Author Topic: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi  (Read 25989 times)

garebear

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 6491
  • Never question my instincts.
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #225 on: September 19, 2012, 05:39:26 PM »
See Kazan - here is what you need to grasp - Obama needs the story to be about the video since if its about the video - obama can continue his policies in creating pan-islamist caliphate to take over the ME headed by the MB. 

If the issue is obama's policies, then he can not continue his policies as such.

Remember - obama's goal is to allow Iran to get a nuke and for the MB to take over the ME so that they can shift the balance of power to the ME and weaken the USA. 
Obama wants us paying drastically higher oil prices and this is one of the ways he can accomplish that.   
Good point.
G

a_ahmed

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5823
  • Team Nasser
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #226 on: September 19, 2012, 05:54:12 PM »
Oil prices pretty much went up when America engaged in WAR. You can literally see the pattern before. 1999 yugoslavia. 1989-1991 gulf war/etc... vietnam.. then 2001> afghanistan, iraq, then obama's extra wars in pakistan, somalia, yemen, then of course now libya, syria and what these sickos expect iran. Mark my words, we won't be able to GET TO WORK or GET TO GROCERIES or get groceries if America starts ANOTHER war



And they are dropping initially with obama's election and slowdown in the wars, which then accelerated further



Oil barrel pricing is not whats going on... its what the companies in the west are determining as gas pricing. If oil barrel pricing REALLY went up we'd all be fucked and unable to go to work or do our groceries. Then they'd be forced to lower their prices but its such a stinky game!

If you make more war, higher prices will happen. It's that simple.

In Canada when the people complained of gas pricing the corporations responded to the government saying well its their right to set prices anyway they see fit even if oil barrel prices drop.

The thing is each time they increase, they NEVER EVER decrease... I remember when in Canada gas was <49cents a liter!



























Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #229 on: September 20, 2012, 06:40:34 AM »

Kazan

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6799
  • Sic vis pacem, parabellum
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #230 on: September 20, 2012, 06:44:07 AM »
http://www.washingtonguardian.com/revising-libya-story


Obama lied again - go figure. 

Why the fuck does the media have to clarify 99% of what Obama says? Give me a fucking break..........
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #231 on: September 20, 2012, 06:45:43 AM »
Why the fuck does the media have to clarify 99% of what Obama says? Give me a fucking break..........

Because the leftist incompetent media is doing anying to wallpaper over obama's disastrous failures. 

Kazan

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6799
  • Sic vis pacem, parabellum
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #232 on: September 20, 2012, 07:02:01 AM »
Because the leftist incompetent media is doing anying to wallpaper over obama's disastrous failures. 

The guy can't utter a fucking sentence without it having to be revised 50 times. Half the time it is complete bullshit that has to be "walked back".
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #233 on: September 20, 2012, 07:31:46 AM »

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #234 on: September 20, 2012, 07:33:17 AM »
Obama lied again.

[ Invalid YouTube link ]

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #236 on: September 20, 2012, 07:48:59 PM »


State Department was discussing putting Marines in Libya 'sometime in the next five years’
 
Posted By Josh RoginThursday, September 20, 2012 - 1:03 PM Share
 




Prior to the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, the State Department and the Marines Corps had been discussing deploying Marines to guard the U.S. Embassy in the Libyan capital Tripoli "sometime in the next five years," according to the Marine Corps.


The issue of security at U.S. diplomatic outposts in Libya has been front and center as Congress and others begin to investigate whether or not those facilities were sufficiently protected before the attacks that killed Amb. Chris Stevens and three other Americans.
 
The State Department won't discuss the specifics of its security posture in Libya before the attack, but the Marine Corps has briefed congressional staffers on the issue, for example in a Sept. 13 email obtained by The Cable.
 
"Typically, when a new embassy is established, it takes time to grow a new [Marine Corps Embassy Security Group] detachment," wrote Col. Harold Van Opdorp, director of the Marine Senate Liaison office, in the e-mail. "[In conjunction with] the State Department, there is discussion about establishing a detachment in Tripoli sometime in the next five years."
 
The State Department did not respond to questions about how high the discussion of deploying Marines to Libya reached, whether that discussion amounted to a recognition that Marines were needed there, or why it might take five years to set it up. A Marine Corps FAST team was deployed to protect the embassy on Sept. 12 after the attack and could stay there indefinitely.
 
