REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

NY Times reports on Benghazi

POSTED BY: NEWOLDBROWNCOAT
UPDATED: Monday, December 30, 2013 13:22
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 768
PAGE 1 of 1

Monday, December 30, 2013 10:51 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT


http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/28/us/libya-benghazi-nyt-report/index.h
tml?hpt=hp_t4


New York Times report casts doubt on al Qaeda involvement in Benghazi
By Mark Morgenstein and Chelsea J. Carter, CNN
December 29, 2013 -- Updated 0508 GMT (1308 HKT)

Quote:



A New York Times report on the September 11, 2012, attack that killed four Americans -- including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens -- in Benghazi, Libya, calls into question much of what Republicans accusing the Obama administration of a cover-up have said about the incident.

The three main points of contention have been whether the attack was planned, whether it was sparked by an anti-Muslim video, and whether al Qaeda was involved.

However, the Times says, the administration's version, focusing on outrage over the inflammatory video, and first delivered by then-ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice on Sunday morning talk shows five days later, isn't exactly right, either.

"The reality in Benghazi was different, and murkier, than either of those story lines suggests. Benghazi was not infiltrated by Al Qaeda, but nonetheless contained grave local threats to American interests. The attack does not appear to have been meticulously planned, but neither was it spontaneous or without warning signs," according to David D. Kirkpatrick's article in the Times.

It's a conclusion that CNN has drawn in its previous reporting.




There's more.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 30, 2013 11:14 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!



Damn right there's more.

From all I'm hearing, it sounds like the Obama admin was running arms,illegally, with Amb Stevens attempting some under the table negotiations, word got out with the local rivals, and dealings then went sideways.

Hillary and Obama intentionally didn't answer Amb Steven's request for more security, because maybe they felt it would be a sign of disrespect to the Libyan govt ? Or possibly they didn't want to tip off enemies that something important was going on , so they tried instead to keep a low profile.

Either way, Hillary and Obama have so far gotten away with murder. Literally.

ETA - From the article

Quote:

The White House and its allies in Congress have said any confusion and conflicting information in the early hours and days after the assault stemmed from the "fog of war," not any deliberate effort to mislead the public.


Horseshit. You don't fabricate a 100% bogus story about a Youtube video when you have no answers. And yet that's exactly what this admin did. Pushed the video story hard, and often, and even cut their own ad, blaming the video , in a bizarre " apology " of sorts, to be played not in Libya, but Pakistan ?? Seriously, WTF is that all about ?

Full blown incompetence can't even come close to explaining this admin's actions. Nor 'fog of war'. This is a deliberate , albeit desperate shell game, meant to distract and confuse anyone and everyone from bothering to find out the TRUTH. And for good reason. Obama would never have been re-elected if the truth came out. Just like with ObamaCare. THEY KNEW.
`


Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 30, 2013 11:28 AM

BYTEMITE


Um, the NY Times report actually does say that it was at least somewhat about the video, but it wasn't a copy cat of the earlier Egyptian protest and it wasn't spontaneous like the former UN ambassador said.

At this point it seems like all versions of the story have a grain of truth to them. There were many factors that lead to the attack, and many aspects in which the attack and security was mishandled.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 30, 2013 11:32 AM

JONGSSTRAW


"WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?" .... Hillary Clinton (on Benghazi), voted most admired woman in America 2013

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 30, 2013 11:37 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!



Quote:

The GOP suggests the administration removed specific terror references and stuck to the explanation advanced by Rice -- later proved untrue -- that the attack was the result of spontaneous demonstrations over the U.S.-produced film "Innocence of Muslims," which contained scenes some Muslims considered blasphemous.


It wasn't about the video.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 30, 2013 11:41 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT


Yannow, Byte, I figured that the Rap would respond exactly as he did, very quickly, and by cherry-picking the tiny bit that supports him in an attack on Obama.

This fits in with the discussion of the Rap's real identity on the other thread. The Rap is really an alias for Dick Cheney. It fits with all the accumulated facts as described there and other places-- guy with a lot of money, RWA, never had to actually work at anything, hates Obama, opposes global warming, approves of oil drilling everywhere, wanted to clobber Iraq, Afghanistan and now Iran and Syria; and cherry picks his sources to back his existing position, while ignoring any facts they might include. He's probably a crappy marksman as well.

You read it here first...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 30, 2013 11:50 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

The GOP suggests the administration removed specific terror references and stuck to the explanation advanced by Rice -- later proved untrue -- that the attack was the result of spontaneous demonstrations over the U.S.-produced film "Innocence of Muslims," which contained scenes some Muslims considered blasphemous.


It wasn't about the video.



*Sigh*

Context, AU. Read the NYTimes report and know what it is claiming first.

Quote:

And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.


Quote:

The violence, though, also had spontaneous elements. Anger at the video motivated the initial attack. Dozens of people joined in, some of them provoked by the video and others responding to fast-spreading false rumors that guards inside the American compound had shot Libyan protesters. Looters and arsonists, without any sign of a plan, were the ones who ravaged the compound after the initial attack, according to more than a dozen Libyan witnesses as well as many American officials who have viewed the footage from security cameras.


http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2013/benghazi/

It was partly about the video. It was about a lot of things.

What you refer to that was proven untrue was that the attack was a copy-cat of a demonstration in Egypt over the video. It was not. The attack was an entirely different animal, with different factors, different groups, and different goals, but was fomented by a typical amount of outrage and distrust on their part, and broken promises and attitudes on our part.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 30, 2013 12:04 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


First, I didn't " cherry pick " anything. I took a quote from the LINKED CNN piece, which clearly stated that the story pushed by Susan Rice and the Admin was proven FALSE.

Also, in interview given at the coffee shop, the information given was " contradictory " , which means they really aren't sure what to believe.

The date was Sept. 11th. The US ( and other nations ) had pissed off a lot of folks in Libya, as if they needed any reason to attack a compound. Concluding that it was the video that sent them over, it laughable. I mean, really effing laughable.

Quote:

"The Benghazi attacks also took place in a context in which the global terrorism threat as most often represented by al Qaeda (AQ) is fragmenting and increasingly devolving to local affiliates and other actors who share many of AQ's aims, including violent anti-Americanism, without necessarily being organized or operated under direct AQ command and control," the report said.


See, basically, they were already pissed.

Quote:


The Times report zeroes in on militia leader Abu Khattala as well as the like-minded Islamist militia Ansar al Sharia ...Khattala's narrative of the events that night was sometimes unclear and, at times, seemed to be contradictory, Damon said.




So,I'm going on the linked article, from CNN, on the report. The original NYT report should have been linked, instead of the CNN article ON the report. But even so, I went with what was posted, and didn't in the least bit 'cherry pick' anything. I supported the position given, with the actual whole paragraph.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 30, 2013 12:12 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!



Quote:

What you refer to that was proven untrue was that the attack was a copy-cat of a demonstration in Egypt over the video. It was not. The attack was an entirely different animal, with different factors, different groups, and different goals, but was fomented by a typical amount of outrage and distrust on their part, and broken promises and attitudes on our part.



That's not what the Obama admin told us though.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 30, 2013 12:50 PM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

That's not what the Obama admin told us though.


Right, exactly, which is why she was wrong. But the video being a factor is not itself incorrect.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 30, 2013 1:05 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
Quote:

That's not what the Obama admin told us though.


Right, exactly, which is why she was wrong. But the video being a factor is not itself incorrect.



It was out there, no question. In fact, it had been " out there ", on YouTube, for a couple or more months. But as THE catalyst for the attack ? Sketchy,at best. If anything, it seems like a great distraction and cover story to me. One the admin bought, too. Hook, line and sinker. And then pushed onto a starry eyed American public. Right before the 2012 election.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 30, 2013 1:11 PM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT


Quote:

Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
Quote:

That's not what the Obama admin told us though.


Right, exactly, which is why she was wrong. But the video being a factor is not itself incorrect.



Byte, that's WAY too sophisticated an analysis for Rap.
His mind is bottled, remember. (See that other thread.) It can't get past, "Obama BAD. Obama LIE." It's having a lot of trouble with, "Hillary BAD, TOO. Hillary LIE, TOO." It would ignore even that concept, except that it wants to get started NOW on the "Hillary BAD in 2016," campaign.

The notion that there might be more than one contributing cause, more than one factor involved, is WAY beyond him.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 30, 2013 1:22 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


NOBC - glad you've at least learned a new phrase to use. Good boy.

But you seem to have completely glossed over my reply to BYTE and just gone about your merry, carrying on w/ your own, twisted fantasy of who I am and what I think.

This President and Hillary did lie, though, on this matter. If it doesn't bother you that they did, then fine. Others may not see it as you.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

FFF.NET SOCIAL