SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!!! News: benghazi

Showing posts with label benghazi. Show all posts

More Emails Show Hillary Knew Benghazi Attack By Al Qeada

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!!! News
Mark Matheny
September 14, 2017

Select Committee on Benghazi Releases Proposed Report

benghazi.house.gov
September 13, 2017

81 New Witnesses, 75,000 New Pages of Documents Reveal Significant New Information,

Fundamentally Changes the Public’s Understanding of the 2012 Terrorist Attacks that Killed Four Americans

Washington, D.C. – Select Committee on Benghazi Chairman Trey Gowdy (SC-04) released the following statement after the committee’s Majority released a mark of its investigative report:

“Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods were heroes who gave their lives in service to our country. Their bravery and the courageous actions of so many others on the ground that night should be honored.

“When the Select Committee was formed, I promised to conduct this investigation in a manner worthy of the American people’s respect, and worthy of the memory of those who died. That is exactly what my colleagues and I have done.

“Now, I simply ask the American people to read this report for themselves, look at the evidence we have collected, and reach their own conclusions. You can read this report in less time than our fellow citizens were taking fire and fighting for their lives on the rooftops and in the streets of Benghazi.”

The committee’s proposed report is just over 800 pages long and is comprised of five primary sections and 12 appendices. It details relevant events in 2011 and 2012.

The following facts are among the many new revelations in Part I:

Despite President Obama and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta’s clear orders to deploy military assets, nothing was sent to Benghazi, and nothing was en route to Libya at the time the last two Americans were killed almost 8 hours after the attacks began. [pg. 141]

With Ambassador Stevens missing, the White House convened a roughly two-hour meeting at 7:30 PM, which resulted in action items focused on a YouTube video, and others containing the phrases “[i]f any deployment is made,” and “Libya must agree to any deployment,” and “[w]ill not deploy until order comes to go to either Tripoli or Benghazi.” [pg. 115]

The Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff typically would have participated in the White House meeting, but did not attend because he went home to host a dinner party for foreign dignitaries. [pg. 107]

A Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team (FAST) sat on a plane in Rota, Spain, for three hours, and changed in and out of their uniforms four times. [pg. 154]

None of the relevant military forces met their required deployment timelines. [pg. 150]

The Libyan forces that evacuated Americans from the CIA Annex to the Benghazi airport was not affiliated with any of the militias the CIA or State Department had developed a relationship with during the prior 18 months. Instead, it was comprised of former Qadhafi loyalists who the U.S. had helped remove from power during the Libyan revolution. [pg. 144]

Rep. Mike Pompeo (KS-04) released the following statement regarding these findings:

“We expect our government to make every effort to save the lives of Americans who serve in harm’s way. That did not happen in Benghazi. Politics were put ahead of the lives of Americans, and while the administration had made excuses and blamed the challenges posed by time and distance, the truth is that they did not try.”

Rep. Martha Roby (AL-02) released the following statement regarding these findings:

“Our committee’s insistence on additional information about the military’s response to the Benghazi attacks was met with strong opposition from the Defense Department, and now we know why. Instead of attempting to hide deficiencies in our posture and performance, it’s my hope our report will help ensure we fix what went wrong so that a tragedy like this never happens again.”

The following facts are among the many new revelations in Part II:

Five of the 10 action items from the 7:30 PM White House meeting referenced the video, but no direct link or solid evidence existed connecting the attacks in Benghazi and the video at the time the meeting took place. The State Department senior officials at the meeting had access to eyewitness accounts to the attack in real time. The Diplomatic Security Command Center was in direct contact with the Diplomatic Security Agents on the ground in Benghazi and sent out multiple updates about the situation, including a “Terrorism Event Notification.” The State Department Watch Center had also notified Jake Sullivan and Cheryl Mills that it had set up a direct telephone line to Tripoli. There was no mention of the video from the agents on the ground. Greg Hicks—one of the last people to talk to Chris Stevens before he died—said there was virtually no discussion about the video in Libya leading up to the attacks. [pg. 28]

The morning after the attacks, the National Security Council’s Deputy Spokesperson sent an email to nearly two dozen people from the White House, Defense Department, State Department, and intelligence community, stating: “Both the President and Secretary Clinton released statements this morning. … Please refer to those for any comments for the time being. To ensure we are all in sync on messaging for the rest of the day, Ben Rhodes will host a conference call for USG communicators on this chain at 9:15 ET today.” [pg. 39]

Minutes before the President delivered his speech in the Rose Garden, Jake Sullivan wrote in an email to Ben Rhodes and others: “There was not really much violence in Egypt. And we are not saying that the violence in Libya erupted ‘over inflammatory videos.’” [pg. 44]

