JeffG @ Protein Wisdom:
So writes Michael Hirsch, who evidently missed the portion of the testimony where we learned that a State Department official emailed the Libyan government on September 12 that the consulate attack was in fact a terrorist operation — specifically identifying Ansar al-Sharia in the email.
And as the Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes, who broke the story on the Benghazi talking points, notes in today’s TWS podcast, this means that the CIA, the Libyan government, the consulate staff, and now the State Department — which provided the information to the Libyan government — were all aware that the attack in Benghazi was a terrorist operation and that there was never a spontaneous “protest” sparked by a YouTube video. And it reinforces Hayes’s earlier revelations that the CIA’s talking points were altered at the direction of the White House and State Department — which the White House now maintains was the change of a single word for “stylistic” reasons.
UN Ambassador Susan Rice would have known that the Benghazi attack was perpetrated by Islamic terrorists days before appearing on Sunday morning news shows; Hillary Clinton, whom Gregory Hicks in his testimony today claims he briefed on the attacks (and the nature of the attacks) at 2 AM that morning, would have known this before standing over the casket of Ambassador Stevens pretending that anti-Muslim hate coming from inside the US prompted the attack that killed the Ambassador and ultimately the two SEALS involved in a rescue effort; and most certainly Obama would have known this, even had he gone to sleep in preparation for his night with Beyonce.
And at least Obama, if not the rest, would have known that a special forces team was available and en route to help rescue remaining personnel before being ordered to stand down — something that Panetta has suggested wasn’t possible given the fluid nature of the events.
Making that money we spent in Pakistan running commercials apologizing for the anti-Muslim HATE that prompted the “protests” during which our Ambassador was murdered a very material attempt at both a cover up and a financial fraud: taxpayer money was spent to perpetuate a known falsehood for the purpose of misleading the American public and adding layers to a lie. That is, to promote a cover story. Which, I would suggest to Mr Hirsch, is one of the premier warning signs that a cover up is afoot.
About 90% of the Media are such groupies they have gone past non-reporting to actually spinning BS for this Administration. The Benghazi stuff, down to Candy Crowley at the debates, is just the icing on it. It goes back to the cover ups for Fannie and Freddie in the financial collapse too.
The guy who made that libeled video on Youtube is still in Prison. Have any free speech advocates said anything about that?
Unless there is a serious interest in the truth on the part of the majority of our media, I’m just going to pack it in on the idea of believing anything they say about anything.
There are some folks like Sharyl Atkisson still willing to call things fair and ask questions equally. The majority seem more interested in spinning whatever smoke screens of lies the Administration wants so they can feel like part of the machine. The next few weeks and months will be big in answering the question of whether we still have a press that will do their job.
Gregory Hicks testified that he didn’t speak with Hillary Clinton until 2:00 a.m. (Benghazi time). That is approx. 4 1/2 hours after the attack started. Where was Hillary when her people were being slaughtered and under fire the first 4 1/2 hours, where was Leon Panetta and where was Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.?
The media, for the most part, will bury the Benghazi story, just as they ignored the Kermit Gossnell story. Murdered ambassadors, murdered FSOs and murdered babies just don’t fit with their boot licking columns about how wonderful Obama is. If the lamestream media, including the print media like the LA Times and the NY Times, relied on people like me to earn a dime, they would be broke tomorrow. Why paid to get lied to?
Yet, there are those in this country that will lap up every lie the media tells them.
We haven’t had a press that did its job for at leat five years now. What difference is a couple of weeks/months going to make. The press, for the most part, are thrilled that they finally have a true Socialist POTUS.
A caller to the Limbaugh show yesterday brought up a good point. By focusing on this bogus youtube video and running the apology spots for it, the administration actually caused more riots and death.
The administration claimed that there were protests all across the ME due to the video. Cairo was even mentioned. But…………………………………..
A CNN reporter was in Cairo that day, and he interview the brother of the Blind Sheik. According to the brother of the Blind Sheik, the protest had everything to do with demanding the U.S. release the Blind Sheik and the video was never mentioned.
Why did CNN not air that interview which would have run AFTER the Benghazi attack? Did they not consider it important to the story line being put out by the Administration? Did they not feel that the American people had a right to know exactly what was behind the Cairo protest? Or did CNN bury it to protect the Administration because the interview differed from the meme being put out by the Administration?
And when it it the conservative blogosphere that the interview was on YouTube, why did YouTube pull it?
Journalism is dead. It died in 2008.
@retire05: I think what Rush’s caller was saying was that there were additional incidents after Cairo & Benghazi that could be blamed on the administration’s sticking to a bogus cover story. I agree with you that journalism is dead…
Hmm. Things keep coming back to the Blind Sheikh.
There is a theory that there was some sort of U.S. plan to turn the Blind Sheikh over to Egypt and that this may have had something to do with the Benghazi attack. The stuff about the Cairo protests being about the Sheikh, and on Sept. 11 no less, is interesting.
The Benghazi attack may have been a result of incompetence, but the ramping up of tensions there, coupled with drawing down of security and finally the stand down orders, followed by magic appearances of personal scandals that destroyed the careers of numerous high ranking officers in the theater, makes me wonder if something is deeper here.
Either way the security draw downs and the final stand down, as violence ramped up, go beyond coincidence to me. It is looking for all the world to me like these guys were “staked out” with a target on their back.