According to the Marines, out of the 285-plus U.S. diplomatic security facilities worldwide, 152 have Marine Corps detachments, primarily to protect the facilities and the classified information they contain.
 
"Overall, the plan is to grow the number of MCESG detachments worldwide to 173. It is also important to note the detachments are charged with protection of the chancery.  Perimeter security is the responsibility of the HN [host nation] police/security forces," Van Opdorp wrote.
 
Many on Capitol Hill are pressing the State Department for details about the exact security arrangements at the Benghazi consulate, contesting the State Department's repeated assertion that there was a "strong" security presence protecting the facility.
 
One congressional aide told The Cable that the State Department initially reported to Congress that the security personnel at the embassy consisted of an unarmed local security force and six armed Libyan government personnel.
 
The Washington Guardian reported Wednesday that the two former Navy SEALs who were killed in the attack were not part of the ambassador's security detail but had unspecified security responsibilities related to the consulate and engaged the attackers after the firefight began.
 
Lawmakers are still trying to get details about the State Department's security posture in Libya and the heads of the Senate Homeland Security Committee have already called on the department to investigate the security failures surrounding the Benghazi attack.
 
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is set to brief Congress on the issue Thursday afternoon. Earlier this week, she defended the security presence in Benghazi, saying, "Let me assure you that our security in Benghazi included a unit of host government security forces, as well as a local guard force of the kind that we rely on in many places around the world."
 
Late Wednesday, Pentagon officials briefed House Armed Services Committee members on the Libya attacks, after which Chairman Buck McKeon (R-CA) said that he was increasingly concerned about the lack of security at U.S. diplomatic posts in Libya.
 
McKeon said it was "inconceivable" that that there were no military personnel stationed in Benghazi, despite a June bomb attack on the consulate, and he said he was "really concerned about the lack of support that the ambassador had, the lack of protection."
 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #238 on: September 21, 2012, 05:13:30 AM »
Spinning over Libya

By Boston Herald Editorial Staff

Friday, September 21, 2012 - Updated 12 hours ago






The U.S. ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, is dead. Native son Glen Doherty, an ex-Navy SEAL, has just been laid to rest. In all four heroes were lost on Sept. 11 and still the Obama administration continues to lie, obfuscate and shade the truth of what happened that day in Benghazi.
 
But for the first time this week, one official has stepped forward to reveal some hard truths.
 
Matthew Olsen, director of the U.S. National Counterterrorism Center, said it is unlikely that Stevens and his team were killed by random protesters.
 


“I would say yes, they were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy,” Olsen told members of the Senate Homeland Security Committee Wednesday. “A number of different elements appear to have been involved in the attack, including individuals connected to militant groups . . . [that] may have made connections to al-Qaida or al-Qaida’s affiliates, including al-Qaida in the Maghreb.”
 
The revelation came after U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice had insisted on at least three Sunday talk show appearances that it was all about that offensive anti-Muslim YouTube video. After Olsen’s testimony White House spokesman Jay Carney said, “It is, I think, self-evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack.”
 
But then intent on having it both ways he added, “We have no information at this point to suggest that this is a significantly [emphasis added] pre-planned attack,” Carney said.
 
And this president has the nerve to criticize Mitt Romney for “shooting first and aiming later.”
 
Even the head of Libya’s interim government has insisted that the attack was premeditated — that there was nothing “spontaneous” about it.
 
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) wasn’t buying the White House spin. Neither was Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.). And neither should the American public.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #239 on: September 21, 2012, 06:25:24 AM »
U.S. probes whether Benghazi attackers had inside help

By Mark Hosenball

WASHINGTON | Thu Sep 20, 2012 5:10pm EDT



 
(Reuters) - U.S. authorities are investigating possible collusion between militants who launched a deadly attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya and locally hired Libyan personnel guarding the facility, three U.S. officials said.
 
So far there is no proof that the attackers, who killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other U.S. officials, were helped by Libyan security personnel hired by the consulate. One official said the Obama administration was playing down this possibility.

However, all the officials said that the question of whether the attackers had inside help or advice was a serious issue in the U.S. investigation into the attack, which occurred on the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States.

Officials discussed the inquiry, still in its initial stages, only on condition of anonymity.

A team of FBI investigators has gone to Libya to lead the investigation.

The question of whether the Benghazi attackers could have been helped by locally hired guards was raised during a hearing on Wednesday by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security.

The panel's top Republican, Senator Susan Collins, asked Matthew Olsen, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, whether there were indications of communications between militants and the Libyan guards prior to the attack.

Olsen said this was an issue "better addressed" in closed briefings that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and National Intelligence Director James Clapper were scheduled to give to Congress on Thursday afternoon.

One possible indication of suspicious activity on the part of Libyan guards at the consulate is a cryptic message which Sean Smith, an American diplomat killed in the Benghazi attack, sent to friends in the online gaming community, in which he was a long-time participant.

A gaming website called The Mittani on September 12 posted what it said was a message Smith sent before his death. In the message, a person using the screen-name "Vile_rat", which The Mittani said was Smith's, the writer said: "assuming we don't die tonight. We saw one of our 'police' that guard the compound taking pictures."

U.S. officials familiar with investigations into the attack had no immediate comment on Smith's purported message.

The State Department has said Blue Mountain Group, a private security company based in Carmarthen, Wales, had a contract related to vetting and hiring local residents to perform security tasks at the Benghazi consulate.

A government contracting database shows the department signed a contract of this nature last May for $387,000, with options raising the value to $783,000. The database entry, which does not name Blue Mountain Group, describes the work the contractor was supposed to do as "Local Guard Program - Benghazi."

Blue Mountain Group's Internet homepage describes it as a security company whose personnel had "many years" service in British special forces, including the Britain's two most elite commando units, the Special Air Service and Special Boat Service.

A person who answered the phone at Blue Mountain Group's offices declined to comment.

British authorities shut their consulate in Benghazi earlier this year after a convoy carrying the British ambassador was attacked by militants with a rocket-propelled grenade. Two bodyguards were injured but Ambassador Dominic Asquith escaped unhurt. British authorities have said that violent Islamic factions are more prevalent in Benghazi and its surrounding area than other parts of Libya.

One group that has been linked to the attack is Ansar al Sharia, or Supporters of Sharia. U.S. officials acknowledged this week that a leader of that militant faction is a former inmate of the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The officials told Reuters that the militant leader, known as Abu Sufian Ibrahim Ahmed bin Qumu, was released from Guantanamo in 2007 by President George W. Bush's administration.

The officials said that it was unclear whether Qumu participated in or helped to direct the Benghazi attack. At least one purported Ansar al Sharia spokesman has denied the group's involvement in the violence.

(Additional reporting by Andrew Quinn and Warren Strobel; Editing by Claudia Parsons)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #240 on: September 21, 2012, 06:54:25 AM »
Republican senators decry ‘useless, worthless' Clinton briefing on Libya attack
 
Posted By Josh RoginThursday, September 20, 2012 - 6:23 PM Share



Several high-level GOP senators emerged from Thursday afternoon's classified briefing with top administration officials incensed that Obama team had offered them no new information and answered none of their questions about the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi that resulted in the death of four Americans.


"That was the most useless, worthless briefing that I have attended in a long time. Believe me, there is more written in every major and minor publication in America about what happened." said Senate Foreign Relations Committee member Bob Corker (R-TN), emerging from the all-senators briefing that included Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Deputy Secretary of Defense Ash Carter, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and Joint Chiefs Vice Chairman Adm. Sandy Winnefeld. "It was like a one-hour filibuster with absolutely not one single bit of new information being brought forth... very disappointing."

Corker said that the briefing was so poorly received by senators that it would spur Congress to push for more independent investigations about the causes of the attack, the perpetrators, the security at the consulate, and the personal security of Amb. Chris Stevens, who died in the attack.
 
"[The briefing], if anything, built far greater distrust about what's happening than just answering questions. It was pretty unbelievable," said Corker.  "In every event, when a serious question was asked, the answer was, ‘It's under investigation.' If I were them I would not have come to the Hill ... I think it is going to cause folks to push for something different, because it was received so poorly."
 
Senate Armed Services Committee ranking Republican John McCain (R-AZ) agreed and said the briefing was indicative of the administration's pattern of not sharing information with Congress about important national security matters. He also said the administration is maintaining its argument that the Benghazi attack was the result of militants taking advantage of protests spurred by an anti-Islam video on the Internet.
 