According to Susan Rice, both Ben Rhodes and David Plouffe prepared her for her appearances on the Sunday morning talk shows following the attacks. Nobody from the FBI, Department of Defense, or CIA participated in her prep call. While Rhodes testified Plouffe would “normally” appear on the Sunday show prep calls, Rice testified she did not recall Plouffe being on prior calls and did not understand why he was on the call in this instance. [pg.98]

On the Sunday shows, Susan Rice stated the FBI had “already begun looking at all sorts of evidence” and “FBI has a lead in this investigation.” But on Monday, the Deputy Director, Office of Maghreb Affairs sent an email stating: “McDonough apparently told the SVTS [Secure Video Teleconference] group today that everyone was required to ‘shut their pieholes’ about the Benghazi attack in light of the FBI investigation, due to start tomorrow.” [pg. 135]

After Susan Rice’s Sunday show appearances, Jake Sullivan assured the Secretary of the State that Rice “wasn’t asked about whether we had any intel. But she did make clear our view that this started spontaneously and then evolved.” [pg. 128]

Susan Rice’s comments on the Sunday talk shows were met with shock and disbelief by State Department employees in Washington. The Senior Libya Desk Officer, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, State Department, wrote: “I think Rice was off the reservation on this one.” The Deputy Director, Office of Press and Public Diplomacy, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, State Department, responded: “Off the reservation on five networks!” The Senior Advisor for Strategic Communications, Bureau of Near East Affairs, State Department, wrote: “WH [White House] very worried about the politics. This was all their doing.” [pg. 132]

The CIA’s September 13, 2012, intelligence assessment was rife with errors. On the first page, there is a single mention of “the early stages of the protest” buried in one of the bullet points. The article cited to support the mention of a protest in this instance was actually from September 4. In other words, the analysts used an article from a full week before the attacks to support the premise that a protest had occurred just prior to the attack on September 11. [pg. 47]

A headline on the following page of the CIA’s September 13 intelligence assessment stated “Extremists Capitalized on Benghazi Protests,” but nothing in the actual text box supports that title. As it turns out, the title of the text box was supposed to be “Extremists Capitalized on Cairo Protests.” That small but vital difference—from Cairo to Benghazi—had major implications in how people in the administration were able to message the attacks. [pg. 52]

Rep. Jim Jordan (OH-04) released the following statement regarding these findings:

“Obama Administration officials, including the Secretary of State, learned almost in real time that the attack in Benghazi was a terrorist attack. Rather than tell the American people the truth, the administration told one story privately and a different story publicly.”

Rep. Peter Roskam (IL-06) released the following statement regarding these findings:

“In the days and weeks after the attacks, the White House worked to pin all of the blame for their misleading and incorrect statements on officials within the intelligence community, but in reality, political operatives like Ben Rhodes and David Plouffe were spinning the false narrative and prepping Susan Rice for her interviews.”

The following facts are among the many new revelations in Part III:

During deliberations within the State Department about whether and how to intervene in Libya in March 2011, Jake Sullivan listed the first goal as “avoid[ing] a failed state, particularly one in which al-Qaeda and other extremists might take safe haven.” [pg. 9]

The administration’s policy of no boots on the ground shaped the type of military assistance provided to State Department personnel in Libya. The Executive Secretariats for both the Defense Department and State Department exchanged communications outlining the diplomatic capacity in which the Defense Department SST security team members would serve, which included wearing civilian clothes so as not to offend the Libyans. [pg. 60]

When the State Department’s presence in Benghazi was extended in December 2012, senior officials from the Bureau of Diplomatic Security were excluded from the discussion. [pg. 74]

In February 2012, the lead Diplomatic Security Agent at Embassy Tripoli informed his counterpart in Benghazi that more DS agents would not be provided by decision makers, because “substantive reporting” was not Benghazi’s purpose. [pg. 77]

Emails indicate senior State Department officials, including Cheryl Mills, Jake Sullivan, and Huma Abedin were preparing for a trip by the Secretary of State to Libya in October 2012. According to testimony, Chris Stevens wanted to have a “deliverable” for the Secretary for her trip to Libya, and that “deliverable” would be making the Mission in Benghazi a permanent Consulate. [pg. 96]

In August 2012—roughly a month before the Benghazi attacks—security on the ground worsened significantly. Ambassador Stevens initially planned to travel to Benghazi in early August, but cancelled the trip “primarily for Ramadan/security reasons.” [pg. 99]

Former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta bluntly told the committee “an intelligence failure” occurred with respect to Benghazi. Former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell also acknowledged multiple times an intelligence failure did in fact occur prior to the Benghazi attacks. [pg. 129]

Rep. Susan Brooks (IN-05) released the following statement regarding these findings:

“President Obama has said his worst mistake was ‘failing to plan for the day after … intervening in Libya.’ As a result of this ‘lead from behind’ foreign policy, the Libyan people were forced to make the dismal trade of the tyranny of Qadhafi for the terror of ISIS, Al-Qaeda and others. Although the State Department considered Libya a grave risk to American diplomats in 2011 and 2012, our people remained in a largely unprotected, unofficial facility that one diplomatic security agent the committee interviewed characterized as ‘a suicide mission.’”

Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (GA-03) released the following statement regarding these findings:

“One of the most concerning parts of the State Department’s policy in Libya was its reliance upon the militias of an unstable nation to protect our men and women in Benghazi. These were by no means forces that could adequately protect Americans on the ground, and the State Department knew it. But the appearance of no boots on the ground was more important to the administration.”

Part IV of the report reveals new information about the Select Committee’s requests and subpoenas seeking documents and witnesses regarding Benghazi and Libya, and details what the Obama administration provided to Congress, what it is still withholding, and how its serial delays hindered the committee’s efforts to uncover the truth.

Part V proposes 25 recommendations for the Pentagon, State Department, Intelligence Community, and Congress aimed at strengthening security for American personnel serving abroad and doing everything possible to ensure something like Benghazi never happens again, and if it does, that we are better prepared to respond.

The Select Committee intends to convene a bipartisan markup to discuss and vote on the proposed report on July 8, 2016. All members of the committee will have the opportunity to offer changes in a manner consistent with the rules of the House.

Letter from Chairman Trey Gowdy to Speaker Paul Ryan

FACT SHEET: The Benghazi Committee's Investigation - By the Numbers

Below is the full report with links to PDF files of each section.

(Update 12/7/16: Following the transmittal of the final report to the House, the report has been published with the Government Printing Office.)

(Update 7/8/16: Following the committee’s vote to make its proposed report final, the links to the PDFs below were updated to reflect the final versions that will be filed in the House.)

Report: Clinton Emails May Have Led to Ambassador Steven's Death

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!!! News
Mark Matheny
October 30, 2016

Mark Matheny discusses newly released emails for Hillary Clinton that may have contributed to the murder of Ambassador Steven's and three soldiers on the night of the attack in Benghazi .

Proof Al Qaeda and Isis were armed under Obama and Hillary Clinton

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!!! News
Mark Matheny
October 16, 2016

Mark Matheny discusses the links the Obama Administration will go to in order to ensure a Clinton presidency. New evidence shows the Obama Administration covertly funded Libyan rebels in 2011 and in an effort to overthrow Gaddafi and Obama then recently tried to cover this up and protect Hillary Clinton in order to get her into office

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/world...

https://www.scribd.com/doc/111001074/...

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/1...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2...

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/u-s-admi...

http://in.reuters.com/article/usa-lib...

Trey Gowdy Shocks The Media Then Walks Off Disgusted

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!!! News
October 16, 2016

HILLARY SAYS SHE LIED TO BENGHAZI FAMILIES DUE TO “FOG OF WAR”… DONALD TRUMP RESPONDS

Gateway Pundit
January 2, 2016

In early December Hillary Clinton told ABC liberal hack and friend George Stephanopoulos she didn’t lie when she told the Benghazi families that the attack was in response to the film.
She told “This Week” viewers she suffered from a military phenomenon know as the ‘fog of war’

A majority of Americans question her honesty.

On New Year’s Day Donald Trump let Hillary have it.

“No fog of war is allowed in the White House, Hillary. Vote Trump”

See the full article here

New Docs: Obama Admin Was Tracking Weapons From Libya to Syria in 2012, Knew Benghazi Attack Was Planned in Advance

PJ Media
May 19, 2015

New documents obtained by Judicial Watch confirm that U.S. intelligence agencies knew early on what happened in Benghazi on 9/11/2012 and why. Hint: It wasn’t about a stupid video.

The docs show that in 2012, U.S. intelligence agencies knew that weapons were moving from Libya to Syria before the attack and were already predicting the rise of ISIS and their quest to establish a caliphate. This was 17 months before the president called ISIS “jay-vee.”

Via Fox News:

Catherine Herridge reported this morning on “America’s Newsroom” that a Defense Intelligence Agency memo from Sept. 16, 2012, concluded that the Benghazi terror attack was planned at least 10 days in advance to coincide with 9/11 and was in retaliation for a drone strike that killed an al Qaeda strategist. The memo was copied to the National Security Council, the State Department and the CIA.

