Lies….White House Told Us That There Was "No Evidence" Of Terrorist Attack In Libya

By 31 Comments 820 views

We now know there was no evidence, NONE, that the attack on our embassy was the result of a silly video. but still….

September 14 – White House spokesman Jay Carney:

You know, we have no information to suggest that it was a preplanned attack…

…let’s be clear. This — these protests were in reaction to a video that had spread to the region

..We do not, at this moment, have information to suggest or to tell you that would indicate that any of this unrest was preplanned.”

September 16 – United States Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice:

The best information and the best assessment we have today is that was, in fact, not a pre-planned and pre-meditated attack.

…we do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned.”

What happened this week in Cairo, in Benghazi, in many other parts of the region…was a result — a direct result of a heinous and offensive video”

The Ivf Success Program – 75% For Affiliates!n-peter-king-bob-woodward-jeffrey-goldberg-andrea-mitchell/”>First of all we had no actionable intelligence to suggest that– that any attack on our facility in Benghazi was imminent.”

September 19 – Carney:

based on the information that we had then and have now we do not yet have indication that it was pre-planned or pre-meditated.”

Obama even brought up the video baloney to the United Nations

“That is what we saw play out the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world…There are no words that excuse the killing of innocents. There is no video that justifies an attack on an Embassy.”

So we now know that the video had nothing to do with it, that in fact there was no intelligence to suggest this, and in fact ALL the intelligence pointed to it being a terrorist attack. Hell, this intelligence was gained within hours of the attack. But still his surrogates lied to the American people and with a straight face told the MSM talking heads that it was all the fault of a video.

If the Obama Administration wants to hide behind the fog of war to justify its behavior, I'd still like to know why their story became more focused on the YouTube video as the days progressed.

Good question…

And now, after all the lies and deceit not only does our State Department know Obama won't do anything to help them if attacked, so does al-Qaeda.

zp8497586rq

Curt served in the Marine Corps for four years and has been a law enforcement officer in Los Angeles for the last 24 years.

31 Responses to “Lies….White House Told Us That There Was "No Evidence" Of Terrorist Attack In Libya”

  1. 1

    James Raider

    1. It is very difficult to understand why the most powerful office in the world gave repeated promotion to a video that no-one would have been aware of or seen if Obama and his emissaries had not championed it. Why? Why? There would have been better and more effective ways to obfuscate.

    2. Why the need to outright lie about the existence of repeated requests from Benghazi for security prior to 9/11?

    3. Hillary and Bill will not keep a lid on the real Obama/Jarrett Middle East policy for ever.

    4. Obama being this far out of touch with reality is not explained just by liberal Progressivism. Something’s not right here, and eventually, it will surface.

  2. 2

    Common Sense

    There is a heck of a lot more evidence of a terrorist attack than a spontaneous demonstration in reaction to an obscure video!! Yet the Whitehouse still says they need to look at all the evidence? What evidence did they have of a video but they blamed that time and time again!!

  3. 3

    Nan G

    Obama had carefully crafted a ”narrative,” on the Muslim world and his policies toward it.
    What happened in Benghazi broke that narrative to pieces.
    He tried to keep a lid on his narrative as long as he could.
    Then he tried to hold off any investigation of his failure until AFTER this election.

  4. 5

    retire05

    @James Raider:

    James, the administration has pointed to Libya, time after time, as a success story for Obama’s Middle East policy. All that braggadocio went up in smoke with the Benghazi mission as Obama watched. Being in a tight election race, Obama could not afford for this terrorist attack to show that his Middle East policy is actually a failure. The administration needed an excuse for the attack. Enter Egypt.

    While it is true that the anti-Mohammed film was shown on Egyptian TV, it is NOT true that the 9-11 protests in Cairo were due to that video. Nic Robertson, of CNN, interviewed the brother of the Blind Sheikh as well as the brother of Ayman al Zawahri, who was organizing the protest, and not once was the video mentioned. Not once. But again, the story had to be concocted to fit the narrative that the administration was going to put out. So, it was told that the attack in Benghazi was due to a protest over a video, and a take-off of the Cairo protest, which the administration also claimed was due to a video. That is the first part that makes you scratch your head; if the Cairo protests were over the video, why did the brother of the Blind Sheikh and the brother of Ayman al Zawahir, BOTH say the protests were for the release of the Blind Shiekh with no mention of a video of any kind?

    The administration also needed to hide what it was doing in Libya. How many Americans would be favorable to our president arming Libyan rebels who are actually al Qaeda who murdered almost 3,000 Americans on 9-11-01? How many Americans would be favorable to the U.S. Ambassador facilitating supplying arms, and jihadists, to the Syrian rebels who are fleeing the Free Syria Army to join with al Qaeda? Think Fast and Furious, Libyan Style AND Fast and Furious, Syrian Style. We have been arming our enemy. Think that would set well with Mr. and Ms. American Voter?

    As to Billary; well, Hillary wants the 2016 DNC nomination. That has been her goal, and Bill’s, from the git-go. She cannot get there if she fractures the entire party into the Obama faction vs. the Clinton faction. So she comes out looking presidential with her “the buck stops with me” interview. Only problem; with anything the Clintons say, you have to listen to everything they say, and Hillary clearly tried to dump the blame on underlings who were “security specialist.” She, Hillary, is responsible for 60,000 people in the State Department and well, come on, it is like herding cats and she is not responsible if a couple of those cats turn feral.

    So in response to your #4, you’re correct, there is something not right. And that something is that this administration has been gun running, just as in Fast and Furious, only to radical jihadists in both Libya and Syria. Jihadist who are the very enemy of the U.S. and its citizens. The administration knew within two hours after the attack ensued in Benghazi that it was not due to protests over a video, either in Cairo or Benghazi. The reason for the big coverup? Obama has been supplying guns to our enemies in his desire to oust dicators who he wants out of office.

    How does that make you feel?

  5. 6

    AdrianS

    “And now, after all the lies and deceit not only does our State Department know Obama won’t do anything to help them if attacked, so does al-Qaeda.”

    Perhaps it was an al-Qaeda plot to see what the military reaction would be. Maybe al-Qaeda wanted to see if Obama had the nerve to respond with force.

    We know now that Obama “chickened-out”. The response was no response. We now have the sure knowledge that Obama, when that 3am phone call comes, may do nothing unless it would help his political posture.

    For Obama to say the administration could not early on determine the nature of the attack, is a lie. Proof. They invented a lie that said the attack was in response to a nasty Militant video that slammed Mohammed. But 1) where is the proof the Obama administration had, physical proof early on, that it was the response to a video? And, 2) there is sure to be absolutely no evidence that the attack was due to a video because that was NEVER the cause; you have to ask yourself, what was Obama’s purpose and reason, if any, in saying definitively for two weeks that it was the video that caused the attack?

    Not unlike the screwy reasoning and explanation for the Fast and Furious idiocy, Obama’s mendacity is public information now with his willingness to lie in such a cowardly way at such a critical time in a war and straight-faced to the American public.

    Let’s get Obama out. There’s no way Obama can explain this. A low-life like Obama merely needs to be shown the door out of the White House. Americans will vote for Mitt Romney in a landslide on November 6th.

    God bless Mitt Romney. God bless our country, the United States of America. Be proud of her. We’ll bring her back to her glory days with Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.

  6. 7

    Greg

    @retire05, #5:

    While it is true that the anti-Mohammed film was shown on Egyptian TV, it is NOT true that the 9-11 protests in Cairo were due to that video. Nic Robertson, of CNN, interviewed the brother of the Blind Sheikh as well as the brother of Ayman al Zawahri, who was organizing the protest, and not once was the video mentioned.

    Clips from the film were presented to the Egyptian public by Sheikh Khalad Abdalla, a popular host on the Islamic Al-Nas television station, just a few days before the Cairo embassy demonstrations. The Egyptian media was full of stories. Outrage over the film was what ignited the protests across the Muslim world.

  7. 8

    James Raider

    @Common Sense: #2,

    What evidence did they have of a video but they blamed that time and time again!!

    Wouldn’t that question raised in the W.H. press room be shocking?

  8. 9

    retire05

    @Greg:

    Greg, who knew more about the civil rights protests in the 1960’s? The American press, or Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr,?

    I don’t give a damn what Al Jazeera says. I know what the organizers of the Cairo protest said, and I will take their word over the Arab press. Nic Robertson’s interview in on YouTube, but hey stay in the dark. That is where you are most confortable.

    See you can’t live up to your word to not opine for a few days after you made an absolute ass out of yourself.

  9. 10

    Greg

    @retire05, #9:

    See you can’t live up to your word to not opine for a few days after you made an absolute ass out of yourself.

    I was afraid you might miss me if I left. Besides, why should I worry about making an ass of myself now and then, when you do it on such a regular basis?

  10. 12

    retire05

    @Greg:

    Miss you? Don’t flatter yourself. All you did was prove that you have no moral basis and can’t keep your word.

    And frankly, Greg, you make an ass out of yourself everytime you post with your constant excuse making for Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.

