Page 1 of 31
1
2
3
11
... LastLast
  1. #1

    The Benghazi Lie in Black and White


    Public vs. Private Timeline

    9/11—Public Statements

    Secretary Clinton's 10:08 p.m. Statement on the Attack in Benghazi:

    "I condemn in the strongest terms the attack on our mission in Benghazi today. * * * Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet."

    9/11—Private Statements




    Secretary Clinton's Call Sheet for call with President of Libya Mohammed al Magariaf at 6:49 p.m.:

    Under heading "Purpose of Call" notes that "Secretary should urge Mr. Magariaf to respond urgently to the attack against the U.S. Mission Benghazi, and security threats against U.S. Embassy Tripoli." No mention of a protest or video.

    Summary of Call between Secretary Clinton and President Magariaf:

    "[O]ur diplomatic mission was attacked[.] . . . [T]here is a gun battle ongoing, which I understand Ansar as-Sharia [sic] is claiming responsibility for." No mention of protest or video.

    Secretary Clinton's E-mail to daughter at 11:23 p.m.:

    "Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an Al Quedalike [sic] group[.]"




    9/12—Public Statements

    Secretary Clinton's Remarks on the Deaths of American Personnel in Benghazi, Libya morning of September 12, 2012:

    "We are working to determine the precise motivations and methods of those who carried out this assault. Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior, along with the protest that took place at our Embassy in Cairo yesterday, as a response to inflammatory material posted on the internet."

    9/12—Private Statements

    Summary of Discussion between Acting Assistant Secretary Beth Jones and Libyan Ambassador Aujali at 9:45 a.m.:




    "I told him that the group that conducted the attacks—Ansar Al Sharia—is affiliated with Islamic extremists."

    Jacob Sullivan in e-mail to embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan:

    "There was not really violence in Egypt [and] "we are not saying that the violence in Libya erupted 'over inflammatory videos.'"

    Secretary Clinton's Statements to Egyptian Prime Minister Kandil at 3:04 p.m.:

    "We know that the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack – not a protest. . . . Based on the information we saw today we believe the group that claimed responsibility for this was affiliated with al Qaeda."




    Under Secretary Patrick Kennedy to congressional staff briefing:

    When asked whether "this [was] an attack under the cover of a protest" Kennedy said, "No the attack was a direct breaching attack." More to the point, he was then asked whether "we believe [this was] coordinated with [the] Cairo [protests] to which Kennedy responded, "Attack in Cairo was a demonstration. There were no weapons shown or used. A few cans of spray paint."

    9/13—Public Statements

    Secretary Clinton's Morocco Remarks:

    "I also want to take a moment to address the video circulating on the Internet that has led to these protests in a number of countries. * * *




    To us, to me personally, this video is disgusting and reprehensible. It appears to have a deeply cynical purpose: to denigrate a great religion and to provoke rage. But as I said yesterday, there is no justification, none at all, for responding to this video with violence. * * *

    Violence, we believe, has no place in religion and is no way to honor religion. Islam, like other religions, respects the fundamental dignity of human beings, and it is a violation of that fundamental dignity to wage attacks on innocents. As long as there are those who are willing to shed blood and take innocent life in the name of God, the world will never know a true and lasting peace. It is especially wrong for violence to be directed against diplomatic missions. . . .

    ***

    I wanted to begin with this statement, because, as our Moroccan friends and all of you know, this has been a difficult week at the State Department. I very much appreciate, Minister, the condolences your government expressed to our Embassy in Rabat. And even though that tragedy happened far away in Benghazi, we found a reminder of the deep bounds that connect Morocco to the United States."

    9/13—Private Statements

    Summary of call between State Department Deputy Secretary Thomas Nides and Egyptian ambassador to U.S.:

    "Nides said he understood the difference between the targeted attack in Libya and the way the protest escalated in Egypt."

    9/14—Public Statements

    White House Spokesman Jay Carney during press conference answering question about Benghazi:

    "We have no information to suggest that it was a preplanned attack. The unrest we've seen around the region has been in reaction to a video that Muslims, many Muslims find offensive. And while the violence is reprehensible and unjustified, it is not a reaction to the 9/11 anniversary that we know of, or to U.S. policy."

    E-mail from White House Advisor Benjamin Rhodes:

    Under heading "Goals" he wrote "To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy[.]"

    Return of remains ceremony statement to father of Tyrone Woods recorded in diary:

    "I gave Hillary a hug and shook her hand, and she said we are going to have the filmmaker arrested who was responsible for the death of my son."

