LOL!
i wonder if pickering and mullen would be willing to tesitfy
y'know, under oath
Mullens and Pickering already testified to a Senate committee back in December...but they said they wanted to testify at the oversight committee hearings too, but Issa won't let them.
cnn: "on september 10, at least 18 hours before the attack, al qaeda leader ayman al zawahiri called for attacks on americans in libya to avenge the death of al libi"
on september 14, aqap "released a statement arguing the attack was revenge for the death of abu yahya al libi, a senior al qaeda operative, in pakistan in june 2012," notes cnn
in other words, it wasn't a video, it was a
drone
Sources: 3 al Qaeda operatives took part in Benghazi attack - CNN.com
coincidence?
No more of a coincidence than the protests in Cairo against the video just hours before the attack in Benghazi. Hicks was watching it on TV when Ambassador Stevens called to tell him the SMC was under attack....coincidence?
"...As the Intelligence Community collects and analyzes more information related to the attack, our understanding of the event continues to evolve. In the immediate aftermath, there was information that led us to assess that the attack began spontaneously following protests earlier that day at our embassy in Cairo. We provided that initial assessment to Executive Branch officials and members of Congress, who used that information to discuss the attack publicly and provide updates as they became available. Throughout our investigation we continued to emphasize that information gathered was preliminary and evolving...."
Furthermore, it was Muslim extremists that attacked the compound, not Al Qaeda....
"...As we learned more about the attack, we revised our initial assessment to reflect new information indicating that it was a deliberate and organized terrorist attack carried out by extremists. It remains unclear if any group or person exercised overall command and control of the attack, and if extremist group leaders directed their members to participate. However, we do assess that some of those involved were linked to groups affiliated with, or sympathetic to al-Qa'ida. We continue to make progress, but there remain many unanswered questions. As more information becomes available our analysis will continue to evolve and we will obtain a more complete understanding of the circumstances surrounding the terrorist attack....read..."
Statement by the Director of Public Affairs for ODNI, Shawn Turner, on the intelligence related to the terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya
why did ambassador rice duplicitously point to a video when even the sterilized talking points, scrubbed assiduously the nite before by state spokespeople on behalf of "building leadership," dared not charge that bridge so far?
The Benghazi Talking Points | The Weekly Standard
I don't think Rice was trying to cover anything up. She was given those talking points...so the person to ask might be Gen. Patraeus...who was head of CIA at the time. Unfortunately, his testimony was in private...BUT..... Rep. King said Patraeus contradicted himself during the private testimony from statements he had previously made....
"...He also stated that he thought all along he made it clear that there were significant terrorist involvement, and
that is not my recollection of what he told us on September 14," King said....<snip>....
King said that unclassified talking points about the attack prepared by the CIA for use by lawmakers, and apparently relied on by Rice, originally pointed specifically to al Qaeda involvement, but were edited before being cleared for use.
"The original talking points were much more specific about al Qaeda involvement. And the final ones just said, ‘indications of extremists,'" King said.
He quoted Petraeus as saying that officials did not realize the significance of the change at the time, "and that for an unclassified statement, this was acceptable."
'BLAME IT ON US' .....read....."
In Benghazi testimony, Petraeus says al Qaeda role known early | Reuters
why was ambassador hicks directed NOT to talk to congressman chaffetz in libya?
Because Chaffetz is a political hack and not interested in the truth. One minute he's praising the ARB report because it agreed with his agenda and then the next minute he's condeming it because it didn't and then the next minute he's praising it again......
Watch A GOP Rep Change His Position On Libya Review Three Times In 10 Seconds | ThinkProgress .
and why in this white house must expediency always trump national interest, security and the truth?
I dunno, why did Romney verbally assault the United States just hours after the attack and before all the information was in? Kinda makes you wonder who our real enemies are?
the e-warriors are back at it:
Exclusive: Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror Reference - ABC News
seeya at the committee, comrades bring a sofabed, it's gonna be a while
lol Funny you should say that because Chaffetz does sleep on a sofabed in his office...mainly because he's too cheap to rent an apartment.
Here's a good time line for the aftermath of Benghazi.....
UPDATED: What Everyone Should Know About The Benghazi Attack | ThinkProgress
The political hacks on FoxNews didn't waste anytime spewing out the misinformation, did they?
