Intelligence Stressed Libya Protest Scenario

[HomerJS]

Article from the Wall Street Journal. Seems to put a damper on the conspiracy theory that Obama admin want to hide this act as terrorism because of the election. Reminder WSJ is right of center.

In Reports to Obama, CIA Didn't Alter Assessment of Trigger for Violence for 10 Days, Even as Witness Accounts Disputed It.

President Barack Obama was told in his daily intelligence briefing for more than a week after the consulate siege in Benghazi that the assault grew out of a spontaneous protest, despite conflicting reports from witnesses and other sources that began to cast doubt on the accuracy of that assessment almost from the start.

Sounds like the various branches of govt did not come to a consistant conclusion rather then a so called massive cover-up.

 

[xBiffx]

Sounds like the various branches of govt did not come to a consistant conclusion rather then a so called massive cover-up.

I'd be more inclined to believe that if it weren't for the obvious PR campaign to change the subject.

Obama was pretty sure he knew the reason for the attack. So sure he told the world via the UN.

So he isn't a liar, he is just incompetent? Guess in the end that won't change things for this election.

 

[HomerJS]

I'd be more inclined to believe that if it weren't for the obvious PR campaign to change the subject.

Obama was pretty sure he knew the reason for the attack. So sure he told the world via the UN.

So he isn't a liar, he is just incompetent? Guess in the end that won't change things for this election.

If you are the President why assume CIA briefing is bogus? Remember he was told this for 10 days.

If POTUS parroted an eyewitness account instead of CIA I would agree with you

 

[xBiffx]

If you are the President why assume CIA briefing is bogus? Remember he was told this for 10 days.

CIA briefings don't explain his/his administrations reactions to what happened. They don't tell him that a video is to blame. He came up with that nugget of wisdom on his own.

This reaction isn't part of the "spontaneous" violence theme that you are trying to spin here either. There wasn't anything spontaneous about that attack, the date of it should be evidence enough for this excuse to be called bullshit.

 

[HomerJS]

CIA briefings don't explain his/his administrations reactions to what happened. They don't tell him that a video is to blame. He came up with that nugget of wisdom on his own.

This reaction isn't part of the "spontaneous" violence theme that you are trying to spin here either. There wasn't anything spontaneous about that attack, the date of it should be evidence enough for this excuse to be called bullshit.

I don't know what your definition of "blame" is but again, CIA said attack grew out of "spontaneous protest" to video

What you state is not what President was being told for 10 days. We know that now.

Were not talking about the ultimate conclusion the theory of a "lie" is being debunked.

 

[EagleKeeper]

CIA is to be believed here; yet they want the CIA to be untruthful for Bush?

Different groups report and analyze info. Someone higher up made the determination of what they wanted to hear.

 

[HomerJS]

CIA is to be believed here; yet they want the CIA to be untruthful for Bush?

Different groups report and analyze info. Someone higher up made the determination of what they wanted to hear.

Interesting point but I would suggest <24 hrs is a very short period of time to get word of the incident, develop their own conclusion, contact CIA requesting evidence to support said conclusion and make a public statement.