  11. 13

    James Raider

    @retire05: #5,

    For the most part I generally agree, however, there may well be something else energizing decisions made by this Administration. The U.S. intelligence community is well informed and knows that the Qaddafi arms are now all over Africa and elsewhere in the hands of Islamic militants, criminals, terrorists, fundamentalists, etc. That’s a fact which would not shock American voters IMHO. It was the result of the lead-from-behind Obama Middle East strategy- not well thought out, nor well executed, but it’s not a critical element in the minds of Americans. Something else has to be at play here to explain the lack of protection ‘prior’ to the attack, and the completely perplexing events during and following. Remember that Ambassador Stevens was a very left leaning liberal from Berkeley who was ideologically aligned with what we know so far of this Administration, and yet he was asking for help, almost begging for more security for himself and his small staff. His boss went against him.

    There are principally 3 currencies in the Middle East, oil, guns, and drugs. Most Arab people don’t have access to oil (that’s for their rulers), so that leaves guns and drugs and government disruptions as occurred in Libya, allowing thugs to step into the breach and build empires, separate from, or including the military contingents. Guns and drugs thrive with flourish when governments are weak or almost non-existent. Another ingredient we can add to that soup – we have evidence that Obama has old and deep roots as well as support in Saudi Arabia. What influence has been brought to bear from S.A. which bypassed all other channels of government?

    Unless I’m missing something, this is a bizarre cover-up, which even moved the President to obfuscate from the podium at the United Nations. This smells so noxious that if we get anywhere near the real “why?” it will make Watergate look like an al fresco picnic.

    I’m also not convinced that Hillary wants to run in four years. I think that with the billion dollar foundation Slick Willy has built, he will have enough slush cash to fund the launch of his daughter Chelsea’s eventual run for the Senate. He’s looking for a long term Clinton legacy and she’s it. They may not like Obama, but they need the Democratic party and have to walk a very fine line.

  12. 14

    retire05

    @James Raider:

    While I think no one would be surprised that the Gadaffi arms are now flowing all across the region, I do think American voters would not like knowing that it was Ambassador Stevens, operating on orders from the Oval Office, to facilitate the transfer of those weapons to both the Libyan rebels AND the Syrian rebels. Americans would really get their noses out of joint to know that our own president was arming the very people who attacked us on 9-11-2001. Ask yourself, why was Stevens meeting with a representative from Turkey when it has been reported that arms, and jihadists, are flowing from Libya, through Turkey into Syria? Stevens was helping that happen. It is Fast and Furious, Libyan Style and Fast and Furious, Syrian Style.

    Do not forget that Obama said he would side with the Muslims should the political winds change. He never said in what country.

    As to Hillary; yes, she has presidential aspirations. She did in 2008, and those aspirations have never dimmed. Bill wants a third term, and Hillary it that ticket. Money doesn’t end ambition, and Hillary’s ambition to be POTUS is just as strong today was it was four years ago.

  13. 17

    Sandy

    Anyone who can help
    I believe Donald Trump has a good Idea. Millions would like to know, they also could participate with a pledge of their own. This could all be tabulated in one website with everyone tracking how many participated and the total amount. Donald Trumps 5 million could become 10 20 or 100 million who knows? Many wealthy people might match his offer. He would probably want to give it the exposure as he seeded the idea. Does anyone know who might want to spear head and have the capabilities to set up such a website.
    I will pledge $50 personally. When I told my friend Henry of the Idea he also pledged $50 so now the call for Obama to release his records is $5,000,100.00
    Obama we the people demand you release your records.
    Sandy
    P.S. Maybe your web sight ??? It could go viral !

  14. 18

    Common Sense

    @Greg: So Greg, are you taking the position that it was the video and not terrorism? Are you saying the evidence presented on 9/11-12 supported this position as the Whitehouse and 0-blama’s administration supported? Evidence to support this position please!! I’m waiting!!

  15. 19

    Wordsmith

    editor

    @James Raider:

    Wouldn’t that question raised in the W.H. press room be shocking?

    Instead of taking questions from the press right now, he seems more comfortable going on Leno.

    Curt,

    Here’s another interview he did that might be of interest where the topic of Libya is brought up: Appearance on Letterman, around September 18th:

  16. 20

    Greg

    @anticsrocks, #15:

    @Greggie: You are an idiot. How many spontaneous, riotous demonstrations do you know that have people using shoulder launched grenades?

    Why do people on the right feel compelled to keep making the claim that the film had nothing whatsoever to do with the violent protests that it triggered across much of the Muslim world? That claim is patently ridiculous.

