Yet they concocted an alternate reality and sold it to the American public.
Reuters – Within hours of last month’s attacks on U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, Libya, President Barack Obama’s administration received about a dozen intelligence reports suggesting militants connected to al Qaeda were involved, three government sources said.
Despite these reports, in public statements and private meetings, top U.S. officials spent nearly two weeks highlighting intelligence suggesting that the attacks were spontaneous protests against an anti-Muslim film, while playing down the involvement of organized militant groups.
The Obama administration did a little more than just talk. They had America’s top soldier call up an obscure preacher to intimidate him out of supporting that film, and they publicly identified and then grabbed the alleged filmmaker and made sure the whole world saw the American government taking him in for questioning. Then they had that man arrested, and today he sits in jail on “probation violations.” President Obama continues to connect the attack to the video, and still refuses to call the attacks “terrorism.”
It was not until last Friday that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper’s office issued an unusual public statement, which described how the picture that intelligence agencies presented to U.S. policymakers had “evolved” into an acknowledgement that the attacks were “deliberate and organized” and “carried out by extremists.”
The existence of the early reports appears to raise fresh questions about the Obama administration’s public messaging about the attack as it seeks to fend off Republican charges that the White House failed to prevent a terrorist strike that left a U.S. ambassador and three others dead.
This was — is, actually — a cover-up. The question is, why? Is the president just in denial about the reality of terrorism, or is his administration trying to hide its bloody failure to anticipate terrorist attacks — on the anniversary of 9-11 — and secure American interests abroad?
h/t Weasel Zippers
I would also add that it is yet another massive security breach by this inept administration. The bad guys knew the ambassador’s itinerary and the location of our ‘safe house’…with so many mooslim bruthahood operatives infesting the upper echelons of our government, who did they get there intel from? Who….or from whom? Whom…Huma….? HUMA! Maybe a little pillow talk from Her Thighness?
CIA head Petraeus said three days after the attack that it was a gone out of control reaction to that internet video that almost no one saw. I don’t know what that lying dope is blathering about right now.
From Fox News on Sept 27: “A congressional source told Fox News that CIA Director David Petraeus, during a briefing with members of the House Intelligence Committee three days after the attack, also espoused the view that Benghazi was an out-of-control demonstration prompted by the YouTube video. According to the source, this was “shocking” to some members who were present and saw the same intelligence pointing toward a terrorist attack”.
So it wasn’t/isn’t just Hussein Obama, Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice,and Baghdad Bob Jay Carney who perpetrated this Goebbels Level Big Lie. CIA head David ‘Holy Qur’an” Petraeus is also guilty as Hell of lying. In fact it was probably that b-astard’s idea.
Um. I will point out that these explanations are not exclusive. It could have been al Qaeda guys with rockets who showed up once they saw a protest going on. COULD have been. Or not. Even in Egypt it remains a little vague why there was an attack on the US embassy, 9/11 or film or both or just because they could or all of the above.
HOWEVER the reports yesterday that there were several previous and serious attacks, THAT pretty much trumps the discussion, IF they turn out to be true.
There is a Sicilian saying: “La Cosa Nostra does not exist”.
Obama says “There is no islamic terrorism”
Probably for the same reason…