    Return of remains ceremony statement to mother of Sean Smith:

    "We were nose-to-nose at the coffin ceremony. She told me it was the fault of the video. I said 'are you sure?' She says 'yes, that's what it was . . . it was the video.'" 9/14—Private Statements

    E-mail from State Department press officer in embassy in Tripoli, Libya: "Colleagues, I mentioned to Andy this morning, and want to share with all of you, our view at Embassy Tripoli that we must be cautious in our local messaging with regard to the inflammatory film trailer, adapting it to Libyan conditions. . . . Relatively few [Facebook comments and tweets] have even mentioned the inflammatory video. So if we post messaging about the video specifically, we may draw unwanted attention to it. And it is becoming increasingly clear that the series of events in Benghazi was much more terrorist attack than a protest which escalated into violence. It is our opinion that in our messaging, we want to distinguish, not conflate, the events in other countries with this well-planned attack by militant extremists. I have discussed this with Charge Hicks and he shares PAS's view."

    9/15—Public Statements

    President's Weekly Address titled "Carrying on the Work of Our Fallen Heroes" muddles Benghazi and protests in other countries:

    "This tragic attack takes place at a time of turmoil and protest in many different countries. I have made it clear that the United States has a profound respect for people of all faiths. We stand for religious freedom. And we reject the denigration of any religion – including Islam."

    9/15—Private Statements

    Secretary Clinton's call with Prime Minister-Elect of Libya:

    Makes no mention of either a protest or the video.

    9/16—Public Statements

    Ambassador Rice on Fox News With Chris Wallace:

    "But we don't see at this point signs this was a coordinated plan, premeditated attack."

    9/16—Private Statements

    Excerpt from Embassy Tripoli Media Report September 16, 2012: "[T]here is evidence that suggests that the second confrontation at the UM mission's safe house could not have happened without insider knowledge or some degree of organization. This goes against statements that the attacks were not carried out by a single group but by an angry multitude protesting[.]"

    9/17—Public Statements

    Excerpt from State Department Daily Press Briefing:

    "Ambassador Rice, in her comments on every network over the weekend, was very clear, very precise, about what our initial assessment of what happened is. . . . I don't have anything to give you beyond that."

    9/17—Private Statements

    Excerpt from e-mail discussion between members of NEA press office about what to say about attack:

    NEA Press Officer Suggested the following language:

    "The currently available information suggests the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests of the US Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault[.]"

    Senior Libya Desk Officer, Near Eastern Affairs Bureau responding to suggested language:

    "I really hope this was revised. I don't think we should go on the record on this."

    9/18—Public Statements

    Excerpt from White House Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney:

    . . . I would point you to what Ambassador Rice said and others have said about what we know thus far about the video and its influence on the protests that occurred in Cairo, in Benghazi and elsewhere."

    9/18—Private Statements

    Deputy Director of CIA Michael Morell in written statement to House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence:

    "The critically important point is that the analysts considered this a terrorist attack from the very beginning."

    E-mail exchange between State Department security officers commenting on news article titled "White House sees no sign Libya attack premeditated":

    DS Agent #30: "Can you believe this?"

    DS Agent: "Was there any rioting in Benghazi reported prior to the attack?"

    DS Agent #30: "Zip, nothing nada"

    9/19—Public Statements

    From "ALDAC"—a worldwide cable—from Secretary Clinton to all U.S. Embassies drafted by Deputy Chief of Staff Jacob Sullivan:

    "Since September 11, 2012, there have been widespread protests and violence against U.S. and some other diplomatic posts across the Muslim world. The proximate cause of the violence was the release by individuals in the United States of the video trailer for a film that many Muslims find offensive. Diplomatic compounds have been breached in several countries including Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, and Yemen. In Benghazi, Libya four U.S. personnel were killed in the violence[.]"

    The administration, including Secretary Clinton, knew that Benghazi was a terrorist attack—from witness accounts, from their understanding of the history of violence in Benghazi, and from the nature of the well-planned, complex attack. Yet, they led the public to believe the video and a protest were to blame in Benghazi.

    9/20—Public Statements

    Excerpt from interview of the President on Univision Town Hall:

    In response to the question, "We have reports that the White House said today that the attacks in Libya were a terrorist attack. Do you have information indicating that it was Iran, or al Qaeda was behind organizing the protests?" the President answered, "[W]e're still doing an investigation[.] . . . What we do know is that the natural protests that arose because of the outrage over the video were used as an excuse by extremists to see if they can also directly harm U.S. interests[.]"

    Secretary Clinton has since blamed her statements on changing information received from U.S. intelligence reports. She and others have claimed that the 10:08 p.m. statement was not meant to ascribe a motive to the attack. Yet, Sullivan knew the morning of September 12th—based on the press release from the embassy in Kabul—that people had heard it exactly that way. Moreover, whether or not the intelligence information changed, Secretary Clinton's public and private statements remained unchanged—publicly tying Benghazi and Cairo together and privately recognizing the violence in Benghazi was a terrorist attack with nothing to do with a protest or video.

