Obama BREAKING: The president knew the truth about Benghazi - Page 10

The_Grand_Illusion · 11-17-2012, 02:58 PM

http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ri...5445_blog.html

BREAKING: The president knew the truth about Benghazi

By Jennifer Rubin, Published: NOVEMBER 16, 5:18 PM ET

In a blockbuster report, John Solomon, the former Associated Press and Post reporter, has ferreted out the president’s daily brief that informed him within 72 hours of the Sept. 11 attack that the Benghazi attack was a jihadist operation.

Citing officials directly familiar with the information, Solomon writes in the Washington Guardian that Obama and other administration officials were told that “that the attack was likely carried out by local militia and other armed extremists sympathetic to al-Qaida in the region.”

He adds:

The details from the CIA and Pentagon assessments of the killing of Ambassador Chris [Stevens] were far more specific, more detailed and more current than the unclassified talking points that UN Ambassador Susan Rice and other officials used five days after the attack to suggest to Americans that an unruly mob angry over an anti-Islamic video was to blame, officials said.

Most of the details affirming al-Qaida links were edited or excluded from the unclassified talking points used by Rice in appearances on news programs the weekend after the attack, officials confirmed Friday. Multiple agencies were involved in excising information, doing so because it revealed sources and methods, dealt with classified intercepts or involved information that was not yet fully confirmed, the officials said.

Solomon cautions that there were bits of evidence pointing to a spontaneous attack but, as Eli Lake of the Daily Beast and others have reported, he writes: “Among the early evidence cited in the briefings to the president and other senior officials were intercepts showing some of the participants were known members or supporters of Ansar al-Sharia — the al-Qaida-sympathizing militia in Libya — and the AQIM, which is a direct affiliate of al-Qaida in northern Africa, the officials said.”

How could the president and his senior staff then have allowed (or rather, sent) Rice to go out to tell an entirely different tale to the American people on Sept. 16 on five TV shows?

This report indicates that the president certainly knew that Benghazi wasn’t a rogue movie review gone bad. He had information that plainly spelled out what was later confirmed by additional intelligence. If this information was too confidential to share with the public, at the very least the president and others should not have mislead voters.

This is a full-blown scandal, and in light of this information, the press corps’s slothful indifference to uncovering the truth at Wednesday’s news conference with Obama is all the more shocking. It is time for the president to come clean. The scandal has now enveloped the Oval Office and will define his second term, if not resolved satisfactorily.

The irony of this is that Rice may well have been used as a patsy, unaware that she was sent out to spin a misleading tale. My colleague Dana Milbank recounts Rice’s long-standing inability to get along with others and to be circumspect in her pronouncements:

It’s true that, in her much-criticized TV performance, she was reciting talking points given to her by the intelligence agencies. But that’s the trouble. Rice stuck with her points even though they had been contradicted by the president of the Libyan National Assembly, who, on CBS’s ‘Face the Nation’ just before Rice, said there was “no doubt” that the attack on Americans in Benghazi “was preplanned.” Rice rebutted the Libyan official, arguing — falsely, it turned out — that there was no evidence of such planning. . . . Obama can do better at State than Susan Rice.

Frankly the same could be said of many national security positions at this point. The American people made their choice in November on the president, but it now appears they were duped regarding the real facts concerning Benghazi. What are we going to do about that?

VAChief · 11-18-2012, 08:34 PM

A little historical perspective taken from the link below:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/12/opinio...air/index.html

Whatever you think of the Obama record, it's worth keeping in mind that by any measure, free enterprise has been winning the game for a long, long time to this point.
Compare the United States of 2012 with the United States of 1962. Leave aside the obvious points about segregation and discrimination, and look only at the economy.
In 1962, the government regulated the price and route of every airplane, every freight train, every truck and every merchant ship in the United States. The government regulated the price of natural gas. It regulated the interest on every checking account and the commission on every purchase or sale of stock. Owning a gold bar was a serious crime that could be prosecuted under the Trading with the Enemy Act. The top rate of income tax was 91%.

