The Truth About Benghazi

[Guest Derek L]

There's a demand for a Watergate-style inquiry over Benghazi.

Come to think of it....what are the chances that this Petraeus affair could be used as a distraction from Benghazi? It seemed to have become more prominent now.....

It's nothing new for sitting administrations to cause distractions (ie Clinton bombing Libya during the Lewinski scandal)....interesting to see if there'll be one soon.

That’s a good point……….Watergate was over wiretapping a political opponent………..No one died over it…………

[betsy]

How could it be a distraction from Benghazi if they're saying the affair was the cause of Benghazi (i.e., the exposure of the prison)?

I didn't know about that part.

[BubberMiley]

I didn't know about that part.

Really? You commented on something even though you didn't bother to read up on it? I'm shocked!

[sharkman]

Again Cantor being the one to tell the FBI director that people outside the agency knew about the investigation is the one who made the FBI expose the investigation in the first place. Again this would have gone no where if it wasn't for REPUBLICAN Eric Cantor so I don't want to here this crazy conspiracy BS about this being someway to cover up Benghazi unless it is Republicans doing the covering up.

Cantor's knowledge did not make the FBI expose anything. The point is that the FBI should have made the investigation official months previous as national security was at stake. And Broadwell's posession of classifed documents and classified knowledge of the Benghazi safe house proves it. So now all parties are trying to control the story.

Edited November 15, 2012 by sharkman

[punked]

Cantor's knowledge did not make the FBI expose anything. The point is that the FBI should have made the investigation official months previous as national security was at stake. And Broadwell's posession of classifed documents and classified knowledge of the Benghazi safe house proves it. So now all parties are trying to control the story.

That is not what those involved say. They say it was Cantor who blew the roof off the whole thing. You might want to go back I even cited the articles and sources. I thought Conservatives would have learned just because the facts don't fit into your narrative doesn't mean they aren't facts. FACTS MATTER!

What is that Broadwell has knowledge of a "safehouse" that has been reported in the media for months...YOU DON'T SAY. That safe house was not hidden in fact I was trying to explain the existence of the safe house when you were pretended Obama had watched the attack from some drone we now know was a lie a before the election. Seriously you have been wrong a 100 times about this thing no one should trust anything you say because of how many times you have proven wrong or have been fooled by the right wing bubble.

GET OUT OF THE BUBBLE IT IS KILLING YOU!

Edited November 15, 2012 by punked

[sharkman]

Punked you have submitted a total of one link in this thread in the last 2 weeks, on November 2. The other info you've shared on this is only speculation, just as what I've given has speculation. But there are some facts too. The point that you missed on Broadwell is that she knew that the safe house was holding prisoners. The CIA is not allowed to do that, and she is not allowed to know that. The other troubling issue here is why the FBI let a CIA director continue in his duties while he was having an affair and national securtiy was compromised.

The other thing is Obama never watched the attack from a drone, he went to bed, remember. You must have me mixed up with someone else again. Obama had a situation room for the Sandy event, but for the Benghazi attack he blames a video on Youtube and goes to bed and then 4 Americans are killed.

I'd suggest that you might want to get out of your leftwing news bubble because buddy, they is going to be a day of reckoning for all this, and for the Fiscal cliff too. If nothing else, things are going to get very interesting.

[punked]

Punked you have submitted a total of one link in this thread in the last 2 weeks, on November 2. The other info you've shared on this is only speculation, just as what I've given has speculation. But there are some facts too. The point that you missed on Broadwell is that she knew that the safe house was holding prisoners. The CIA is not allowed to do that, and she is not allowed to know that. The other troubling issue here is why the FBI let a CIA director continue in his duties while he was having an affair and national securtiy was compromised.

Again PROOF PLEASE. This lady is claiming something no one has any proof of and maybe MAYBE just speculating like you and me.

The other thing is Obama never watched the attack from a drone, he went to bed, remember. You must have me mixed up with someone else again. Obama had a situation room for the Sandy event, but for the Benghazi attack he blames a video on Youtube and goes to bed and then 4 Americans are killed.

I'd suggest that you might want to get out of your leftwing news bubble because buddy, they is going to be a day of reckoning for all this, and for the Fiscal cliff too. If nothing else, things are going to get very interesting.

Just ignore the fact that there was no drone recording the attack and that was more "speculation". Again you want to run Obama out of town based only on the made up ideas in your head. The right wing has lost it. Get out of the bubble.

[bush_cheney2004]

....Just ignore the fact that there was no drone recording the attack and that was more "speculation". Again you want to run Obama out of town based only on the made up ideas in your head. The right wing has lost it. Get out of the bubble.