“The intention was to attack the consulate and to kill as many Americans as possible to seek revenge for the [U.S.] killing of Aboyahiye (Alaliby) in Pakistan and in memorial of the 11 September 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center buildings,” the memo said.

Two and a half years after the attack, Judicial Watch was finally able to obtain the memos by suing in federal court.

“The Obama administration says it was a coincidence that [the Benghazi attack] occurred on 9/11. In fact, their intelligence said it wasn’t a coincidence, and in fact, specifically the attack occurred because it was 9/11,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.

The Obama administration knew all of this on September 16, 2012 – yet White House Press Secretary Jay Carney got in front of reporters day after day, spinning tales about a spontaneous demonstration, “bad actors” with heavy weapons and a “disgusting and reprehensible” YouTube video. Instead of answering simple questions he knew (or should have known) the answers to, Carney told reporters the matter was under investigation.

Flash back to a September 19, 2012, press briefing where Carney has trouble convincing skeptical reporters of the White House spin. Note that this was three days after the DIA memos which prove that administration already knew the truth:

Q    If the government still maintains that there was no evidence of a preplanned attack, how come –

MR. CARNEY: Bill, let me just repeat now, again, that based on the information –

Q    But how is it that the attackers had RPGs, automatic weapons, mortars?

MR. CARNEY: Bill, I know you’ve done a little bit of reading about Libya since the unrest that began under Qaddafi. The place is — has an abundance of weapons, and there are –

Q    No question about it. But do you expect a street mob to come armed that way?

MR. CARNEY: There are, unfortunately, many bad actors in that country as there are throughout the region.

Q    But that’s not the point, Jay.

MR. CARNEY: And they have — they’re very armed. The point is you can make suppositions about what happened. We prefer to have an investigation that looks very closely into what happened, and assembles the facts and presents them. Based on — all I’m saying –

Q    But our people on the ground have seen the fragments of the — the remains of the mortars and the heavy weapons that were used.

MR. CARNEY: We’ve been clear that there were armed assailants who used heavy weapons. We obviously haven’t disputed that. And –

Q    So this is just a random crowd that got together with their heavy weapons, insulted by the film, and decided to go –

MR. CARNEY: As I think I just said, there has certainly been precedent in the past where bad actors, extremists who are heavily armed in different countries, in different regions of the world, have taken advantage of and exploited situations that have developed in order to either attack Westerners or Western assets or American assets. That is not –

Q    They might plan to do it, don’t you think?

MR. CARNEY: They might or they might not. All I can tell you is, based on the information we had at the time — we have now, we do not yet have indication that it was preplanned or premeditated. There’s an active investigation. If that active investigation produces facts that lead to a different conclusion, we will make clear that that’s where the investigation has led. It’s not — our interest is in finding out the facts of what happened, not taking what we’ve read in the newspaper and making bold assertions that we know what happened. We’d rather investigate it.

Q So in the investigations about all the skirmishes and the initial skirmish that happened in Libya, has it been concluded that this was linked to trying to show America something on 9/11, to show anti-American sentiment on 9/11? Is that –

MR. CARNEY: April, I’ve had a lot of questions about what we know about what precipitated the attacks in Benghazi. And I said earlier and have said on previous days that, based on the information we have now, we don’t have evidence that it was premeditated or preplanned.

It is certainly the case that there are a number of bad actors and armed groups of extremists in Libya who might take advantage of a situation that was brought about initially as a response to the video in question. But this is under active investigation and we await the results of that investigation by the FBI before we can reach any firm conclusions about what precipitated the attacks.

Q Right now we should say it’s a coincidence that it all happened on 9/11?

MR. CARNEY: Right now I’m saying we don’t have evidence at this point that this was premeditated or preplanned to coincide on a — to happen on a specific date or coincide with that anniversary. If that changes, we will certainly make you aware of it.

Video here.

Jay Carney is a shameless liar. But then, so is his successor, their boss, and pretty much everyone else associated with this abhorrent administration.

UPDATE:

Judicial Watch now has their report on the new documents, here.

What Does a President Have to do to Get Impeached?

Before It's News
June 18, 2014

The U.S. Constitution provides for the removal of a sitting president through impeachment because our founders knew that all men have a propensity for evil. The first president to be impeached was Democrat Andrew Johnson who became president upon the death of Abraham Lincoln.

Johnson had removed his Secretary of War from his cabinet, thereby violating the Tenure of Office Act, that was later declared unconstitutional. He was charged with bringing into “disgrace, ridicule, hatred, contempt, and reproach the Congress of the United States.” The House voted overwhelmingly to impeach; however, the trial in the Senate was short one vote for conviction so he served out his term as President.