It was illegal to own a telephone. Phones had to be rented from the giant government-regulated monopoly that controlled all telecommunications in the United States. All young men were subject to the military draft and could escape only if they entered a government-approved graduate course of study. The great concern of students of American society -- of liberals such as David Riesman, of conservatives such as Russell Kirk and of radicals such as Dwight Macdonald -- was the country's stultifying, crushing conformity.
Even if you look only at the experiences of white heterosexual men, the United States of 2012 is a freer country in almost every way than the United States of 1962.

Brock · 11-18-2012, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VAChief

A little historical perspective taken from the link below:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/12/opinio...air/index.html

Whatever you think of the Obama record, it's worth keeping in mind that by any measure, free enterprise has been winning the game for a long, long time to this point.
Compare the United States of 2012 with the United States of 1962. Leave aside the obvious points about segregation and discrimination, and look only at the economy.
In 1962, the government regulated the price and route of every airplane, every freight train, every truck and every merchant ship in the United States. The government regulated the price of natural gas. It regulated the interest on every checking account and the commission on every purchase or sale of stock. Owning a gold bar was a serious crime that could be prosecuted under the Trading with the Enemy Act. The top rate of income tax was 91%.

It was illegal to own a telephone. Phones had to be rented from the giant government-regulated monopoly that controlled all telecommunications in the United States. All young men were subject to the military draft and could escape only if they entered a government-approved graduate course of study. The great concern of students of American society -- of liberals such as David Riesman, of conservatives such as Russell Kirk and of radicals such as Dwight Macdonald -- was the country's stultifying, crushing conformity.
Even if you look only at the experiences of white heterosexual men, the United States of 2012 is a freer country in almost every way than the United States of 1962.

Ah, the good old days.

ROYC75 · 11-18-2012, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock

The **** does christianity have to do with anything? Oh, Jesus. I just realized you think I said "Satanism' instead of "statism".

Oh sweet lord.

LOL

Oh snap, I did screw that on up, Oh well, screw the French, government has too much control of our business anyway.

Go ahead and milk this one, it's on me and I did misread that one.

|Zach| · 11-18-2012, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedNeckRaider

How is business btw? I am still having fun with my camera. Heck the company asks me to shoot their events...uh for free

I guess I suck at the business part of it~

Good. Though you always have to do the hustle.

I have a pretty good anchor tenant so to speak that accounts for more than half the income yearly. Its a good relationship...pro sports team so its fun...and they value images. Hard to find.

It is all about getting value you for the value you provide and there are a lot of ways to do that. For a lil while there would be something real cool I would love to have pictures of that I thought having them could benefit me down the line. That is pretty rare now that I have been in the game for a while.

It is a free market and life is made of decisions. The only road you can't go down is thinking that you can start with some company or entity doing stuff for free and work up to doing paid work. It never works like.

Usually part timers looking to get extra money focus on families...kids...weddings...pets...stuff like that. It is everywhere and everyone needs it. To get to that higher level you just have to convince someone who respects photos they value that great photos have and try to part them with their money. Its a process.

But that is if you wanna make money at it. If you just enjoy taking photos then **** all that and take awesome photos.

|Zach| · 11-18-2012, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ROYC75

Oh snap, I did screw that on up, Oh well, screw the French, government has too much control of our business anyway.

Go ahead and milk this one, it's on me and I did misread that one.

Yea, I was right the whole time. Just log off buddy...

Log the hell off...

ROYC75 · 11-18-2012, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by |Zach|

Yea, I was right the whole time. Just log off buddy...

Log the hell off...

Says the one who will not answer question and has no balls. Why Zach ? I have asked you plenty of questions and yet, no honest answers except pulling out your Slick Willie act.

The_Grand_Illusion · 11-18-2012, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedNeckRaider

I don't have a dog in this fight, but Zach owns his own business or did at one time~

Oh I understand not all businesses have been affected by this bad economy. He should be grateful instead of being so arrogant. I have a friend whose business is doing really well right now but I also have many business friends that are not doing so well or have closed up completely during this whole mess. I've always made a habit of looking at how much retail space is for sale or rent when I look through my town or visit other towns in my state and other states. I also go through the industrial parks to see how well the are filled or not filled.

