White House e-mails told of militant claim two hours after Libya attack

reply to post by milominderbinder
How sad for you to live in such a little shell.

Everybody knew it was SOME SORT of a terrorist attack pretty much right away. That's why Obama clearly and plainly said as much the very next day in the Rose Garden.

He didn't "clearly and plainly" attribute Benghazi to terrorists. He spoke of heroes buried at Arlington, 9/11/2001, and promulgated lies and misdirection.

Lies 1&2:

"I have directed my Administration to provide all necessary resources to support the security of our personnel in Libya, and to increase security at our diplomatic posts around the globe. While the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, we must all unequivocally oppose the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of these public servants.

Already, a reference to the horrinle video! "All necessary resources," after repeatedky denying additional security to Stae and Stevens?
This was not "senseless violence," but a premeditated attack.
Full Transcript of Obama's Speech

Lie3:

"Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourned with the families who were lost on that day. I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed. And then last night, we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi. "

None of the fallen in Benghazi were at Arlington yet, or at Walter Reed. clearly, he is referring to the past and ongoing loss of lives he's contributed to; not Benghazi.

Lie 4:

"No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act."

"No acts of terror," does not refer to Benghazi; it follows in context the discussion of past attacks. Nothing here speaks of Benghazi "clearly and plainly."
"We will not waiver?" "Our commitment?"
What about a commitment to security and safety before our Ambassador is murdered?
But what about the changing explanations?
What about the lack of security, such that reporters could stroll the crime scene and pick up evidence un-challenged?

Then...during the next couple of weeks they investigated thoroughly to ensure that they knew the full story before making any more statements.

Pure B.S.
This doesn't explain Carney, Rice and Obama going worldwide espousing a "spontaneous" protest about some obscure video untill they could no longer deny the fact that there was no protest, the attack was coordinated, and it was directed against the Ambassador and U.S. property..

So...what's the problem?

Ignorance and denial.

This whole "Benghazi!!" thing is just pure hype and is indicative of how weak Romney is as a candidate.

Mitt Romney did not lie to the world about this. Mitt Romney did not report the dozen or so email messages on September 11, 2012, or the drone video or the Libtan gov't confirmation that this was a premeditated terrorist attack and NOT a "spontaneous" protest that goy out of hand.

Try harder.

deny ignorants

jw

Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by Kali74

 

There's probably other emails stating that other groups claimed responsibility too.

Name 1.

Fail!

Pathetic.

Exactly, not only did they have emails, not only did they have video on the building itself, they had drones flying over filming in real time.......

THERES NO WAY they didnt know...........

The denial on by the supporters of the president on this is unfathomable

reply to post by 3chainz


It does not sound like there was much "fact checking" before he blamed the video. Repeatedly.

reply to post by milominderbinder


So many are saying here that Obama was right not to report that the attack was a terrorist attack based on these emails. It is true that he should not announce the cause of the attack before an investigation and proof. Where was his proof that the cause was a protest against a video? Where did he get that idea? After "investigation" and "proof"?

ETA: What these emails do is discount the previous claims that he just "did not know" that it was a terrorist attack. He did definitely know it was a possibility. And if he did not know, and got this so wrong, that is very scary. If all of these people, who are responsible for the safety of this country, and have to make informed decisions, are so clueless, then we are in great danger.

reply to post by ManBehindTheMask


I don't support Obama, you of all people should know that. So to call me a blind supporter is ....

I'm just not willing to jump all over this when nothing so far that disparages the Administration holds much weight, I'm sorry that my disagreeing with the RW claims, equals support of Obama to you or anyone else.
Obama called it an act of terror from the beginning, not assigning blame right off is... there's just nothing of merit to slam him for here. That is my opinion. And I will hold to it unless something concrete comes out.

Originally posted by BlueAjah
reply to post by milominderbinder

 

So many are saying here that Obama was right not to report that the attack was a terrorist attack based on these emails. It is true that he should not announce the cause of the attack before an investigation and proof. Where was his proof that the cause was a protest against a video? Where did he get that idea? After "investigation" and "proof"?

ETA: What these emails do is discount the previous claims that he just "did not know" that it was a terrorist attack. He did definitely know it was a possibility. And if he did not know, and got this so wrong, that is very scary. If all of these people, who are responsible for the safety of this country, and have to make informed decisions, are so clueless, then we are in great danger.

edit on 10/24/12 by BlueAjah because: (no reason given)

S&F for extreme common sense!

Supporters claoim "he did not have enough evidence" to blame terrorists; yet, they ignore that there wa NO EVIDENCE in Benghazi that the attacks were prompted by a video oir even "spontaneous protests."
Show me the "spontaneous" emails, phone transcripts, drone videos, et c.

There are NONE; it is all a cover story!

reply to post by Kali74

nothing so far that disparages the Administration holds much weight

There are none so blind as they who will not see ... .

Did you not have a chance to see the six hours of emails and drone video that documented the attack?

Did you not have a chance to see Ambassador Stevens' own pleas for help and security concerns the weeks before and day of the attack?

What planet were you on when this all went down? MSNBC:?

Originally posted by PsykoOps
www.nydailynews.com... because it's reliable intel if someone claims to take responsibility for an attack. It's not like they all flock to take claim at any attack they possibly could

You could always look for a bit of reality before you post nonsense, but that would be way too much to expect, no?

, “Officials at the White House and State Department were advised two hours after attackers assaulted the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11 that an Islamic militant group had claimed credit for the attack, official emails show.”

Nowhere in these emails is a YouTube video mentioned…not even once.

This blows a hole in everything the President, the vice-president and every mouthpiece they employ has been saying all along. In other words, they lied, knowingly and willingly, to the American people, to the families of the victims, for weeks.

Why would they do it? Politics.

www.nydailynews.com...

So sorry for your empty dreams.

jw

Originally posted by 3chainz
And? You need to fact check before you declare something as 100% reality. Anyone can send an email.

It is a good thing they actually waited and gathered all the information........

edit on 24-10-2012 by 3chainz because: (no reason given)

And did they fact check before saying it was because of a stupid youtube video?

Naaaaaah! That was for sure because of a stupid youtube video.

It really takes a stupid youtube video to make the terrorists do stupid things! They can't think of that by themselves, must be a stupid youtube video...

Peace out.

I can't believe it! CNN is actually covering this:
www.cnn.com...

Of course, they put their spin on it. But the facts are the facts, and they can not negate that.
The comments on the article are very interesting, considering it is CNN. The administration's lies have been uncovered, and they are going to need to respond.

Good news... for the first time since this broke on the web..

Google news' TOP story is this..

And the MSM is finally on it..

NBC, CBS, ABC, NYT, NPR etc...

Better late than never, guess they were waiting for permission?

Right now, on CNN's Situation Room, they are actually talking about this.
And they are actually questioning the administration.
When msm is turning on him, Obama is in trouble.

This story stinks to high heaven. First of all, these embassies are in a known problematic area that can flair up at whim. They have constant secure channels back to DC via satellite phones. Special forces could of had boots on the ground in a short amount of time and saved those people. Imagine whats going through the minds of the other employee's right now that work in other embassies.

Sheep will be sheep forever more. You just can't fix stupid. The last 4 years have been an orchestration to end America as we know it. The policies of this administration are absolutely moronic and based on fairytale visions.

Originally posted by BlueAjah
reply to post by milominderbinder

 

It does not sound like there was much "fact checking" before he blamed the video. Repeatedly.

So many are saying here that Obama was right not to report that the attack was a terrorist attack based on these emails. It is true that he should not announce the cause of the attack before an investigation and proof. Where was his proof that the cause was a protest against a video? Where did he get that idea? After "investigation" and "proof"?

ETA: What these emails do is discount the previous claims that he just "did not know" that it was a terrorist attack. He did definitely know it was a possibility. And if he did not know, and got this so wrong, that is very scary. If all of these people, who are responsible for the safety of this country, and have to make informed decisions, are so clueless, then we are in great danger.

edit on 10/24/12 by BlueAjah because: (no reason given)

The "fact checking" was done alright.
It was done to see how they could blame anything other than organized terrorists for the attack, despite their knowledge and forewarning!

CIA operators were denied request for help during Benghazi attack

Originally posted by JacKatMtn
Good news... for the first time since this broke on the web..
Google news' TOP story is this..
And the MSM is finally on it..
NBC, CBS, ABC, NYT, NPR etc...
Better late than never, guess they were waiting for permission?

I guess the real question is, "Who gave the 'All Clear' to run with the story?"
Hillary/State?
CIA?
Panetta?
Soros?

A second question would follow: "Why did it take you so long?"

And, is it really "better late than never," with so much at stake?

jw

reply to post by jdub297


I'm watching this on FOX now, the Father of Tyrone Woods was on...crying...wondering who made the decision to not save his son. It's heartbreaking. This new info coming out is showing criminal negligence on the part of this administration.

Des

Originally posted by jimmiec
Sheep will be sheep forever more. You just can't fix stupid. The last 4 years have been an orchestration to end America as we know it. The policies of this administration are absolutely moronic and based on fairytale visions.

You are a little bit late to the show.
Obama played his hand in "Dreams From My Father" and "The Audacity of Hope."
He admitted to his agenda when he vowed the "transformation" of America.

We are witnesses to the results of the first steps of the transformation.
More to come ... .

Originally posted by Destinyone
reply to post by jdub297

 

I'm watching this on FOX now, the Father of Tyrone Woods was on...crying...wondering who made the decision to not save his son. It's heartbreaking. This new info coming out is showing criminal negligence on the part of this administration.

Des

As of 2p.m. EDT, FoxNews says it has confirmed earlier reports, and have broadcast video from the CIA team that went to the consulate after being told to "Stand Down."
They reportedly had targeting lasers sighted on the mortars, but the White House refused to authorize the airstrike to hit them.

reply to post by jdub297


I'm not late. Obama ran on nothing, had no vision of any substance and was easy to see through. I knew before he was elected that it was all smoke and mirrors and the media was fully involved. He was not properly vetted. America has been set back 40 years by 4 years of this disaster.