Richard Nixon was accused of obstruction of justice and abuse of power and the House Judiciary Committee voted for his impeachment; however, he resigned his office and the full House did not consider the issue. Nixon’s sin was the cover-up of a bungled robbery of the Democrat National Committee offices by the Committee to Re-elect President Nixon. Of Nixon’s guilt of trying to obstruct justice and abuse of power there is no doubt and to keep from being drummed out of the Oval Office, he resigned, the first U.S. President to do so.

Bill Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives on two charges, one of perjury and one of obstruction of justice on December 19, 1998. Sixty-seven senators were required to find him guilty but only 50 voted to convict. The five Republicans who refused to impeach him on both counts were all located on the political spectrum far left of The New York Times.

A blind and deaf man with the IQ of his ring-size knew Clinton was guilty but not one Democrat voted for impeachment! Gutless Republican Senator Alan Specter voted “Not Proven” but William H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court who was presiding, decreed that it was a “not guilty” vote.

Clinton went “scot-free,” proving that a President can perjure himself and obstruct justice and not pay the price. Moreover, he is still loved and respected by the American public and has received up to $500,000 per speech since leaving office! Sometimes crime does pay–very well.

Our sitting President has done more mischievous and illegal acts than all the previous presidents put together; yet the weak, wobbly, worthless, witless Congress has refused to impeach him, proving that they are as culpable as he.

Obama’s appointment of left-wing socialists and Communists are myriad, mysterious, and maddening to freedom-loving Americans. It seems there is a concerted effort to destroy this nation. Maybe the Manchurian Candidate wasn’t just a novel (1959) and subsequent movies.

It is astounding that Obama’s Attorney General was permitted to disregard American values and laws especially relating to gun running (Fast and Furious) without going to prison. His crime resulted in at least the death of one Federal Agent.

Moreover, the incredible, incendiary, and insane failure to seal the southern border is mind-boggling. Mothers with children are showing up demanding the right to invade our nation! Furthermore, hundreds of unaccompanied children are flooding the border as I write!

After thousands of Americans were killed in Iraq and many thousands maimed, we fled the nation and permitted the most vicious Muslim terrorists to take control of its major cities. At this moment, they are marching on Baghdad. It seems everything Obama touches turns to failure.

The scandal at the Veterans Administration where hundreds of vets were forced onto a waiting list to receive treatment is worthy of impeachment; however, he is given a pass since the VA was also a mess under other presidents.

Finally there is much speculation about his being impeached for his other high crimes and misdemeanors.

Many intelligent, honest people have serious doubts that Obama is even a U.S. citizen! He says he was born in Hawaii; however, there is evidence that he was born in Kenya. Why not remove all doubt and provide original documents to prove his birthplace? There is evidence that he traveled to Pakistan on a passport that reveals his true place of birth but he refuses to provide the documents.

He refuses to provide the information about his education at Columbia and Harvard. Is he concerned about his poor grades or would the documents reveal he was a student from a foreign nation? I don’t know but Obama could easily settle the issue by surrendering the documents. Moreover, Donald Trump has offered to give $5 million to Obama’s favorite charity if he reveals his school and passport records. What reason could Obama have for not doing so unless it is fear?

On September 11, 2012, an attack occurred at the U.S. compound in Benghazi resulting in the deaths of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. White House hacks immediately blamed the assault on a crude video that was critical of Mohammed and Islam. But now we know that it was an orchestrated attack by a Muslim terrorist group. Five days after the tragedy, White House spokeswoman, Susan Rice appeared on five major television shows to deflect the flak from angry Americans. She lied after Americans died. The White House and Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State knew from the beginning that it was not a simple demonstration that went awry but a concerted terrorist attack upon Americans and American property.

President Obama has repeatedly refused to answer whether the four dead Americans were denied help. Of course they were, but the White House and the State Department have sought to cover their behinds instead of confessing palpable guilt and their massive cover-up. Anyone with character would have resigned their leadership positions but Obama and Clinton refused to do so.

But it gets worser and worser.

Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl walked away from camp in Afghanistan and went searching for the enemy without his gun! He is a deserter and, from the evidence, he colluded with the enemy. To equate him with brave soldiers who risk their lives every day is beyond the pale. He went after the Taliban and found them. After five years in “captivity” Bergdahl was exchanged for five top Taliban terrorists imprisoned in Gitmo. Reports reveal at that least six fellow soldiers were killed seeking to free him.