I can tell you the last several years, just about every place I've been to, it is alarming how much retail/office/industrial space is available out there. I know we are on the downhill if we don't get this country back to what made private enterprise great and even minorities like myself had a shot at the American dream (I'm not completely out of the game but I can see the writing on the wall). With rising statism in this country, it is going to make it more and more difficult for everyone, not just business owners. It's private enterprise doing well that supports the government that is necessary, not the other way around like so many have been misled to believe in this country.

TGI

**RNR** · 11-18-2012, 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by |Zach|

Good. Though you always have to do the hustle.

I have a pretty good anchor tenant so to speak that accounts for more than half the income yearly. Its a good relationship...pro sports team so its fun...and they value images. Hard to find.

It is all about getting value you for the value you provide and there are a lot of ways to do that. For a lil while there would be something real cool I would love to have pictures of that I thought having them could benefit me down the line. That is pretty rare now that I have been in the game for a while.

It is a free market and life is made of decisions. The only road you can't go down is thinking that you can start with some company or entity doing stuff for free and work up to doing paid work. It never works like.

Usually part timers looking to get extra money focus on families...kids...weddings...pets...stuff like that. It is everywhere and everyone needs it. To get to that higher level you just have to convince someone who respects photos they value that great photos have and try to part them with their money. Its a process.

But that is if you wanna make money at it. If you just enjoy taking photos then **** all that and take awesome photos.

I am in it for fun, but I am glad to hear you are doing well. Doing what you love and getting paid for it is something few get to do, good for you~

|Zach| · 11-18-2012, 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ROYC75

Says the one who will not answer question and has no balls. Why Zach ? I have asked you plenty of questions and yet, no honest answers except pulling out your Slick Willie act.

You wouldn't know how to read the answer.

Brock · 11-18-2012, 08:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Grand_Illusion

With rising statism in this country, it is going to make it more and more difficult for everyone, not just business owners. It's private enterprise doing well that supports the government that is necessary, not the other way around like so many have been misled to believe in this country.

TGI

Maybe you need to start up a Statanic supply store. You know, inverted crosses, pentagrams and the like.

The_Grand_Illusion · 11-18-2012, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock

Maybe you need to start up a Statanic supply store. You know, inverted crosses, pentagrams and the like.

That's pretty dumb Brock, especially since my avatar means "Long Live Christ the King"

TGI

Brock · 11-18-2012, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Grand_Illusion

That's pretty dumb Brock, especially since my avatar means "Long Live Christ the King"

TGI

Capitalism doesn't care what your religion is. I'm just saying, maybe you need to cash in on this rise of statanism instead of blaming it for all your problems.

The_Grand_Illusion · 11-18-2012, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock

Capitalism doesn't care what your religion is. I'm just saying, maybe you need to cash in on this rise of statanism instead of blaming it for all your problems.

What is it with you liberals and arrogance?

TGI

Brock · 11-18-2012, 08:54 PM

Guys used to tell if if you want to change your luck, **** a black girl. Maybe it's like that with this statanism stuff.

Brock · 11-18-2012, 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Grand_Illusion

What is it with you liberals and arrogance?

TGI

I only look like a liberal next to a Right Wing kook like yourself.