    Moreover, to the extent any intelligence analysis incorrectly reported on a protest or a video in connection with Benghazi, Secretary Clinton and other State officials, who knew better, simply ignored them. As just one example, in her conversation September 15, 2012 with the president of Libya, Secretary Clinton made no mention of anything in the CIA talking points that administration officials later claimed were the best assessment available at the time, and those talking points made no mention of a video in connection with Benghazi. In short, Secretary Clinton and the administration knew better than to rely on flawed intelligence reports. Intelligence assessments may have changed. News reports may have changed. But the eye witness accounts remained same—and not one said a protest had occurred. Yet, once Secretary Clinton and Ben Rhodes set the message, the truth became an afterthought

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/the-be...rticle/2003058


    As you can clearly see from the provided time line it wasn't an evolving account on what happened. Clinton and the WH knew from the start the truth that it wasn't a dam you tube vid cuased protest but a planned terroist attack

    they had one story a blatantly knowing lie they told the public and the truth they discussed in private

    I know I will read many post about either beating a dead horse or that this was nothing but a political partisan with hunt but all this is backed up by facts and facts aren't partisan so please save your breath
    Last edited by Vyxn; 2016-06-28 at 02:39 PM.

  2. #2
    Bush lied about WMDs in Iraq which has cost the lives of thousands of American soldiers, adversely affected the lives of tens of thousands more, has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in the region and opened the door for the rise of ISIS.

    But please, tell us how "lying" about how a riot started in Benghazi changes the course of human history.
    "Lack of information on your part does not constitute bias on mine."


  3. #3
    Yawn we still doing this witch hunt? Still no new information and the same old tired attempt to help Clinton lose the election.

    There was 99% less effort put into the real 9-11 then this and they did not even try to prosecute anyone in our govt.

  4. #4
    I am Murloc! WskyDK's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    20 Miles to Texas, 25 to Hell
    Posts
    5,802
    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/us...-benghazi.html
    Interesting timing on your post there Vyxn
    Quote Originally Posted by Vaerys View Post
    Gaze upon the field in which I grow my fucks, and see that it is barren.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by WskyDK View Post
    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/us...-benghazi.html
    Interesting timing on your post there Vyxn
    depends what you call wrong doing did she break any laws no
    did she blatantly lie to the American pubic yes
    but I guess many don't conceder that wrong doing

  6. #6
    Bloodsail Admiral Ooid's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    In the oven baking
    Posts
    1,044
    Ok, so they were lying to the public. Maybe they were trying to spin the story into a "not all Muslims" narrative. Maybe they were being lying because they assumed the public would never find out. maybe it was a conspiracy to kill everyone in the embassy to keep secrets from leaking. What exactly am I supposed to take away from this? The government lies to us, we all know this.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Zan15 View Post
    Yawn we still doing this witch hunt? Still no new information and the same old tired attempt to help Clinton lose the election.

    There was 99% less effort put into the real 9-11 then this and they did not even try to prosecute anyone in our govt.
    and how do you know no new information has been provided? you was able to read the newly released 800 page report that quick?

  8. #8
    Merely a Setback Reeve's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    28,800
    So the best you can do on this "scandal" is "she said it was related to something it wasn't related to?" Big fucking deal.
    'Twas a cutlass swipe or an ounce of lead
    Or a yawing hole in a battered head
    And the scuppers clogged with rotting red
    And there they lay I damn me eyes
    All lookouts clapped on Paradise
    All souls bound just contrarywise, yo ho ho and a bottle of rum!

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Zan15 View Post
    There was 99% less effort put into the real 9-11 then this and they did not even try to prosecute anyone in our govt.
    That's because the government didn't try to cover up what happened on the real 9-11. Cover-ups should be investigated, especially when they're done to try and protect a sitting presidents campaign for another term, regardless of what topic the cover-up is pertaining to.

    I don't live in a fantasy land though, I understand that the reason the GOP is following through on investigating this cover-up is only to help their own political chances. Believe me, if Bush was running again after the war, the Democrats would have done their own investigations to show a cover-up of information leading to the decision to go to war. The only time we have accountability in our government, is when one side wants to beat the other.

  10. #10
    Merely a Setback Reeve's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    28,800
    Quote Originally Posted by Narwal View Post
    That's because the government didn't try to cover up what happened on the real 9-11. Cover-ups should be investigated, especially when they're done to try and protect a sitting presidents campaign for another term, regardless of what topic the cover-up is pertaining to.