    It’s the right that keeps connecting the attack in Benghazi with the damn film, just so they can work themselves up into a state and heatedly deny it again. It’s beginning to look like some sort of weird obsessive/compulsive fixation. The White House ceased making such a direct connection over a month ago. Everybody knows Benghazi was a planned attack. This is no longer news to anyone.

    That doesn’t mean the film didn’t trigger protests. It did, in numerous locations: Egypt; Pakistan: Bangladesh; Nigeria; Tunisia; Sudan; Lebanon; Libya; Yemen; Somalia; Turkey; India . . . People have died because of the film. What evidence does it take to convince people that it inflamed Islamic fundamentalists all across the world?

  17. 21

    Common Sense

    @Greg: Greg, it was 0-blama that blamed the video, geeez man your stupid. Show me the proof that it was the video, if you can’t then why did 0-blama, Hillary, and Rice say it was??

  18. 22

    James Raider

    @Wordsmith: #19,

    he seems more comfortable going on Leno.

    . . . . And on Leno, he lied and rambled in response to the softballs pitched. In Hollywood he’s right at home. This man can lie without twitching very much.

    In the debates, Romney was stunned by Obama’s ability to outright lie when directly confronted, such as the second debate on the subject of oil. It is incredible that such narcissism is effectively camouflaged from almost half of the country.

  19. 23

    Sua Sponte

    @Greg: Oh please give us insight into the ME, you’ve spent how much time in the ME operationally?…Yeah, that’s what I thought…Or maybe you were/are a desk officer, nah, I doubt that….

    It’s the right that keeps connecting the attack in Benghazi with the damn film

    You truly are a complete assclown aren’t you?….

    People have died because of the film

    Which one?………..Again, thank you for not being suitable military material…

  20. 24

    Greg

    @Sua Sponte, #23:

    @Greg: Oh please give us insight into the ME, you’ve spent how much time in the ME operationally?…Yeah, that’s what I thought…Or maybe you were/are a desk officer, nah, I doubt that….

    It doesn’t take any unusual degree of insight. It only takes an ability to read–which you apparently possess–and a willingness to apply that ability to wider range of source material you seem to be paying attention to.

    More deaths as protests against anti-Islam film spread

  21. 26

    retire05

    @Nan G:

    Mr. Woods said that when Obama came to tell him he was sorry for Ty’s death, that Barack Obama would not look Mr. Woods in the eyes. What kind of Commander in Chief does not look the family of subordinates squarely in the eyes when expressing sympathy for the loss of such a man as Ty Woods?

    He also said that Joe Biden, who is just a heartbeat away from the most powerful position in the world ask Mr. Woods “Did your son always have balls the size of cue balls?” Joe Biden belongs tending bar in some ship channel dive, not sitting at the desk of the Vice President of the United States.

    Ty Woods was a true hero. His father, and all the families, deserve the truth as to why their loved ones died. They don’t need Hillary Clinton to try to cover the administration’s ass with a statement like she made to Mr. Woods. What dispicable people Obama, Clinton and Biden are.

  22. 27

    Me. Irons

    @Greg:

    Yes, and you’ve proven time and again to be a total moron at reading and comprehension. But that’s beside the point that Obama and his staff blamed the video trailer to a crappy film all over the place even goin to the UN and complaining about it. Unless Susan Rice and Obama suddenly became hard Right constitutional conservatives, your point of view of who claimed what at when is childish and highly idiotic when the facts speak of a different reality than which you live in. Does your olfactory no longer work correctly? Is it not so sunny today for you? Do you have sudden back pains from all the twisting?

  23. 29

    anticsrocks

    @Greg: So a video released months ago, that got little to no attention was the sole reason that four Americans are now dead?

    Obama official: Benghazi was a terrorist attack

    The Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was in fact “a terrorist attack” and the U.S. government has indications that members of al Qaeda were directly involved, a top Obama administration official said Wednesday morning.

    “I would say yes, they were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy,” Matt Olsen, the director of the National Counterterrorism Center, said Wednesday at a hearing of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, in response to questioning from Chairman Joe Lieberman (I-CT) about the attack that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.

    As for who was responsible, Olsen said it appears there were attackers from a number of different militant groups that operate in and around Benghazi, and said there are already signs of al Qaeda involvement.

    Olsen: I was not reprimanded for calling Benghazi a terrorist attack

    “We are looking at indications that individuals involved in the attack may have had connections to al Qaeda or al Qaeda’s affiliates; in particular, al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb,” he [Olsen] said.