"I learned nothing in that briefing that I hadn't seen or read in the media," said McCain. "They still are blaming the video and they have a fundamental misunderstanding. It's not the video; it's the Islamists that are pushing this video throughout the world to inflame passions on the part of people of the Muslim faith."
 
McCain highlighted recent statements from administration officials acknowledging that the Benghazi incident was a "terrorist attack" and said that while he didn't know exactly how long it had been pre-planned, there was mounting evidence that significant planning did go into the assault.
 
"It's very likely that there is a terrorist organization, affiliated with al Qaeda, that at least had some role in this attack, which had mortars, heavy equipment, and rocket propelled grenades -- not exactly a spontaneous demonstration," McCain said, citing open source information, not the briefing, which was classified.
 
Senate Foreign Relations Committee member Marco Rubio (R-FL) was also critical of the briefing, and said that the situation in Benghazi was materially different from protests last week in Egypt, Yemen, Sudan, and other places, where protesters cited the video directly.
 
"The only demonstrations in Libya have been anti-terrorist demonstrations. Compare Libya to the other countries -- in Libya, there aren't anti-American protests going on there," Rubio said. "We heard on Sunday that this was all the result of a YouTube video; now it's clear that's not the case. [The administration is] not accurately assessing what happened in Libya, and that's not helping anyone."
 
Democratic senators emerging from the briefing declined to speak with reporters. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said earlier Thursday, "It is self-evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack," but maintained that there was no specific intelligence pointing to planning by the attackers in advance.
 
Deputy Secretary of State Bill Burns was in Tripoli Thursday and met with Libyan President Mohamed Magariaf, Prime Minister Abdul-Rahim al-Keeb, the new Prime Minister-Elect Mustafa Abushagur, and Foreign Minister Ashour Bin Khayal. Burns also delivered remarks at a memorial service for Stevens and the three other Americans killed.
 
"Chris would be the first to remind us that dignity, respect, hope, and freedom are powerful words and noble aspirations -- but translating them into reality takes hard work and great sacrifice. That is the responsibility before all Libyans, and before all of us in America and around the world who remain committed to supporting you in this crucial effort. There are formidable tasks ahead: to build democratic institutions to safeguard human rights for every Libyan; to build security institutions to protect your own citizens and the diplomats who serve here; to build an economy which realizes the full potential of all Libyans," he said.
 
"None of this will be easy. It will take time. There will be more difficult moments along the way. But you have already achieved so much, and so much more is possible. Libyans will have to continue to make hard choices, to live up to your responsibilities, and to ensure that violent extremists don't hijack the promise of your revolution."
 

Kazan

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6799
  • Sic vis pacem, parabellum
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #241 on: September 21, 2012, 06:58:43 AM »
Yet another cover up for the administration, Hilary may have just sunk her chances of a 2016 run with this disaster
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #242 on: September 21, 2012, 07:04:18 AM »
Yet another cover up for the administration, Hilary may have just sunk her chances of a 2016 run with this disaster

The the marxist left failure is actually good thing if it helps collapse the nation and shrink our power. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #243 on: September 21, 2012, 08:05:35 AM »
Obama Donor Heads Organization that Freed Terrorist Accused of Plotting Attack in Benghazi


http://www.menrec.com/2012/09/obama-donor-heads-organization-that.html




There are reports tonight that a radical left-wing organization is responsible for helping to free a former detainee at Guantanamo Bay named Abu Sufian bin Qumu.  Bin Qumu has been cited by multiple sources at Fox News as at least being involved with, and possibly playing the lead role in the attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.  Those attacks resulted in the deaths of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other American diplomats.

Michelle Malkin has revealed that the Center for Constitutional Rights represented Qumu and helped lead the charge in freeing him back in 2007.

Longtime readers know that I’ve extensively covered the troublesome conflict of interest at the Department of Justice involving Attorney General Eric Holder and his former law firm, Covington and Burling, which has represented a score of Gitmo detainees. See my archive of posts on the matter here. Many readers have asked whether the firm represented Abu Sufian bin Qumu, the former Gitmo detainee released in 2007 — and now named as the possible lead plotter in the bloody attacks on our consulate personnel, staff, and private security contractors in Benghazi.
The left-wing organization that helped spring Qumu was the Center for Constitutional Rights. Last April, the group issued an indignant press release painting Qumu as a harmless victim and blasting those concerned about his unrepentant jihadi ways. After a trove of Gitmo documents found their way to Wikileaks and were published by the New York Times, CCR rose to Qumu’s defense and parroted jihadi propaganda that the aggrieved Qumu was actually a friend of the U.S.
President Emeritus of the CCR, Michael Ratner, has long advocated for closing Guantanamo Bay's doors, and for the right of Gitmo detainees within.  In a 2009 article for the Huffington Post, Ratner sings the praises of his organization's efforts, calling the release of two thirds of Gitmo detainees an "amazing success".