    I don't live in a fantasy land though, I understand that the reason the GOP is following through on investigating this cover-up is only to help their own political chances. Believe me, if Bush was running again after the war, the Democrats would have done their own investigations to show a cover-up of information leading to the decision to go to war. The only time we have accountability in our government, is when one side wants to beat the other.
    What was the cover up? That she told the public something that wasn't accurate during the first few hours after an attack? That's sort of how this works.
    'Twas a cutlass swipe or an ounce of lead
    Or a yawing hole in a battered head
    And the scuppers clogged with rotting red
    And there they lay I damn me eyes
    All lookouts clapped on Paradise
    All souls bound just contrarywise, yo ho ho and a bottle of rum!

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Reeve View Post
    So the best you can do on this "scandal" is "she said it was related to something it wasn't related to?" Big fucking deal.
    and the motive why she blatantly lied doesn't concern you at all? It was a systematic cover up to save face to not hurt the reelection bid of Obama

  12. #12
    Legendary! TZucchini's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Wish it was Canada
    Posts
    6,989
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    depends what you call wrong doing did she break any laws no
    did she blatantly lie to the American pubic yes
    Great. So the GOP spent several years, and several millions of dollars, to determine that Hillary probably lied to the public.

    That's just fantastic. Bravo GOP. Bravo.
    Eat yo vegetables

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    and the motive why she blatantly lied doesn't concern you at all?
    Nope. It was to keep flames less enflamed.

    What possible other reason would it have been?
    "When Facism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross." - Unknown

  14. #14
    Merely a Setback Reeve's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    28,800
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    and the motive why she blatantly lied doesn't concern you at all?
    Not really, no. People in power tend to spin stories as damage control after major events. What the hell else is new?

    I mean, what are you thinking is going on here?
    'Twas a cutlass swipe or an ounce of lead
    Or a yawing hole in a battered head
    And the scuppers clogged with rotting red
    And there they lay I damn me eyes
    All lookouts clapped on Paradise
    All souls bound just contrarywise, yo ho ho and a bottle of rum!

  15. #15
    As opposed to Donald Trump who makes statement like "We should kill the terrorists families" Yea, he advocates warcrimes and torture and worse and you're on about Hilary?

    What a fucking joke your views are.

  16. #16
    Legendary! TZucchini's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Wish it was Canada
    Posts
    6,989
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    and the motive why she blatantly lied doesn't concern you at all? It was a systematic cover up to save face to not hurt the reelection bid of Obama
    There's absolutely no evidence for that statement, actually.
    Eat yo vegetables

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by PRE 9-11 View Post
    There's absolutely no evidence for that statement, actually.
    then you explain and give a more reasonable explanation of the motive behind the blatant lies

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Ooid View Post
    Ok, so they were lying to the public. Maybe they were trying to spin the story into a "not all Muslims" narrative. Maybe they were being lying because they assumed the public would never find out. maybe it was a conspiracy to kill everyone in the embassy to keep secrets from leaking. What exactly am I supposed to take away from this? The government lies to us, we all know this.
    It was a cover-up. It was a lie, but moreso it had large ramifications. See, it's been so long no one remembers why this was a big deal.

    It was 2 months until a presidential election which Obama was running for when the attack occurred. Obama's campaign was saying that "Al Qaeda was dead". It was important to them this narrative remain apparent because of his perception as being weak on terrorism. In order to do this, they needed the attack to not be by Al Qaeda, because it was dead in their words, and likewise that it was caused by external forces outside the control of his foreign policy, hence the movie. If it wasn't the movie, then it was going to be attributed to his failed foreign policy.

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Deja Thoris View Post
    As opposed to Donald Trump who makes statement like "We should kill the terrorists families" Yea, he advocates warcrimes and torture and worse and you're on about Hilary?

    What a fucking joke your views are.
    what mention doing something that Obama is already doing? so if Trump is guilty of war crimes for suggesting it what does that make Obama for actually doing it?

  20. #20
    Merely a Setback Reeve's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    28,800
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    and the motive why she blatantly lied doesn't concern you at all? It was a systematic cover up to save face to not hurt the reelection bid of Obama
    To reply to the part of your statement you edited in after I quoted you, how the hell is claiming the attack may have been in response to a video going to help Obama's re-election bid? It's a complete non sequitur. Obama's re-election chances and whether the attack was terrorist or video-related terrorist have absolutely nothing to do with one another.
    'Twas a cutlass swipe or an ounce of lead
    Or a yawing hole in a battered head
    And the scuppers clogged with rotting red
    And there they lay I damn me eyes
    All lookouts clapped on Paradise
    All souls bound just contrarywise, yo ho ho and a bottle of rum!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •