Quote:

---

There were two attacks in Benghazi that night. The first was a spontaneous response to the anti-Islamic film that had caused similar protests in Cairo and elsewhere. That is important: there would have been no terrorist attack if the film hadn’t provided the opportunity for mayhem. Most of the protesters were members of local salafist militias, who quickly realized that the security at the consulate was nearly nonexistent. They organized a second attack with heavier weapons, including mortars. And so we have four essential facts that do not contradict one another:

1. the attack was a spontaneous reaction to the film

2. it was followed by an organized attack.

3. both attacks were populated and organized by terrorist militias, with loose ties to Al-Qaeda.

4. security at the consulate was inadequate

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kpo:
There were two attacks in Benghazi that night.

---

Quote:

---

Little sign of Libyan probe into consulate attack

BENGHAZI, Libya (AP) - After more than two months, Libya's investigation into the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi appears in limbo. Key security commanders and witnesses say they were never questioned. No suspects have been named, and gunmen seen participating in the assault walk freely in the eastern Libyan city.

Hanging over the probe is a fear of reprisals from extremist militiamen. Farag al-Fazani, a young commander of a Libyan security force commissioned to protect the U.S. post at the time of the Sept. 11 attack, says he sees militants he recognizes from that chaotic night.

They recognize him too.

"I get death threats by phone (saying) you are an infidel and spilling your blood is permitted," said al-Fazani. "No one can protect me. I see them and they know me."

The dangers in the city are clear. On Wednesday, the head of one of the city's security agencies, National Security chief Col. Farag el-Dersi, was shot to death by three attackers as he headed home from work. It is the latest in a string of killings of officials with no word on who is behind them, though there is no indication they are connected to the investigation.

U.S. and Libyan leaders have sworn to hunt down those who carried out the Sept. 11 assault, in which gunmen blasted their way into the consulate compound after nightfall and killed four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens. Most officials and witnesses have blamed fighters from Ansar al-Shariah, an Islamic extremist militia in the city. But much remains unexplained _ including what was the attack's motive, why did Libyan security pull back from the consulate and even what time the attack started, much less the bigger questions of whether outside terror groups like al-Qaida had a hand.

The FBI, which sent a team to Tripoli immediately after the attack to work with Libyan investigators, has said nothing about its findings so far. At FBI headquarters in Washington, spokesman Michael Kortan on Wednesday declined to comment on the Libyan's conduct of the probe.

At United Nations headquarters in New York, U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice told reporters, "You know the FBI and the State Department's Accountability Review Board are conducting investigations as we speak. And they will look into all aspects of this heinous terrorist attack, to provide what will become the definitive accounting of what occurred."

"None of us will rest, none of us will be satisfied until we have the answers, and the terrorists responsible for this attack are brought to justice," she said.

From the Libyan side, there has been little sign of an investigation.

Numerous senior security officials in the city approached by The Associated Press knew nothing about the probe, and none said they had been questioned by investigators. The commander of Joint Operation Room who oversaw the security forces' reaction during the attack said he sent a report to the ruling General National Congress but received no feedback and had not been contacted by investigators.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Intelligence Director James Clapper Alters Benghazi Story from Earlier Sworn Testimony on al Qaeda

CBS News

(CBS News) WASHINGTON - CBS News has learned that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) cut specific references to "al Qaeda" and "terrorism" from the unclassified talking points given to Ambassador Susan Rice on the Benghazi consulate attack - with the agreement of the CIA and FBI. The White House or State Department did not make those changes.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
So Jongs, you're just going to fall in line w/ the MSM , who wants to completely ignore the whole part where an Obama appointee chose to remove the actual reason for the attack in the first place, and instead give Ms Rice the talking points of a video, for no real reason, what so ever ?

---

Quote:

---

But, as unwarranted and invasive as this all is, there is some sweet justice in having the stars of America's national security state destroyed by the very surveillance system which they implemented and over which they preside. As Trevor Timm of the Electronic Frontier Foundation put it this morning: "Who knew the key to stopping the Surveillance State was to just wait until it got so big that it ate itself?"

It is usually the case that abuses of state power become a source for concern and opposition only when they begin to subsume the elites who are responsible for those abuses. Recall how former Democratic Rep. Jane Harman - one of the most outspoken defenders of the illegal Bush National Security Agency (NSA) warrantless eavesdropping program - suddenly began sounding like an irate, life-long ACLU privacy activist when it was revealed that the NSA had eavesdropped on her private communications with a suspected Israeli agent over alleged attempts to intervene on behalf of AIPAC officials accused of espionage. Overnight, one of the Surveillance State's chief assets, the former ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, transformed into a vocal privacy proponent because now it was her activities, rather than those of powerless citizens, which were invaded.

With the private, intimate activities of America's most revered military and intelligence officials being smeared all over newspapers and televisions for no good reason, perhaps similar conversions are possible. Put another way, having the career of the beloved CIA Director and the commanding general in Afghanistan instantly destroyed due to highly invasive and unwarranted electronic surveillance is almost enough to make one believe not only that there is a god, but that he is an ardent civil libertarian.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
And those bastards will be replaced with new bastards. Wheel never stops turning.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
And those bastards will be replaced with new bastards. Wheel never stops turning.

---

I disagree, a big part of my intentions is to wreck the social and political structures which create such bastards in the first place, which strip empathy and humanity away from our children in the name of raising them, and while lookin at it in the here-and-now it seems a struggle, looking back down the past twenty years or so we've made amazing strides on it.

See, that was Robespierres mistake, every time he cleaned house, ya just got more bastards, as you say - he kept treating the symptoms instead of the root cause, which can be helpful and satisfying, but doesn't never address the underlying problem, which is the creating of people so mentally and emotionally screwed up they're capable of such things.

Doubly ironic that ole Robespierre wound up one of those bastards himself, becoming in the end the very thing he strived against cause his ambition blinded him....
It's prolly a good thing that I am such a slacker, then.


-F

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by m52nickerson:
Well the rigth does get upset when reality slams them in the face.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by m52nickerson:
Well the rigth does get upset when reality slams them in the face.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.
...and now a Fundie!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=53359

---

Quote:

---

Fox: When you have four people dead including the first US ambassador in more than 30 years, how do you call that hype?

Ricks: How many security contractors died in Iraq, do you know?

Fox: I don't.

Ricks: No, nobody does, because nobody cared. We know that several hundred died, but there was never an official count done, of security contractors dead in Iraq. So when I see this focus on what was essentially a small fire fight, I think number one, I've covered a lot of fire fights, it's impossible to figure out what happens in them sometimes. And second, I think that the emphasis on Benghazi has been extremely political partly because Fox was operating as a wing of the Republican party.

Fox: All right. Tom Ricks, thanks very much for joining us today.

Ricks: You're welcome.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by m52nickerson:
Well the rigth does get upset when reality slams them in the face.

---

And of what " reality" do you speak ?

How Susan Rice, instead of merely , honestly, admitting that she wasn't sure as to the specifics of the attack, chose instead to promote a lie, about a video , which no one had seen, while it had been on youtube for several weeks, prior to 9/11 ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:



As Geezer keeps pointing out, it's not a lie if SHE believed it when she said it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:

They are openly praising Sen. John Kerry to the moon as a better appointee. Apparently he improved drastically since 2004, since he wasn't getting many kudos from them then. What they really mean, of course, is "We don't give a hoot who the Secretary of State is, but we would sure like a special election for a Senate seat in Massachusetts since we think Scott Brown could win it."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by m52nickerson:
Well the rigth does get upset when reality slams them in the face.

---

And of what " reality" do you speak ?

How Susan Rice, instead of merely , honestly, admitting that she wasn't sure as to the specifics of the attack, chose instead to promote a lie, about a video , which no one had seen, while it had been on youtube for several weeks, prior to 9/11 ?

---

As Geezer keeps pointing out, it's not a lie if SHE believed it when she said it.

As to the idea that "no one had seen" the video in question, the U.S. Embassy in Cairo would disagree, since it was the seen of some serious protests the exact same day.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by m52nickerson:
Well the rigth does get upset when reality slams them in the face.

---

And of what " reality" do you speak ?

How Susan Rice, instead of merely , honestly, admitting that she wasn't sure as to the specifics of the attack, chose instead to promote a lie, about a video , which no one had seen, while it had been on youtube for several weeks, prior to 9/11 ?

---

As Geezer keeps pointing out, it's not a lie if SHE believed it when she said it.

As to the idea that "no one had seen" the video in question, the U.S. Embassy in Cairo would disagree, since it was the seen of some serious protests the exact same day.

---

2nd part first.. the "exact same day", that day being.. Sept. 11th ?

As for Susan Rice, I think she did what she was told. ( And was sent out, as a sacrificial lamb, instead of Hillary, for exactly that reason )

While it may not be a 'lie', it still shows great incompetence, not only on her part, but in the part of those who KNOWINGLY supplied her w/ suspect intel.

If we weren't certain on the details, then don't speculate. That's pretty SOP for just about any intel issue, or investigation. But that's exactly what happened.

Why? I think it's self evident why.

The Admin needed a diversion, to track the story off of what was happening, which would ruin the 'Arab Spring! - Everyone LOVES us now ! ' scenario ', and they sent out the UN amb, instead of Hillary, because they KNEW that anyone who took issue w/ Susan Rice could easily be dismissed as being a 'racist' or 'anti-woman', and that's exactly the card which the WH dealt, as soon as it became clear that their story was full of hokum.



" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

---