Obama was required by federal law to get permission from the Congress at least 30 days before releasing any Gitmo prisoners. He refused to obey that law. Someone needs to remind him that he is the President not the Emperor. He may rule but he doesn’t reign and he will rue the day when those freed terrorists kill more Americans.

Do the members of Congress know how to spell impeachment? Get to it. Or maybe this November’s elections will bring in better spellers.

Dr. Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives, author of 15 books, frequent guest on television and radio talk shows, and wrote columns for USA Today for 8 years. His shocking book, ISLAM: America’s Trojan Horse!; Christian Resistance: An Idea Whose Time Has Come–Again!; and The God Haters are all available at Amazon.com. These columns go to newspapers, magazines, television, and radio stations and may be used without change from title through the end tag. His web sites are www.cstnews.com, www.Muslimfact.com andwww.thegodhaters.com. Contact Don for an interview or talk show.

This Journalist Died After Exposing Bowe Bergdahl’s Anti-Americanism

The Center for Western Journalism
June 15, 2014

Email Shows Blaming Benghazi Attack On ‘The Video’ Was Obama Administration’s Idea

Personal Liberty Digest
April 29, 2014

A top Obama Administration official strongly urged Susan Rice, National Security Advisor at the time of the Benghazi, Lybia terror attack on Sept. 11, 2012, to go before the press and blame the strike on grass-roots Islamist backlash against “The Innocence of Muslims,” a satirical YouTube video.

According to a White House email obtained by Judicial Watch, White House Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes specifically fingered the video on Sept. 14, 2012 as a talking point Rice should focus on when making the obligatory TV news junket following the attack. Oh, and the email unswervingly calls what happened “protests,” not a terror attack, or even, simply an “attack.”

Under the ‘Goals’ outline in the State Department email – an email specifically created to dictate talking points for media to consume – the video stands alone as a named culprit. The purpose of Rhodes’ memo was to “underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy…”

That email was sent out on a Friday. By Sunday, Rice was in songbird mode.

One of the talking points (Rhodes calls them “Top-lines”) that Rice was instructed to play up was to focus on the video as the villain simply by denouncing it.

Only twice does Rhodes advise using speech that would denounce the attack at all, and then only in flyover language that puts the blame back on that dastardly video. “[W]e’ve encouraged leaders around the globe to speak out against the violence, and you’ve seen very important statements in the Muslim world by people like Prime Minister Erdogan of Turkey, President Morsi of Egypt, and others who have condemned the violence and called for a peaceful response,” Rhodes wrote.

The State Department’s real outrage is focused on the bad guys who would foment unrest in Islamists who can’t help themselves by making such hurtful and offensive video clips:

[W]e’ve made our views on this video crystal clear. The United States government had nothing to do with it. We reject its message and its contents. We find it disgusting and reprehensible. But there is absolutely no justification at all for responding to this movie with violence.

And on and on.

Well, there’s confirmation that the Obama Administration was behind the whole “blame the video” narrative.

But the question remains: why in the hell was the State Department even talking about a video?

Read the entire bevy of emails Judicial Watch obtained here – the Rhodes memo is on page 14. Elsewhere, expect a lot of white boxes where the words are supposed to go.

Does This Navy Map Alter The Benghazi Narrative?

Western Center for Journalism
February 17, 2014

Newly released information about the location of military assets on the night of the terrorist attacks in Benghazi in 2012 has been met with a yawn by the mainstream media, but it has caused quite a stir in the conservative press.

Most of the media are following the lead of the Obama administration, arguing that while the outcome in Benghazi was regrettable, it was merely due to mistakes that have since been addressed, and it’s long past time to move on. Any suggestion of this being a scandal, that narrative goes, is the result of Fox News and talk-radio pushing an agenda, combined with thinly disguised racism. We have shown time and again why this is, in fact, a very real and significant scandal and should be seen as such by the media and Congress.

Several congressional and administration reports consider the military response to Benghazi to have been justifiable. “The interagency response was timely and appropriate, but there simply was not enough time for armed U.S. military assets to have made a difference,” concluded the Accountability Review Board (ARB) back in December 2012. “As the only military member of the ARB, I personally reviewed all of the military assets that were in theater and available,” Admiral Michael Mullen, Vice Chair of the ARB, said in an interview in June of last year. This board was largely handpicked by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to investigate Benghazi, but she was never interviewed by them.

Now, Americans have gotten a glimpse into which naval forces were active on September 11, 2012 and can judge for themselves. A new map has been released by Judicial Watch that details the location of multiple ships in the region. Judicial Watch has done an excellent job in reporting on and analyzing the situation in Benghazi, and their Freedom of Information requests have yielded significant information.

