Petraeus Testifies That He Knew Benghazi Was Terrorism Immediately But CIA Info Was

[Zoom-boing]

From Associated Press:

The recently resigned spy chief explained that references to terrorist groups suspected of carrying out the violence were removed from the public explanation of what caused the attack so as not to tip off the groups that the U.S. intelligence community was on their trail, according to lawmakers who attended the private briefings.

Petraeus: U.S. didn't reveal role of terrorists in Benghazi to avoid tipping them off - San Jose Mercury News

/thread.

Has anyone caught those responsible for the Benghazi attack? If not, why is it ok to say terrorist now but not when it happened? Why is Petraeus stating that from the beginning he claimed it to be a terrorist attack and yet King and other lawmakers recall that Petraeus claimed it to be a spontaneous attack due to the film? Was Petraeus lying then, is he lying now, is King/others lying about what Petraeus originally stated, are they lying now? Hmmm . . . . many unanswered questions remain.

 

[Steelplate]

The day you start burining in hell should be a world holiday.

So when does Obamination get arrested? Before or after he takes the oath of office again.

I'm sure they'll let him and his wife waste about $250K partying it up before he gets arrested....

When you STFU.

how Christian of you.

 

[Care4all]

So it still begs the question--the question that nobody at the press conference this week had the balls to ask--who told Ambassador Rice, days after the attack on Benghazi, to go out and tell a bald faced lie on five different Sunday news programs? Who changed the story? And why? And what was she promised in return for doing it? (And if she didn't know the truth by that time she is certainly too naive and clueless to be in that position and certainly is not competent for a promotion. And if she did know the truth and still put out the lie as adamently as she did, she is too dishonest for that position and/or promotion.)

The spectacle of President Obama defending his pretty, delicate U.N. Ambassador at the press conference, and the press letting him get away with that, was an abomination to journalistic integrity. Can you imagine President Bush getting away with complaining that the press or the Democrats were unfairly picking on John Bolton?

Perhaps you should try reading something other than the very right wing media that lied to you and fooled you about a Romney landslide, that has also put the right wing in to a rabid frenzy over this, and you may get some answers foxfire?

WASHINGTON -- Ex-CIA Director David Petraeus told lawmakers Friday that classified intelligence showed the deadly raid on the U.S. Consulate in Libya was a terrorist attack, but that the administration withheld the suspected role of specific al-Qaida affiliates to avoid tipping off the terrorist groups.

The recently resigned spy chief explained that references to terrorist groups suspected of carrying out the violence were removed from the public explanation of what caused the attack so as not to tip off the groups that the U.S. intelligence community was on their trail, according to lawmakers who attended the private briefings.

Petraeus also said it initially was unclear whether militants infiltrated a demonstration to cover their attack.

The retired four-star general addressed the House and Senate intelligence committees in back-to-back, closed-door hearings as questions persist over what the Obama administration knew in the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks and why their public description did not match intelligence agencies' assessments.
After the hearings, lawmakers who questioned Petraeus said he testified that the CIA's draft talking points written in response to the assault on the diplomat post in Benghazi that killed four Americans referred to it as a terrorist attack. But Petraeus told the lawmakers that reference was removed from the final version, although he wasn't sure which federal agency deleted it.

Democrats said Petraeus made it clear the change was not done for political reasons during President Barack Obama's re-election campaign. "The general was adamant there was no politicization of the process, no White House interference or political agenda," said Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif. "He completely debunked that idea."

Petraeus: U.S. didn't reveal role of terrorists in Benghazi to avoid tipping them off - San Jose Mercury News

Are you one of the ones that also believes the Ambassador was raped and dragged through the streets in joy by the perps?

Are you also one of the ones that claims Obama was watching and rubbing his hands together in GLEE as these 4 were killed?

Are you also one of the ones that said Obama told them to stand down and let themselves be killed?

Are you also one of the ones who claimed no help was sent?

I hope you were not fooled by the beloved right wing media propaganda machine and if you were you've learned a lesson from it......


Now, can we get down to catching all the perps so justice can prevail instead of spending time on this faux right wing rabid 'GOTCHA mr president' propaganda?

 

[Freewill]

Benghazi will be Obama's legacy.

betraus was the head of CIA. surely it is his legacy also.

Agreed, the CIA does not appear to know exactly what they are doing. That is why a CIA kill list acted upon by the POTUS is so dangerous, in my opinion.

Of course to believe Petraeus he did report the right information to the WH. Of course Petraeus is a cheat and a liar so whom are we to believe? I guess we can only go on the facts as known.

 

[Freewill]

From Associated Press:

The recently resigned spy chief explained that references to terrorist groups suspected of carrying out the violence were removed from the public explanation of what caused the attack so as not to tip off the groups that the U.S. intelligence community was on their trail, according to lawmakers who attended the private briefings.

Petraeus: U.S. didn't reveal role of terrorists in Benghazi to avoid tipping them off - San Jose Mercury News

/thread.

Has anyone caught those responsible for the Benghazi attack? If not, why is it ok to say terrorist now but not when it happened? Why is Petraeus stating that from the beginning he claimed it to be a terrorist attack and yet King and other lawmakers recall that Petraeus claimed it to be a spontaneous attack due to the film? Was Petraeus lying then, is he lying now, is King/others lying about what Petraeus originally stated, are they lying now? Hmmm . . . . many unanswered questions remain.

Your questions about Petraeus is EXACTLY why his affair was made known. This is typical Obama. He has raised doubt about Petraeus' honesty. Quite predictable in so doing.

 

[Foxfyre]

So it still begs the question--the question that nobody at the press conference this week had the balls to ask--who told Ambassador Rice, days after the attack on Benghazi, to go out and tell a bald faced lie on five different Sunday news programs? Who changed the story? And why? And what was she promised in return for doing it? (And if she didn't know the truth by that time she is certainly too naive and clueless to be in that position and certainly is not competent for a promotion. And if she did know the truth and still put out the lie as adamently as she did, she is too dishonest for that position and/or promotion.)

The spectacle of President Obama defending his pretty, delicate U.N. Ambassador at the press conference, and the press letting him get away with that, was an abomination to journalistic integrity. Can you imagine President Bush getting away with complaining that the press or the Democrats were unfairly picking on John Bolton?

Perhaps you should try reading something other than the very right wing media that lied to you and fooled you about a Romney landslide, that has also put the right wing in to a rabid frenzy over this, and you may get some answers foxfire?

WASHINGTON -- Ex-CIA Director David Petraeus told lawmakers Friday that classified intelligence showed the deadly raid on the U.S. Consulate in Libya was a terrorist attack, but that the administration withheld the suspected role of specific al-Qaida affiliates to avoid tipping off the terrorist groups.

The recently resigned spy chief explained that references to terrorist groups suspected of carrying out the violence were removed from the public explanation of what caused the attack so as not to tip off the groups that the U.S. intelligence community was on their trail, according to lawmakers who attended the private briefings.

Petraeus also said it initially was unclear whether militants infiltrated a demonstration to cover their attack.

The retired four-star general addressed the House and Senate intelligence committees in back-to-back, closed-door hearings as questions persist over what the Obama administration knew in the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks and why their public description did not match intelligence agencies' assessments.
After the hearings, lawmakers who questioned Petraeus said he testified that the CIA's draft talking points written in response to the assault on the diplomat post in Benghazi that killed four Americans referred to it as a terrorist attack. But Petraeus told the lawmakers that reference was removed from the final version, although he wasn't sure which federal agency deleted it.

Democrats said Petraeus made it clear the change was not done for political reasons during President Barack Obama's re-election campaign. "The general was adamant there was no politicization of the process, no White House interference or political agenda," said Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif. "He completely debunked that idea."

Petraeus: U.S. didn't reveal role of terrorists in Benghazi to avoid tipping them off - San Jose Mercury News

Are you one of the ones that also believes the Ambassador was raped and dragged through the streets in joy by the perps?

Are you also one of the ones that claims Obama was watching and rubbing his hands together in GLEE as these 4 were killed?

Are you also one of the ones that said Obama told them to stand down and let themselves be killed?

Are you also one of the ones who claimed no help was sent?

I hope you were not fooled by the beloved right wing media propaganda machine and if you were you've learned a lesson from it......


Now, can we get down to catching all the perps so justice can prevail instead of spending time on this faux right wing rabid 'GOTCHA mr president' propaganda?

Perhaps if you were less intent on insulting other members, you would read more carefully what they said. And take in the whole big picture?

I have not accused Obama of anything other than furthering a lie and then back pedaling on it and refusing to answer the difficult questions put to him. The rest I put at the feet of the press for their cowardice or partisanship that keeps them from asking the questions they should be asking.

As for 'classified information', the word was out within 24 hours that the terrorists had used rocket-propelled grenades, hand grenadess, diesel canisters, and mortars. Anybody with a brain knew that was not the work of a spontaneous angry mob. If people watching the news could figure that out, do you honestly think our best intelligence experts were incapable of figuring that out? And do you honestly believe the President would not have been advised? That the Secretary of State who was responsible for that consulate was not adivsed? The at the U.N. Ambassador was not advised? If they didn't know, they are all too incompetent to be in their respective positions. We are still seeing the media sweep under the rug the damning evidence that the consulate personnel themselves were asking for more security and knew they were in trouble, and it was not provided to them. That is also inexcusable.

And then for them to continue to assume the American people are such idiots that they would believe the 'spontaneous mob outraged over a video' story and they all promoted that version of the facts is also inexcusable.

As somebody previously posted, none of the perpetrators have yet been apprehended. Nevertheless, all this stuff isn't so classified any more and they have been forced to back off the politically correct but intentional lie of the 'spontaneous mob' story. If it isn't necessary to classify the truth now, it wasn't necessary when they sent the U.N. Ambassador out to five different Sunday television shows to spread what they knew was a lie. When the following day the President promoted the lie and then again days later at the U.N. When Hillary Clinton promoted the lie in her address for benefit of the press. This didn't meet the smell test from the very beginning.

And only those who are so ideologically blinded or so star struck they won't accept any criticism of the annointed ones will continue to excuse it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So it still begs the question--the question that nobody at the press conference this week had the balls to ask--who told Ambassador Rice, days after the attack on Benghazi, to go out and tell a bald faced lie on five different Sunday news programs? Who changed the story? And why? And what was she promised in return for doing it? (And if she didn't know the truth by that time she is certainly too naive and clueless to be in that position and certainly is not competent for a promotion. And if she did know the truth and still put out the lie as adamently as she did, she is too dishonest for that position and/or promotion.)

The spectacle of President Obama defending his pretty, delicate U.N. Ambassador at the press conference, and the press letting him get away with that, was an abomination to journalistic integrity. Can you imagine President Bush getting away with complaining that the press or the Democrats were unfairly picking on John Bolton?

Perhaps you should try reading something other than the very right wing media that lied to you and fooled you about a Romney landslide, that has also put the right wing in to a rabid frenzy over this, and you may get some answers foxfire?

WASHINGTON -- Ex-CIA Director David Petraeus told lawmakers Friday that classified intelligence showed the deadly raid on the U.S. Consulate in Libya was a terrorist attack, but that the administration withheld the suspected role of specific al-Qaida affiliates to avoid tipping off the terrorist groups.

The recently resigned spy chief explained that references to terrorist groups suspected of carrying out the violence were removed from the public explanation of what caused the attack so as not to tip off the groups that the U.S. intelligence community was on their trail, according to lawmakers who attended the private briefings.

Petraeus also said it initially was unclear whether militants infiltrated a demonstration to cover their attack.

The retired four-star general addressed the House and Senate intelligence committees in back-to-back, closed-door hearings as questions persist over what the Obama administration knew in the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks and why their public description did not match intelligence agencies' assessments.
After the hearings, lawmakers who questioned Petraeus said he testified that the CIA's draft talking points written in response to the assault on the diplomat post in Benghazi that killed four Americans referred to it as a terrorist attack. But Petraeus told the lawmakers that reference was removed from the final version, although he wasn't sure which federal agency deleted it.

Democrats said Petraeus made it clear the change was not done for political reasons during President Barack Obama's re-election campaign. "The general was adamant there was no politicization of the process, no White House interference or political agenda," said Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif. "He completely debunked that idea."

Petraeus: U.S. didn't reveal role of terrorists in Benghazi to avoid tipping them off - San Jose Mercury News

Are you one of the ones that also believes the Ambassador was raped and dragged through the streets in joy by the perps?

Are you also one of the ones that claims Obama was watching and rubbing his hands together in GLEE as these 4 were killed?

Are you also one of the ones that said Obama told them to stand down and let themselves be killed?

Are you also one of the ones who claimed no help was sent?

I hope you were not fooled by the beloved right wing media propaganda machine and if you were you've learned a lesson from it......


Now, can we get down to catching all the perps so justice can prevail instead of spending time on this faux right wing rabid 'GOTCHA mr president' propaganda?

In the process of removing specific information about who attacked the consulate they decided to make up a story about it being about a video, even though everyone on the entire fracking planet knew it was a terror attack. And, for some reason, normally intelligent people, like you, think they did the right thing.

 

[Wehrwolfen]

So it still begs the question--the question that nobody at the press conference this week had the balls to ask--who told Ambassador Rice, days after the attack on Benghazi, to go out and tell a bald faced lie on five different Sunday news programs? Who changed the story? And why? And what was she promised in return for doing it? (And if she didn't know the truth by that time she is certainly too naive and clueless to be in that position and certainly is not competent for a promotion. And if she did know the truth and still put out the lie as adamently as she did, she is too dishonest for that position and/or promotion.)

The spectacle of President Obama defending his pretty, delicate U.N. Ambassador at the press conference, and the press letting him get away with that, was an abomination to journalistic integrity. Can you imagine President Bush getting away with complaining that the press or the Democrats were unfairly picking on John Bolton?

Perhaps you should try reading something other than the very right wing media that lied to you and fooled you about a Romney landslide, that has also put the right wing in to a rabid frenzy over this, and you may get some answers foxfire?

WASHINGTON -- Ex-CIA Director David Petraeus told lawmakers Friday that classified intelligence showed the deadly raid on the U.S. Consulate in Libya was a terrorist attack, but that the administration withheld the suspected role of specific al-Qaida affiliates to avoid tipping off the terrorist groups.

The recently resigned spy chief explained that references to terrorist groups suspected of carrying out the violence were removed from the public explanation of what caused the attack so as not to tip off the groups that the U.S. intelligence community was on their trail, according to lawmakers who attended the private briefings.

Petraeus also said it initially was unclear whether militants infiltrated a demonstration to cover their attack.

The retired four-star general addressed the House and Senate intelligence committees in back-to-back, closed-door hearings as questions persist over what the Obama administration knew in the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks and why their public description did not match intelligence agencies' assessments.
After the hearings, lawmakers who questioned Petraeus said he testified that the CIA's draft talking points written in response to the assault on the diplomat post in Benghazi that killed four Americans referred to it as a terrorist attack. But Petraeus told the lawmakers that reference was removed from the final version, although he wasn't sure which federal agency deleted it.

Democrats said Petraeus made it clear the change was not done for political reasons during President Barack Obama's re-election campaign. "The general was adamant there was no politicization of the process, no White House interference or political agenda," said Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif. "He completely debunked that idea."

Petraeus: U.S. didn't reveal role of terrorists in Benghazi to avoid tipping them off - San Jose Mercury News

Are you one of the ones that also believes the Ambassador was raped and dragged through the streets in joy by the perps?

Are you also one of the ones that claims Obama was watching and rubbing his hands together in GLEE as these 4 were killed?

Are you also one of the ones that said Obama told them to stand down and let themselves be killed?

Are you also one of the ones who claimed no help was sent?

I hope you were not fooled by the beloved right wing media propaganda machine and if you were you've learned a lesson from it......


Now, can we get down to catching all the perps so justice can prevail instead of spending time on this faux right wing rabid 'GOTCHA mr president' propaganda?

In the process of removing specific information about who attacked the consulate they decided to make up a story about it being about a video, even though everyone on the entire fracking planet knew it was a terror attack. And, for some reason, normally intelligent people, like you, think they did the right thing.

The 64 dollar question is, 'WHO' within the W.H. made the decision to lie about the attack?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Something for everyone who wants to defend the administration in this.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/clean-debate-zone/263224-an-open-challenge.html#post6363370

 

[Wehrwolfen]

HE LIED… Obama Was Told Benghazi Was Terrorist Attack Not YouTube Protest Within 72 Hours​

by Jim Hoft
November 17, 2012

On 9-11 the American heroes in Benghazi sent several emails to Washington asking for help. The third email sent to the White House the evening of 9-11 blamed an Al-Qaeda-linked group for the attack on the consulate. This email was …

U.S. intelligence told President Barack Obama and senior administration officials within 72 hours of the Benghazi tragedy that the attack was likely carried out by local militia and other armed extremists sympathetic to al-Qaida in the region, officials directly familiar with the information told the Washington Guardian on Friday.

Based on electronic intercepts and human intelligence on the ground, the early briefings after the deadly Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya identified possible organizers and participants. Most were believed to be from a local Libyan militia group called Ansar al-Sharia that is sympathetic to al-Qaida, the official said, while a handful of others was linked to a direct al-Qaida affiliate in North Africa known as AQIM.

Continue reading:
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/11/he-lied-obama-was-told-benghazi-was-terrorist-attack-not-youtube-protest/

 

[Lakhota]

OMG, this is BREAKING NEWS...

 

[francoHFW]

No, he was told it was a terror attack- even now the CIA isn't sure it wasn't triggered by the video...

 

[AVG-JOE]

Is it possible that it was a terror attack in the planning that took advantage of the protests for a change in the timetable?

 

[jillian]

Is it possible that it was a terror attack in the planning that took advantage of the protests for a change in the timetable?

more than possible.

but what amuses me about the wingers is that they never said a word when bush's incompetence resulted in nyc being attacked.

did they demand condi's head on a platter?

 

[SniperFire]

Obama Lied

That's like saying water is wet.

 

[konradv]

Is it possible that it was a terror attack in the planning that took advantage of the protests for a change in the timetable?

Much too complicated for them to wrap their minds around unless Rush, somebody from FOX or their favorite blog tells them so. The hive mind doesn't tolerate independent thought.

 

[PredFan]

Breaking news: Obama lied!
In other news: the sun is hot, the Pope is Catholic, and people died in World War II.

Film at eleven.

 

[WillowTree]

but JIllian is still blaming Boooooooooooosh.

 

[WillowTree]

Is it possible that it was a terror attack in the planning that took advantage of the protests for a change in the timetable?

possible but not probable as there were two previous attacks before the video was even known about, that's why the people at the consulate were literally begging for increased security,, and three times were denied. so you democrats should not be surprised that these people are dead.

 

[Foxfyre]

Is it possible that it was a terror attack in the planning that took advantage of the protests for a change in the timetable?

"Possible" allows for a lot of leeway. But probable is generally the smartest way to go. The protest in Cairo took place only hours before the attack in Benghazi--there was too little time for the terrorist militia group to have planned and orchestrated the much more organized and orchestrated murderous attack on the consulate AFTER the 'spontaneous' riot in Cairo. It is possible that the two were orchestrated cooperatively.

But the fact that this took place on 9/11 increases the high probability that both had nothing to do with a video and everything to do with anti-American hatred and intent to frighten and damage us as much as possible.