The only bubble around here is purposeful naivete about what actually went down, followed by a "play dumb" policy to cover things up until the election was over. Romney was right all along...this thing stinks.

[BubberMiley]

Does this mean no Petraeus 2016 on the GOP ticket?

[Sleipnir]

"McCain skips Benghazi briefing, gets testy when questioned by CNN.

Most of the Republican members of a Senate committee investigating the terrorist attack at the U.S consulate in Benghazi, Libya, skipped a classified briefing by administration officials on the incident Wednesday, CNN has learned."

http://politicaltick...-cnn/?hpt=hp_t4

Edited November 16, 2012 by Sleipnir

[cybercoma]

Makes it look like they really care about what's going on there, doesn't it?

[bush_cheney2004]

Why listen to more lies from the Obama administration.

[GostHacked]

Why listen to more lies from the Obama administration.

The public does not want to hear the truth.

Hey did you hear about the attack in Benghazi where the CIA asset was killed? - No, don't care.

Hey did you hear Jersey Shore got cancelled? - YES AND I AM SOOOOOOOOOO PISSED ......

[GostHacked]

Cannot post items in the window anymore. Quotes don't seem to work today for me.

[GostHacked]

Former CIA Director David Petraeus testified in a closed-door hearing Friday morning that his agency determined immediately after the Sept. 11 Libya attack that "Al Qaeda involvement" was suspected -- but the line was taken out in the final version circulated to administration officials, according to a top lawmaker who was briefed.

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., who spoke to reporters after Petraeus testified before the House Intelligence Committee, indicated he and other lawmakers still have plenty of questions about the aftermath of the attack.

"No one knows yet exactly who came up with the final version of the talking points," he said.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/16/petraeus-to-testify-knew-libya-was-terrorism-from-start-source-says/

[sharkman]

Ghost, that is some kind of bombshell, that the facts got altered right off the hop. Right now the administration is preparing a response, although it might take a little time since it's going to have to be believable.

We all know that blaming the video was bogus. A video put up on youtube in May with apparently 200 hits. The thing is, it's so bad a story that it's obviously a cover. So for Obama to be out there repeating it for almost 2 weeks, and having Rice and others repeating it is ridiculous. So now it comes out that the CIA's version of things was altered, which of course made it easier to blame the video.

[punked]

Ghost, that is some kind of bombshell, that the facts got altered right off the hop. Right now the administration is preparing a response, although it might take a little time since it's going to have to be believable.

We all know that blaming the video was bogus. A video put up on youtube in May with apparently 200 hits. The thing is, it's so bad a story that it's obviously a cover. So for Obama to be out there repeating it for almost 2 weeks, and having Rice and others repeating it is ridiculous. So now it comes out that the CIA's version of things was altered, which of course made it easier to blame the video.

So you got no proof today to back up anything you said so instead you just keep making it up as you go along. Be careful because I remember the story of the boy who cried wolf very well. Keep yelling about that wolf.

[GostHacked]

So you got no proof today to back up anything you said so instead you just keep making it up as you go along. Be careful because I remember the story of the boy who cried wolf very well. Keep yelling about that wolf.

Punked the facts are already there. And they have been documented in this thread along with the Patreaus thread. I was one early on to question the reasons surrounding the movie. That bit was quickly tossed out as a talking point initially then retracted once facts came about.

[dre]

http://www.foxnews.c...rt-source-says/

Sounds like bullshart to me. Id like to know why Broadwell is telling people that the CIA was operating a secret prison out of the annex there.

Edited November 16, 2012 by dre

[GostHacked]

Sounds like bullshart to me. Id like to know why Broadwell is telling people that the CIA was operating a secret prison out of the annex there.

Sure the bit about prisoners being held there still needs to be vetted (even she admits that herself), but you don't even need to get to that to see how often the official story changed from the spontaneous attacks because of a film to a coordinated attack now claimed (from Patreaus) to be carried out by Al-Queda types.

When we were discussing the Arab Spring, one common point was that the leaders of those countries affected claimed that it was all outside interference instead of some natural revolution happening from within. And as soon as the rebels in each country started to get traction, you saw NATO begin supporting the rebels through funds and arms. And it was reported that Al_queda fighters were among the rebels in each country. This was a consist point from those leaders that cannot be ignored or easily dismissed.

[GostHacked]

Now if you can't find out who changed the talking points in a memo, then you have a serious internal issue within the CIA organization. Someone definately wants to hide something.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/16/petraeus-to-testify-knew-libya-was-terrorism-from-start-source-says/

Former CIA Director David Petraeus stoked the controversy over the Obama administration's handling of the Libya terror attack, testifying Friday that references to "Al Qaeda involvement" were stripped from his agency's original talking points -- while other intelligence officials were unable to say who changed the memo, according to a top lawmaker who was briefed.

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., told Fox News that intelligence officials who testified in a closed-door hearing a day earlier, including Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and Acting CIA Director Mike Morell, said they did not know who changed the talking points. He said they went out to multiple departments, including the State Department, National Security Council, Justice Department and White House.

"To me the question right now is who changed those talking points and why. ... I'd say it was somebody in the administration had to have taken it out," King told Fox News. "That, to me, has to be pursued."

[punked]

Now if you can't find out who changed the talking points in a memo, then you have a serious internal issue within the CIA organization. Someone definately wants to hide something.

http://www.foxnews.c...rt-source-says/

GET OUT OF THE BUBBLE!!!!

The C.I.A. and other intelligence agencies prepared unclassified talking points on the attack for members of Congress, and in them the references to Qaeda affiliates were changed to the less specific “extremists” to avoid revealing to insurgents that American intelligence agencies were eavesdropping on their electronic communications.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/17/world/americas/benghazi-not-petraeus-affair-is-focus-at-hearings.html

The article not only says that but it goes on to say Republicans were aware of this fact and asked not to politicize the matter as it would make catching those responsible for the attack harder to catch and make these attacks in the future harder to prevent. What was the republican response? A document dump that gave the names of CIA informants and pro American activist in Lybia to the terrorist. The US intelligence agencies might have handled this situation the wrong way, the Republicans certainly handled this situation wrong, the ONLY ONES who it seems have done right by this cluster-F is the Administration. GET OUT OF THE BUBBLE it is making you all dumber.

[GostHacked]

GET OUT OF THE BUBBLE!!!!

http://www.nytimes.c...t-hearings.html

The article not only says that but it goes on to say Republicans were aware of this fact and asked not to politicize the matter as it would make catching those responsible for the attack harder to catch and make these attacks in the future harder to prevent. What was the republican response? A document dump that gave the names of CIA informants and pro American activist in Lybia to the terrorist. The US intelligence agencies might have handled this situation the wrong way, the Republicans certainly handled this situation wrong, the ONLY ONES who it seems have done right by this cluster-F is the Administration. GET OUT OF THE BUBBLE it is making you all dumber.

The only one that seems to be in a bubble is you. I again must point out that it is only you that is on the one side of this argument. Because typically with the posters in this thread, we are quite polarized in the arguments. However you are the only one coming out in protection of the whole affair waiting for more facts. That is about as partisan as you can get.

Your article seems to indicate that the Democrats have come to the aid of Rice and other officials. Now we know there was no spontaneous attack (hopefully you are not still believing it was spontaneous due to a movie that was online for months), and we know the CIA has it's hands in it.

But now that is another change in the story. And only Patreaus seem to have a consistant story which is KEY in determining the real facts from the whole incident. At first the was not even a CIA outpost, and when that came out, the whole shitstorm started.

Now you still need to understand that it looks like Stevens himself was a CIA asset and not a real ambassador of any kind. Because the consulate never existed (that is to be determined but until proven otherwise I am sticking with that story).

So there was no consulate, there was a CIA outpost, Stevens was not an ambassador.... come on Punked, tell us what really happened then. I don't want to wait for more lies from the administration, we've had PLENTY of them over the past couple months.

[punked]

The only one that seems to be in a bubble is you. I again must point out that it is only you that is on the one side of this argument. Because typically with the posters in this thread, we are quite polarized in the arguments. However you are the only one coming out in protection of the whole affair waiting for more facts. That is about as partisan as you can get.

Your article seems to indicate that the Democrats have come to the aid of Rice and other officials. Now we know there was no spontaneous attack (hopefully you are not still believing it was spontaneous due to a movie that was online for months), and we know the CIA has it's hands in it.

Again you have no idea what spontaneous attack here means. I'm still waiting on facts because right now most of the FACTS point to an attack that was organized the day of. I would call that spontaneous. Was the attack provoked by demonstrations? No but I NEVER SAID IT WAS. Sit back and wait for the facts because every time someone reports more and more facts the side you have picked to hang your hat on IS WRONG.

But now that is another change in the story. And only Patreaus seem to have a consistant story which is KEY in determining the real facts from the whole incident. At first the was not even a CIA outpost, and when that came out, the whole shitstorm started.

Now you still need to understand that it looks like Stevens himself was a CIA asset and not a real ambassador of any kind. Because the consulate never existed (that is to be determined but until proven otherwise I am sticking with that story).