11-17-2012, 02:58 PM
The_Grand_Illusion Veteran Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Ad Astra Per Aspera Casino cash: $5000	BREAKING: The president knew the truth about Benghazi http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ri...5445_blog.html BREAKING: The president knew the truth about Benghazi By Jennifer Rubin, Published: NOVEMBER 16, 5:18 PM ET In a blockbuster report, John Solomon, the former Associated Press and Post reporter, has ferreted out the president’s daily brief that informed him within 72 hours of the Sept. 11 attack that the Benghazi attack was a jihadist operation. Citing officials directly familiar with the information, Solomon writes in the Washington Guardian that Obama and other administration officials were told that “that the attack was likely carried out by local militia and other armed extremists sympathetic to al-Qaida in the region.” He adds: The details from the CIA and Pentagon assessments of the killing of Ambassador Chris [Stevens] were far more specific, more detailed and more current than the unclassified talking points that UN Ambassador Susan Rice and other officials used five days after the attack to suggest to Americans that an unruly mob angry over an anti-Islamic video was to blame, officials said. Most of the details affirming al-Qaida links were edited or excluded from the unclassified talking points used by Rice in appearances on news programs the weekend after the attack, officials confirmed Friday. Multiple agencies were involved in excising information, doing so because it revealed sources and methods, dealt with classified intercepts or involved information that was not yet fully confirmed, the officials said. Solomon cautions that there were bits of evidence pointing to a spontaneous attack but, as Eli Lake of the Daily Beast and others have reported, he writes: “Among the early evidence cited in the briefings to the president and other senior officials were intercepts showing some of the participants were known members or supporters of Ansar al-Sharia — the al-Qaida-sympathizing militia in Libya — and the AQIM, which is a direct affiliate of al-Qaida in northern Africa, the officials said.” How could the president and his senior staff then have allowed (or rather, sent) Rice to go out to tell an entirely different tale to the American people on Sept. 16 on five TV shows? This report indicates that the president certainly knew that Benghazi wasn’t a rogue movie review gone bad. He had information that plainly spelled out what was later confirmed by additional intelligence. If this information was too confidential to share with the public, at the very least the president and others should not have mislead voters. This is a full-blown scandal, and in light of this information, the press corps’s slothful indifference to uncovering the truth at Wednesday’s news conference with Obama is all the more shocking. It is time for the president to come clean. The scandal has now enveloped the Oval Office and will define his second term, if not resolved satisfactorily. The irony of this is that Rice may well have been used as a patsy, unaware that she was sent out to spin a misleading tale. My colleague Dana Milbank recounts Rice’s long-standing inability to get along with others and to be circumspect in her pronouncements: It’s true that, in her much-criticized TV performance, she was reciting talking points given to her by the intelligence agencies. But that’s the trouble. Rice stuck with her points even though they had been contradicted by the president of the Libyan National Assembly, who, on CBS’s ‘Face the Nation’ just before Rice, said there was “no doubt” that the attack on Americans in Benghazi “was preplanned.” Rice rebutted the Libyan official, arguing — falsely, it turned out — that there was no evidence of such planning. . . . Obama can do better at State than Susan Rice. Frankly the same could be said of many national security positions at this point. The American people made their choice in November on the president, but it now appears they were duped regarding the real facts concerning Benghazi. What are we going to do about that?
Posts: 1,489

11-18-2012, 08:34 PM	#136
VAChief Comfortably Numb Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Virginia Casino cash: $5942	A little historical perspective taken from the link below: http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/12/opinio...air/index.html Whatever you think of the Obama record, it's worth keeping in mind that by any measure, free enterprise has been winning the game for a long, long time to this point. Compare the United States of 2012 with the United States of 1962. Leave aside the obvious points about segregation and discrimination, and look only at the economy. In 1962, the government regulated the price and route of every airplane, every freight train, every truck and every merchant ship in the United States. The government regulated the price of natural gas. It regulated the interest on every checking account and the commission on every purchase or sale of stock. Owning a gold bar was a serious crime that could be prosecuted under the Trading with the Enemy Act. The top rate of income tax was 91%. It was illegal to own a telephone. Phones had to be rented from the giant government-regulated monopoly that controlled all telecommunications in the United States. All young men were subject to the military draft and could escape only if they entered a government-approved graduate course of study. The great concern of students of American society -- of liberals such as David Riesman, of conservatives such as Russell Kirk and of radicals such as Dwight Macdonald -- was the country's stultifying, crushing conformity. Even if you look only at the experiences of white heterosexual men, the United States of 2012 is a freer country in almost every way than the United States of 1962.
Posts: 3,256

11-18-2012, 08:54 PM	#149
Brock Say hello to my little friend Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Larryville Casino cash: $28522	Guys used to tell if if you want to change your luck, **** a black girl. Maybe it's like that with this statanism stuff.
Posts: 47,282

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode