BENGHAZI: HE KNEW

CounterPsyOps
October 25, 2012

[Editor’s Note: An unknown source from the State Department leaked the emails received from Benghazi to CBS: Libya emails sent on 9/11]

As CBS reports, At 6:07 p.m. of Sept. 11, 2012, State sent out an alert saying the embassy in Tripoli reported the Islamic military group “Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibilty for Benghazi Attack”… “on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli.”

So why did Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice go on ABC’s “This Week,” the following Sunday and say that the attacked was not “pre-planned.” And: “We believe that folks in Benghazi, a small number of people came to … the consulate … to replicate the sort of challenge that was posed in Cairo. “And then as that unfolded, it seems to have been hijacked, let us say, by some individual clusters of extremists who came with heavier weapons.” Clearly the administration preferred blaming a video produced in America for the attack than terrorists with guns in Libya.

Source: Libya emails fingered terrorist group on 9/11, by Debra J Saunders – SF Blog

What did the President know and when did he know it? That famous question from Watergate should resurface today as news breaks that President Obama and his administration knew 2 hours after the attack that led to the murder of Libyan Ambassador Christopher Stevens and 3 other Americans were terrorism and claimed by a known terrorist group.

Reuters reported last night, “Officials at the White House and State Department were advised two hours after attackers assaulted the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11 that an Islamic militant group had claimed credit for the attack, official emails show.”

Nowhere in these emails is a YouTube video mentioned…not even once.

This blows a hole in everything the President, the vice-president and every mouthpiece they employ has been saying all along. In other words, they lied, knowingly and willingly, to the American people, to the families of the victims, for weeks.

Why would they do it? Politics.

It’s pretty simple – the President and his campaign have been travelling the country since the Democratic National Convention, slinging the line “Osama Bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive.” They wanted people to think, as the President said, “Al Qaeda is on its heels.” Terrorists plotting and executing an attack on US soil, murdering an Ambassador, causes that narrative to crumble like a house of cards.

Lara Logan, the 60 Minutes correspondent, told the world Al Qaeda was not on the run a few weeks ago, but the most of the media shrugged it off, ignoring her in the hope the administration’s lie would be unquestioned as truth…at least until November 7th.

But it hasn’t. The emperor has no clothes. The President lied about the motivation for the attack, lied about his knowledge of the motivation for the attack and lied to cover up all of it.

You may think the word “lie” is too strong, but there’s no other for when someone knowingly and willingly says something as true when they know it not to be. That’s what we have here, beyond any doubt.

The White House and the State Department watched, in real time from an overhead drone, live video of the attack and did nothing. They did nothing to help those Americans under attack, those Americans who ended up dead.

No action was taken, no troops deployed to aid those under siege in the 7 hour attack. That’s right, the attack lasted 7 hours. That’s more than enough time to scramble fighter jets that could have easily flown over the consulate and, at a minimum, scared the hell out of the attacking terrorists forces, if not kill them.

President Obama and his administration did nothing.

Considering that, it’s little wonder why the video lie was created. Why the President, Vice President and UN Ambassador Susan Rice stuck to it even at it unraveled. They wanted desperately to get to November 7th, the day after the election, before the truth came out. Too late.

What lie will they tell now? How will they try to spin their being caught in this lie?

With this news breaking last night, Mitt Romney’s lack of attack in the debate Monday on the failures of Benghazi seem all the more a strategic win. There was no reason for Romney to attack the President on his failures in Libya because the story already had a life of its own. The President was undoubtedly prepared with well rehearsed responses of indignation that Romney would dare “politicize” this attack.

Of course, “We should not politicize this issue” is the last, desperate gasp of someone who really doesn’t want to discuss something. By not giving the President a chance to use his canned response, Romney kept the story alive. Obama couldn’t rebut what he wasn’t accused of, couldn’t spin what wasn’t thrown his way. The story continued to develop untouched, un-rebutted, unspun with the latest poll-tested nuance to paint plausible deniability. It’s doubtful the White House was blindsided by this yesterday, so Romney’s silence on it didn’t allow the Obama team to head it off at the pass.

The story lives, the lie is exposed and the American people await an explanation as to why the President spent weeks telling them things he knew not to be true. Mr. President, what say you?

Source: Press Obama on Benghazi, by Derek HUNTER – NY Daily News

October 25, 2012 | Categories: co-opting and/or destabilization, Libya, news, sovereignty, tyranny, US, war | Tags: Benghazi | Leave a comment