Again everything you are posting are supported by NO FACTS just by your wild fantsies. Could you be right? Sure. I will wait though for FACTS until I support such a wild view with nothing to back it up. All I am saying is wait for the facts because so far people have SO WRONG ABOUT THIS THING time and time again that everyone else has tuned out. The public doesn't care because of how wrong the Republicans have been time and time again.Which means no heads will roll even if they should and that is tragic and I blame the Republicans for not waiting for facts and trying to use this tragedy for their own gain instead of doing their jobs. WAIT FOR FACTS!!! THEY MATTER!

So there was no consulate, there was a CIA outpost, Stevens was not an ambassador.... come on Punked, tell us what really happened then. I don't want to wait for more lies from the administration, we've had PLENTY of them over the past couple months.

I want to know what really happened to. Posting things not based on real facts isn't going to help anyone know what happened it is only going to muddy the water so much no one is going to care. At this point we will have wait for a book or something to be published in 10 years so someone can actually break down the facts from fiction and that does no one justice. To bad really that the rabid right jumped before knowing anything and has made this whole thing something to complex that the public has tuned out really.

[GostHacked]

Again you have no idea what spontaneous attack here means.

Nor does the Obama administration, nor do you.

1 - It was claimed that the attacks were spontaneous because of the movie that was released.

2 - The movie was found to be month old and could NOT have been the reason for a spontaneous attack.

3 - The story moved to a coordinated attack, but did not know who the attackers were.

4 - Hearings let slip out that there was a CIA annex either at the consulate grounds or a mile away (still not quit sure about that)

We do know

1 - Stevens was a key player in helping the NTC

2 - With helping the NTC NATO helped arm and fund the rebels with known Al-Queda.

3 - Strange case to find NATO on the same side as Al-Queda in order to help bring down Gadaffi.

4 - Those rebels (with elements of Al-Queda) attacked the 'consulate' or CIA Annex (again the status and type of the facility is still in question)

This all sounds like a case of blowback to me. It's not like helping the enemy of your enemy has ever come back to bite the USA in the ass. Oh right, the Muhajedeen in Afghanistan which turned into Al-Queda with the CIA/USAs help. Then that same organization came back to destroy buildings in NYC.

What does this really look like to you Punked? We have to go back about a year at the start of the Arab Spring and the 'revolution' that took down Gadaffi. He as others have claimed foreign fighters were causing the trouble. And a good number of those were found to be Al-Queda. Also it is important to note that a key player in the downfall of Gaddafi was/is an Al-Queda member, also that man spent some time at GITMO. And I made the claim that it seems that GITMO could be what the CIA uses in order to train these 'terrorists' to start the Arab Spring.

I'm still waiting on facts because right now most of the FACTS point to an attack that was organized the day of. I would call that spontaneous. Was the attack provoked by demonstrations? No but I NEVER SAID IT WAS. Sit back and wait for the facts because every time someone reports more and more facts the side you have picked to hang your hat on IS WRONG.

Al-Queda does not do anything spontaneously. While you are waiting for 'facts' that will never support your argument, many have really begun to question the whole event. Check out the comments on the article you posted. Only a few are swallowing what the Obama administration is saying. Clinton stepped down? Hmm convenient. Same with Patreaus. An affair? Please.

This is how these people operate.

Again everything you are posting are supported by NO FACTS just by your wild fantsies. Could you be right? Sure. I will wait though for FACTS until I support such a wild view with nothing to back it up. All I am saying is wait for the facts because so far people have SO WRONG ABOUT THIS THING time and time again that everyone else has tuned out. The public doesn't care because of how wrong the Republicans have been time and time again.Which means no heads will roll even if they should and that is tragic and I blame the Republicans for not waiting for facts and trying to use this tragedy for their own gain instead of doing their jobs. WAIT FOR FACTS!!! THEY MATTER!

Republicans did not wait for the facts when Iraq was invaded. It does not matter if it's Democrats or Republicans. They are part of the same team, same government and end up working together but claim to be different enough to fool people into thinking there are two sides to this story. It's a damn circus and we have front row seats.

I want to know what really happened to. Posting things not based on real facts isn't going to help anyone know what happened it is only going to muddy the water so much no one is going to care. At this point we will have wait for a book or something to be published in 10 years so someone can actually break down the facts from fiction and that does no one justice. To bad really that the rabid right jumped before knowing anything and has made this whole thing something to complex that the public has tuned out really.

I have drawn up my own conclusion based on the facts and the inconsistencies of the talking points the Obama administration has dumped out there. Maybe Obama could have waited for the facts himself before he claimed it was spontaneous or a coordinated attack.

The only ones muddying the water here are the ones who are attempting to hide something. And the only people having that power to hide those facts are someone in the Obama administration, or a high military official, or someone in the intelligence communities.

Patreaus' story seems to be quite consistent. The official story has had to change several times to fit the facts that have been exposed.