However, the fact that there were many ships in the area does not necessarily mean that they provided the instant military capacity to have affected the outcome. The far-left Mother Jones publication has argued, “This Map Is Not the Benghazi Smoking Gun Conservatives Think It Is.” This is because “Most of the ‘dozens’ of ships were nowhere near Benghazi, and the list includes many vessels that wouldn’t do much good in a rescue situation,” wrote Tim Murphy for MoJo. In this instance, they may have stumbled on the truth.

The Navy noted in a letter to the Freedom of Information Act requester that “ENTERPRISE was approximately 3350 nautical miles from Benghazi. Assuming a 20 knot transit speed and no Suez Canal delays, the transit would take approximately 168 hours or seven days.” And the closest amphibious vessel, IWO JIMA, was “underway in the Gulf of Oman,” wrote Captain B.C. Nickerson for the Navy.

In other words, no naval help was on its way that night; and the best help was too far away to make a difference.

But the real story here is not that there were military assets in the immediate area that weren’t used to rescue the Americans under attack in Benghazi. Rather, it is that this newly released information underscores the fact that there should have been forces on hand and ready to deal with this kind of situation.

Read the entire article

Admiral: Obama Conspired With America’s Enemies to Kidnap Chris Stevens

Gopthedailydose.com
February 17, 2014

It’s even worse than we previously thought. A retired four-star admiral is claiming that Barack Obama intentionally conspired with America’s enemies to stage a bogus attack and the kidnapping of an American ambassador so he could “negotiate” the release of a “hostage” and bolster his mediocre approval ratings just prior to the election?

On Lou Dobbs, retired Four-Star Admiral James Lyons, said: “the attack on the American Consulate in Benghazi… was the result of a bungled abduction attempt…. the first stage of an international prisoner exchange… that would have ensured the release of Omar Abdel Rahman, the ‘Blind Sheik’…”

But something went horribly wrong with Obama’s “October Surprise.” Although the Obama Administration intentionally gutted security at the consulate prior to the staged kidnapping, former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty disobeyed direct orders to stand down, saved American lives, single-handedly killed scores of attackers…and the attackers, believing that the Obama had betrayed them, tortured Ambassador Chris Stevens and dragged his body through the streets.

It’s clear. Benghazi-Gate is only a small piece of a much larger operation, an attempt to conceal what The New American calls; “the Obama administration’s full role in helping violent Jihadists and self-styled al Qaeda terrorists.”

Birther Confronts Rep. Roby: Obama Is A Foreign-Born Communist Despot

Birther Report
August 14, 2013

WH releases docs that show State Dept, CIA pushed for revisions to talking points...

The Hill
May 16, 2013

The White House on Wednesday released more than 100 pages of inter-agency emails intended to bolster its argument it did not try to hide the fact that last year’s attack on the U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya, was terrorism.

The messages — circulated Sept. 14-15 — show that CIA Deputy Director Mike Morrell asked that references to al Qaeda and another terrorist groups be removed from official administration talking points hours before State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland made a similar request.

One page of talking points dated Sept. 14 includes handwritten notes by Morrell, who scratches out parts of the talking points that say that there were “indications that Islamic extremists participated in the violent demonstrations,” and also that there were “at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British ambassador’s convoy.”

But the emails also show that Morrell’s boss, then-CIA Director David Petraeus, wanted additional information, including warnings about earlier violence in the region, including in the talking points. He suggested he would rather not use the talking points without the additional disclosures.

Read the entire article

Latest On Benghazi: Continual Live Updates

Infowars.com
May 8, 2013

Whistleblower: Hillary Was ‘The Only Person’ Who Could’ve Authorized More Benghazi Security
CNS News

Benghazi whistleblower Eric Nordstrom said the Benghazi consulate was listed as “high threat” before the attacks and the only person who could add more security personnel to a facility that does not meet standards is the Secretary of State – Hillary Clinton – at the time.

Nordstrom was asked: “By statute, Mr. Nordstrom, who has the authority to place personnel in a facility that does not meet the minimum OSPB standards?”

“The OSPB standards go in tandem with SECA, which is Secure Embassy Construction,” Nordstrom testified. “It’s my understanding that, since we were the occupants of both facilities– Benghazi and Tripoli– the only person who could grant waivers or exceptions to those are the Secretary of State,” Nordstrom said.

Benghazi a premeditated terrorist attack, not a response to anti-Muslim video, say whistleblowers
Natural News

For weeks after the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, in which U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other operatives were killed, President Obama and his administration told the American people and the world that it all went down because of an anti-Muslim video made by a hapless California man.

“While the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, we must all unequivocally oppose the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of these public servants,” Obama said immediately following news that the ambassador and some of his security staff had been killed on the eleventh anniversary of the 9/11 attacks (Note: historical dates have significance in the world of Islamic terrorism).

In the days that followed, the administration circled its wagons around the narrative that the video, titled, “Innocence of Muslims,” was responsible.

Top U.S. Diplomat in Libya Knew Benghazi Was Terrorism
Daily Beast

For eleven days after the 9/11 anniversary assault on the U.S. diplomatic facility in Benghazi, top Obama administration officials told the public that the assault stemmed from a protest of an anti-Muslim YouTube video. That was the public line from the White House in the closing weeks of a presidential election season, but it was not the view of several State Department officials at the time or the U.S. personnel on the ground in Libya.

At a hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on Benghazi Wednesday, Trey Goudy, a Republican from South Carolina, read into the record an email from Beth Jones, the acting assistant secretary of state for Near East Affairs. The September 12 email—disclosed for the first time on Wednesday—said Jones had spoken to Libya’s ambassador to Washington who said the attack was the work of former Gadhafi regime loyalists. Jones said she told the ambassador: “The group that conducted the attacks, Ansar al-Sharia, is affiliated with Islamic terrorists.”

Jones was not the only one who viewed the attack as the work of terrorists. Gregory Hicks, the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. embassy in Tripoli at the time, said there were no reports from U.S. personnel in Libya there was a demonstration. In often-dramatic testimony, Hicks provided new details of the attack in the evening of Benghazi. He said he had no doubt the assault on the U.S. compound in Benghazi at the time was a terrorist attack, noting that Ansar al-Sharia had claimed credit for the assault on its twitter feed. Indeed, the U.S. embassy in Tripoli believed it would be attacked next. Hicks said embassy personnel smashed hard drives, loaded weapons into armored vehicles and that the 55 embassy employees in Tripoli that evening were gathered in a safe annex all in anticipation of the attack.

Read the entire article

The Benghazi Bus

The August Forecast & Review
May 9, 2013

The Benghazi scandal is unquestionably the lowest point of American foreign policy in the last 50 years. It sends a message to all foreign service workers that their government will no longer rescue them when experiencing hostile situations; this flies in the face of historical military coda where all available resources are brought to bear to rescue and protect the wounded, trapped or endangered. Furthermore, it brands our government as unreliable and untruthful.

Henceforth, diplomats and soldiers everywhere should beware of the “Benghazi Bus“, which could run over them at any inconvenient time. Getting Benghazied may even become a new verb in diplomatic language.

Today’s live testimony of the “Benghazi Whistle blowers” before the House Oversight & Government Reform Committee could provide the testimony that takes down the Obama Administration. Or not. The question is, will Congress have the guts to impeach the public officials who were responsible for the disaster and the subsequent coverup. This writer’s guess is that no one will be held accountable in the end.

This writer’s original analysis of the September 11, 2012 Benghazi attack and coverup can be read in these two articles:

Those testifying before the House Committee are high-profile whistle blowers, including the former deputy chief of mission in Libya, Greg Hicks. Hicks immediately became the chief of mission when it was learned that his boss, Amb. Chris Stevens was killed during the attack. Eric Nordstrom was the former regional security officer in Libya, responsible for overall security of U.S. and diplomatic personnel. Mark Thompson is the deputy assistant Secretary of State for counterterrorism.

After listening to the entire live testimony on C-Span, and reading numerous reports on this and the other 8 Congressional hearings, it is evident that there were two layers of operation in Benghazi. First, there was a blackops group centered in and operating out of the CIA compound that was just down the road from the diplomatic mission: Exactly what they were doing in Libya will never be fully known.

Secondly, there was the diplomatic mission that was in the chain of command under the Department of State. By contrast, we now know a lot about this.

According to eye-witness testimony, the 9/11 (2012) attack was clearly planned and executed by a known terrorist group and everyone in Libya understood this to be the case. This information was clearly passed up the ladder to direct leadership in Washington, who chose to ignore it and instead cooked up an entirely different story for the world press.

Hicks, Nordstrom and Thompson testified that a military stand-down order was indeed issued that prevented a team of Special Operations troops from flying into Benghazi. They could not even get a simple fighter jet flyover to take place, which would have quickly dispersed the attackers. (The terrorists are deathly afraid of laser-guided armaments carried by U.S. airplanes because once they are “locked”, they are as good as dead.)

The only important questions that remain concern who threw the Benghazi mission under the bus in the first place, and then who orchestrated the coverup.

Read the entire article