While feeling that terrorists caught on the battlefield were privy to the same rights as ordinary Americans, Ratner also repeatedly advocated for the prosecution of senior-level Bush administration officials, calling the detention of those terrorists, like bin Qumu, unlawful.  His op-ed for CNN made a case for prosecuting former President George W. Bush for torture under the War Crimes Act.

In other words, terrorists captured on the battlefield were being held illegally, but the Bush administration officials who were gathering intelligence from those terrorists should be tried for war crimes.

In 2008, Ratner signed an endorsement for Barack Obama in his presidential bid, based on a belief that Obama would best represent the rights of Gitmo detainees.  He and 79 other lawyers said in a joint statement, that they believed Obama was the best choice to roll back the Bush-Cheney administration's detention policies in the war on terrorism and thereby to "restore the rule of law, demonstrate our commitment to human rights, and repair our reputation in the world community."

Ratner, on the same day as endorsing Obama in word, also endorsed through donation, sending $2,300 to the Obama campaign.





Sadly for Ratner, much like other voters in 2008, he became disillusioned with President Obama, stating recently that there is little difference between the humans rights policies of Obama and those of Bush.


The question now is, will Ratner also call for Obama to be charged for war crimes violations? 


And will he admit the danger involved in releasing terrorists that have a high rate of recidivism upon gaining freedom?  His organization played a key role in the release of a man who would later launch a terrorist attack on sovereign U.S. soil. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #244 on: September 21, 2012, 09:32:40 AM »
Libyan Official: ‘We Don’t Have Enough Power’ To Catch US Ambassador’s Killers
September 21, 2012 9:06 AM



An armed man waves his rifle as buildings and cars are engulfed in flames after being set on fire inside the U.S. consulate compound in Benghazi late on Sept. 11, 2012. (credit: STR/AFP/Getty Images)




WASHINGTON (CBSDC) — A Libyan official admitted they will most likely not be able to find the killers behind the deadly attack at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi last week.
 
Interior Ministry spokesman Izzedine Fezzen told CBS News that Libya just doesn’t have the “power” to find the attackers who killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.
 
“We don’t have enough power to catch them,” Fezzen said.

 

Benghazi’s attorney general also told CBS News that they don’t have the “expertise or technology to do a proper investigation.”
 
The FBI will be handling the investigation.
 
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Thursday that the attack on the consulate was a form of terrorism, but during an interview with Univision, President Obama explained that he still doesn’t know if the deadly attack was terrorism.
 
“We’re still doing an investigation and there will be different circumstances in different countries,” Obama told Univision.
 
CBS News has learned that officials are focusing on Islamist militia Ansar al Sharia for the attack.
 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #245 on: September 21, 2012, 11:11:41 AM »
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_US_LIBYA_CLINTON?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-09-21-13-45-17


Hillary finally admitting the truth.  Funny obama, misery be upon him, lied about this too. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #246 on: September 21, 2012, 11:19:40 AM »



Video of Stevens Murder: What Really Happened

Video which some news outlets claimed had showed Libyans trying to save Ambassador Stevens turns out to show the opposite.
By Elad Benari

First Publish: 9/21/2012, 4:43 AM

 



The U.S. Consulate in Benghazi is seen in flames during a protest

Reuters
 

A video released over the weekend, which some news outlets claimed had showed Libyan men trying to save U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens as his body is recovered from the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, has turned out to show the opposite.
 
Arutz Sheva posted a report on the video with the translation given by prominent news sources, but raised immediate doubts as to the authenticity of its interpretation, which have now been shown to be well founded.
 
According to an alternative translation provided to Alex Jones' Infowars by a native Arabic speaker, there is no evidence whatsoever that the men in the video are pleased Stevens is still alive or are trying to rescue him.
 
In fact, the video appears to show the men celebrating the fact that he is dead. Stevens is hauled out of the window and dumped on the floor as the men stick cameras in his face, fist pump the air and chant, “Allahu Akbar” (G-d is great), which is routinely shouted by Islamic radicals following a successful attack.
 
There is no indication whatsoever that the men are attempting to save Stevens’ life or get him to a hospital.
 
Note: Viewer discretion is advised as the video is somewhat graphic. Stevens' body is clearly visible, albeit briefly, about halfway through.
 


Right at the start of the clip, the men are heard shouting “sawer sawer,” meaning “film, film,” hardly the actions of people concerned with saving a dying man, noted Infowars.
 
“At no point does someone say ‘he’s alive’ after the body is pulled out,” the Arabic speaker told the site, adding that the men seem very excited to see Stevens’ body, overwhelmingly suggesting they are reveling in his death, not trying to save his life.
 
The video also contradicts reports that Stevens managed to escape the consulate but was killed either en route or inside a nearby safe house.
 
Reports in other outlets indicated that the one of the men said: "Is there a doctor around? Does anyone know a doctor?” Another person was reported to have checked the pulse of the victim.
 
A report in the New York Times quoted the men as having said, “The man is alive. Move out of the way,” others shout. Just bring him out, man.”
 
“Move, move, he is still alive! Alive, Alive! G-d is great,” the report quoted the men as saying as someone calls to bring Stevens to a car.
 
Infowars noted that the New York Times’ translation of the video appears to have originated from a Twitter user who supported both the U.S.-backed assault in Libya and the attempt to topple President Bashar Assad in Syria by supporting the same Islamic militants.
 
Meanwhile on Thursday, CNN reported that Stevens had said he was on Al-Qaeda’s hit list. A source familiar with Stevens' thinking told CNN that in the months leading up to his death, Stevens had been worried about Al-Qaeda’s stepped-up presence in Libya and mentioned that his name was on an Al-Qaeda hit list.
 
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, however, was quoted by CNN as having said Thursday she has "absolutely no information or reason to believe there is any basis" to suggest that Stevens believed he was on an Al-Qaeda hit list.
 
Also on Thursday the White House, after insisting for eight days that the deadly attack on the consulate in Benghazi was a "spontaneous" act, conceded that it was "self evident" that it was an act of terror. The 9/11 date was seen as not coincidental.
 
As the search continues for those directly involved in the attack on the embassy in Benghazi, it was revealed Thursday that a former inmate of the Gunatanamo Bay detention facility may have been the leader of the attack.
 
Former inmate Sufyan Ben Qumu, one of the leaders of Ansar al-Sharia, a militant Islamist group based in Derna, Libya, has been identified by local officials as being involved in the attack in Benghazi that killed the ambassador.
 
Click here for Phyllis Chesler's analysis.











So the lying ghetto thug lied again!   




Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #247 on: September 21, 2012, 11:58:08 AM »
Posted at 12:11 PM ET, 09/21/2012
Obama’s embassy cover story dissolves

By Jennifer Rubin


It is a measure of how skewed the reporting is and how intellectually inconsistent is most of the “analysis” from the mainstream media that while Mitt Romney’s comment on the embassy attacks held the attention of the press for days (when in fact he had correctly surmised that the administration was trying to make excuses for the embassy attack by expressing regret over an anti-Muslim video), there has been comparatively little concern with a much more critical story: Did the Obama team intentionally lie to voters (or just shoot first and aim later) for a week about what it knew, and did the deaths of four Americans result, in part, from defective security and preparation at the Benghazi consulate? Well, thankfully some reporters are beginning to perk up, although the “opinion makers” are trying their best to bury their heads in the sand, wary, no doubt, about attacking the president and effectively admitting they had failed to grasp the real story.
 
There is ample evidence that the administration screwed up. The Wall Street Journal has a must-read in-depth report that explains what the administration has refused to tell us:
 
The deadly assault on a U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya on Sept. 11 was preceded by a succession of security lapses and misjudgments, compounded by fog-of-battle decisions, that raise questions about whether the scope of the tragedy could have been contained.

U.S. officials issued alerts and ordered security precautions in neighboring Egypt ahead of protests and violence on Sept. 11, but largely overlooked the possibility of trouble at other diplomatic postings in the region.

The State Department chose to maintain only limited security in Benghazi, Libya, despite months of sporadic attacks there on U.S. and other Western missions
 
That is a scandal of the first order, which in any unbiased media environment would be the biggest story of the year and reason to demand a full explanation from the White House. Did Obama and his advisers incorrectly assess the ongoing threat of jihadists, lack sufficient intelligence on the ground in Libya (after chest-thumping about our leading-from-behind strategy in the war) and fail to grasp that blaming a video is only feeding into the mentality of the jihadists (i.e., the West is to blame for violence)?

Now, let’s see how the administration, either by mendacity or incompetence, put out a false story of the attacks, which is now shredding day by day.
 
For a week the White House press secretary, the ambassador to the United Nations and the president told us this was about an anti-Muslim video, was spontaneous and did not reflect on the United States or its policies. Then yesterday, as news reports and lawmakers were decrying this as patently false (and the day after a national security official called the assault a “terrorist” attack), the White House changed its tune. Jay Carney for the first time used “terrorist” in connection with the attack. And the president for the first time conceded that the video was a pretext. The Associated Press reports:


President Barack Obama said Thursday that extremists used an anti-Islam video as an excuse to assault U.S. interests overseas, including an attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya that killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans.
 
The president’s comments came as Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton faced questions from members of the House and Senate about the Sept. 11 attack on the consulate in Benghazi in a series of closed-door classified briefings on Capitol Hill. . . .
 
“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,” the president said at a candidate forum on the Spanish-language network Univision.
 
Asked if that meant al-Qaida, Obama said, “We don’t know yet.”
 
In short, only under pressure from outside reports and lawmakers, who openly disputed the administration’s cover story and blew up over a useless briefing, did the administration try an about-face.
 
There is no way to reconcile the first Obama story (spontaneous, all about the movie) and the new version (terrorism, the movie was a pretext). By definition, terrorists don’t act spontaneously, nor do they get offended by movies. They are “offended” by the West and are at war with us.
 
National security reporter Eli Lake is one of the few to connect the dots and point the finger back to the White House. He writes:


Ten days after the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, the White House’s official story about the incident appears to be falling apart.
 
In the days following the killing of the U.S. ambassador and two ex-Navy SEALs, President Obama and top State Department officials portrayed the attack as a spontaneous reaction to an Internet video depicting the Muslim prophet Mohammad as a lascivious brute. The protests, White House spokesman Jay Carney said last week, were “in response to a video—a film—that we have judged to be reprehensible and disgusting.”
 
It remains an open question whether the administration was intentionally misleading the public so as to avoid the appearance of an administration failure, or was simply making things up without pinning down the facts (what the Democrats accused Romney of doing). Lake quotes a retired CIA official as saying: “I think this is a case of an administration saying what they wished to be true before waiting for all the facts to come in.” That’s the most generous take on what happened.
 
But now that we know the administration was wrong, why no demands for an apology, let alone an explanation? Why do the pundits turn a blind eye after raking Romney over the coals for calling out the administration’s first sniveling responses to the attack?
 
The State Department spokeswoman was doing her best yesterday to be nondefinitive:
 
QUESTION: Before we leave this part of the world, can I just ask you about reporting out there? That’s – a former Guantanamo detainee – detainees – is believed to have been behind the attack in Benghazi.
 
MS. NULAND: I saw that report. Frankly, I don’t have anything for you on it one way or the other. The intelligence community, I expect, will speak to it.
 
That might be the most honest thing said since the murders occurred, namely that the Obama administration doesn’t know very much.
 
There is, as always, a media scandal here, a deliberate effort, conservatives believe, to construct narratives that favor the president. But that is small potatoes compared with the mounting evidence of a scandal in the Obama administration. If the administration was negligent in planning, convinced of its own spin (the war on terror is over!) and politicized national security to aid the president's reelection campaign, that is all a big deal. In any event, it should make for an interesting foreign policy presidential debate.

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Lybian Militias attack U.S. embassy in Benghazi
« Reply #249 on: September 21, 2012, 02:13:30 PM »
What did he lie about?

He lied about the film being the cause of the terrorist attack. 

The film had ZERO do with anything. 

Obama / Hillarys policies and incompetence and delusions are the cause of the problems. 


OBAMA = GLOBAL FAILURE