It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror Reference

page: 3
15
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2013 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by FlyersFan
 



Originally posted by FlyersFan
- No one in the Bush or Clinton administrations tried to cover up the attacks and call them anything other than terrorist attacks and no one tried to cover up extremely poor responses by the administration.


How do you know? How WOULD we know? We barely heard about it on the news at all.

And the ONLY reason I bring it up now, is because I am being accused of politicizing this event, when clearly, it was being politicized (by the right) way before I had even heard about it.

edit on 5/13/2013 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)

No, you've politicized it fromn your 1st post, as per the "marching orders" and talking point s fummeled from the White House through Media Matters and Message matter, their "progressive talking points" affiliiate.

Perhaps if you used your own brain instead of parroting propaganda, you'd have a leg to stand on or a bit of credibility.




posted on May, 16 2013 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by ratcals
Well it would seem we can put this to rest.

"There's no there there."

The annointed one has spoken. So move along.
edit on 13-5-2013 by ratcals because: Spelling mistake. I hate spelling mistakes.


Too bad the CIA and State didn't get the "burn notice."

The wholesale whitewashing is now public information.

The only "politicizing" was Chicago-style thug politics to protect the Obama and Clinton candidacies.

The White House on Wednesday released 94 pages of emails between top administration and intelligence officials who helped shape the talking points about the attacks in Benghazi, Libya, that the CIA would provide to policymakers in both the legislative and executive branches.

The documents, first reported by THE WEEKLY STANDARD in articles here and here, directly contradict claims by White House press secretary Jay Carney and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the revisions of those talking points were driven by the intelligence community and show heavy input from top Obama administration officials, particularly those at the State Department.

Benghazi Emails Directly Contradict White House Claims

If you look at the CIA's approved statement, and compare it to the final version, the Obama/Hillary sanitization are staggering! No GOP politician participated in this cover-up.. The fact that their investigation un-covered it doesn't make it any less true or damning.

Calling it "political" seems to imply that lying and deceit are acceptable if the liars themsrlves 'fess-up, but not if someone else brings it to light.

All of the whining thus far has completely ignored the truth:
Obama and Hillary lied to the US and the world; they participated in a cover-up of their failure and incompetence, even indifference, to the realitites in Libya and to disclosure of an unflattering truth during/ahead of their respective campaigns.

And, as if the cover-up wasn't bad enough, they conjure up a scapegoat:

CIA officials also added bullet points about the possible participation of Ansar al Sharia, an al Qaeda-linked jihadist group, and previous warnings about the deteriorating security situation in Benghazi. Those additions came out after the talking points were sent to “the interagency,” where the CIA’s final draft was further stripped down to little more than boilerplate. The half dozen references to terrorists – both in Benghazi and more generally – all but disappeared. Gone were references to al Qaeda, Ansar al Sharia, jihadists, Islamic extremists, etc. The only remaining mention was a note that “extremists” had participated in the attack.

As striking as what appears in the email traffic is what does not. There is no mention of the YouTube video that would become a central part of the administration’s explanation of the attacks to the American people until a brief mention in the subject line of emails coming out of an important meeting where further revisions were made.


If there was "politiciztng" here, it was on the part of the Obama administration and its deaf and blind acolytes.



edit on 16-5-2013 by jdub297 because: sp



posted on May, 16 2013 @ 04:59 PM
link   
*ATTENTION*

The debate in this thread is getting way to personal. Please return to debating the facts and STOP this tit for tat nonsense. If not the thread may be closed and any further bickering in posts will be removed with point deductions.

Final warning.

Blaine91555
Forum Moderator



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


Obama admnistration has replied to FOIA rquests for add'l info with 15 pages of totally redactred
iinfo.

Most Transparent Administration in History Releases Completely Redacted Document

OK, so now we know.

jw



posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 01:42 AM
link   
Friday document dump. The State Department responded with 97 pages this Friday. Most of the pages Congress already had. So lets see what few new goodies are in there next week.



new topics

top topics
 
15
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join