from there into something much, much more violent."
So it is in the national interest to send the UN Ambassador out to lie to the nation? What exactly would that accomplish? Why would the Sec of State not be the one to do this as it was her job? Why were the requests for additional security ignored prior to the attack? Everyone knew the CIA is operational in Libya, everyone knows AQ was involved in the overthrow of Gaddafi and had stayed on as a force....just as they are in Syria. All the time we have Obama campaigning on wiping AQ out through drone strikes. It is time for OUR government to be straight with the PEOPLE rather than selective leaks and selective lies for political gains. So much for transparency.
So all references to terrorism were removed from the initial report, even though everyone involved knew it was due to terrorism. No one can say WHY this was done ... only that it FOR SURE wasn't political. Seriously? So it had nothing to do with Obama saying 5 days prior to the attack that Al-Qaeda was on the skids, set back on its heels, thanks to him?
"The general was adamant there was no politicization of the process, no White House interference or political agenda," Schiff said. "He completely debunked that idea."............And once again FauxNews is proven wrong. They were wrong about the presidential election and they are wrong about Benghazi. When will people stop believing the propaganda FauxNews spews 24/7?
"So it is in the national interest to send the UN Ambassador out to lie to the nation? " .... based on their best assessment at the time. As another Rice said: "when there is a fog of war like this there are a lot of competing stories coming in, there's a lot of competing information coming in and it takes a little while to know precisely what has happened. .. it's not very easy in circumstances like this to know precisely what's going on as it's unfolding. .. a lot of information is flowing in and is flowing in rapidly and from multiple sources."
Conspiracy theorists will never be satisfied with any answer to their questions. It's all about Obama's re-election and nothing to do with security.
"Why were the requests for additional security ignored prior to the attack?" .... the request for security was for Tripoli, not Benghazi. That information came out in Darrell Issa's hearing.
"So all references to terrorism were removed from the initial report, even though everyone involved knew it was due to terrorism. "..............This assertion is in strong dispute with those who read the original statement being issued saying that this was NOT in the reading, while King, who read it much later, insists it was. I can't help but wonder why on earth McCain's so obsessed with this incident? I suspect that he's simply acting out his rage from losing to Obama and doing everything within his power to blow this up into another "gate" affair. He hotly defended the other Rice woman who repeatedly insisted that Iraq had WMDs, but is trying to hang this Rice out to dry. His motives are simply too transparent. McCain needs to retire before he does any more damage to the GOP brand, IMO.
"I can't help but wonder why on earth McCain's so obsessed with this incident?" You are right... it was only 4 dead American's and who cares if the obama regime lied to cover up their disregard for American lives and their responsibility to protect them. Utterly disgraceful.
I thought the issue of whether it was a terrorist attack was settled by moderator Candi Crowley and President Obama in the second Presidential debate. Then out comes UN Ambassador Susan Rice five days later to explain that "in fact it was a spontaneous attack as a result of an anti Muslim video". Someone is lying! Who is it?
Your comment is being reviewed for inclusion on the site.
Comments will be reviewed before being published.
425 Portland Av. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55488
© 2013 StarTribune. All rights reserved.
StarTribune.com is powered by Limelight Networks