State Dept. Releases Phone Transcript of Hillary Admitting She Knew Benghazi Was Planned Attack (government, claim)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you don't agree with this article, don't attack the messenger, Me.
So here we go,
according to this article
The former acting director of the CIA has testified under oath that the US intelligence community never tied the Benghazi attacks to the Internet video. And former CIA director David Petraeus has stated that the US government ascertained that the Benghazi massacre was a coordinated act of terrorism "almost immediately." State Department documents and Hillary's own virtual paper trail affirm this. The Secretary of State understood the truth, with clarity. She shared it with her own daughter and with foreign diplomats, while serving up a fiction to the American people, including heartbroken family members of the deceased.
On page 3 you can see what Morell claims to be the key points the CIA made within 24 hours of the attack. Point 1-- the attack was spontaneous event, evolved from a protest. Point 2 -- the attackers were inspired by the events in Cairo. Point 4 -- that attacks did not involve significant pre-planning, the attackers decided to attack after seeing events in Cairo.
Morell does point out that the CIA never used the word Video, however the attack in Cairo was over the Video. He claims the CIA was telling people that the attack was inspired by events in Cairo.
He also goes on to claim that the spontaneity of the attack was also included in the talking points for Petraeus. I have no idea how one gets from spontaneous to coordinated. I've read the links and the links within the links. No place do they quote Petraeus saying the attacks were coordinated.
On page 3 you can see what Morell claims to be the key points the CIA made within 24 hours of the attack. Point 1-- the attack was spontaneous event, evolved from a protest. Point 2 -- the attackers were inspired by the events in Cairo. Point 4 -- that attacks did not involve significant pre-planning, the attackers decided to attack after seeing events in Cairo.
Morell does point out that the CIA never used the word Video, however the attack in Cairo was over the Video. He claims the CIA was telling people that the attack was inspired by events in Cairo.
He also goes on to claim that the spontaneity of the attack was also included in the talking points for Petraeus. I have no idea how one gets from spontaneous to coordinated. I've read the links and the links within the links. No place do they quote Petraeus saying the attacks were coordinated.
well, I have been attacked too, so let's not get too defensive here.
I don't know if you have read the article that I posted or not, but it doesn't seem like you have read it.
The bottom line is you seem to believe she has been telling the truth, well, I don't know if she has or not, but somebody have been lying, either HER or the victims' family members. That is the ONLY point I was trying to make.
The phone call proves nothing. Don't assume that diplomats tell all in diplomatic phone calls trying to smooth over relations. "We know" can easily be we have evidence but haven't reached a firm conclusion. The PM replies that they also have reports, received that day, that it was terrorists not video-related.
well, I have been attacked too, so let's not get too defensive here.
I don't know if you have read the article that I posted or not, but it doesn't seem like you have read it.
The bottom line is you seem to believe she has been telling the truth, well, I don't know if she has or not, but somebody have been lying, either HER or the victims' family members. That is the ONLY point I was trying to make.
When I wrote that "I've read the links and the links within the links" I was referring to the article you linked.
It seems to me that some are claiming Clinton was lying because what she said about the attack changed over time. The article you linked makes the same assertion.
From the article:
...then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton privately blamed the attack on an online anti-Islam video.
She did so days after she knew, according to her own words, that the deadly raid "had nothing to with the film. It was a planned attack -- not a protest."
There is a clear reason why what Clinton said while the attack was occurring or immediately after would be different from what Clinton said a day or two later. Within the first 24 hours after attack the CIA produced its initial assessment of the attack. Clinton's remarks after that point were consistent with the CIA's analysis. Yes, the CIA's initial assessment was flawed.
People vote for a certain party because it's in line with their beliefs of the policies we should put forward. I don't like her at all but I will vote for her if I have to. And FYI every single politician has lied yet we keep electing them don't we
Results have not been all that good, have they. That's a good reason to change the way we do things, and the people we elect. If we can't be certain whether a politician is presenting themselves honestly and truthfully, we can't know what we are voting for.
Because by the link you provided she was telling others that she KNEW it was not because the video and was a planned attack......
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamSmyth
That was before she received additional information from the CIA.
You are fighting the good fight, Mr Smyth, but you are trying to make those without eyes, see, and those without ears, hear. You see, in their minds, Hillary herself, must have received a phone call or email from the very terrorists themselves, giving her a heads-up that they were going to attack Benghazi. They are pulling 2-3 comments/emails that she made within the first 24 hrs, and screeching, "THERE. SEE, SHE KNEW!!!!!!".
They can not even fathom the idea that maybe it was just her guessing...or, as she stated in the video you posted at post# 44 that the group xxx a-sharia (a known terrorist group) had claimed immediate responsibility for the attack (they later retracted).
You are fighting the good fight, Mr Smyth, but you are trying to make those without eyes, see, and those without ears, hear. You see, in their minds, Hillary herself, must have received a phone call or email from the very terrorists themselves, giving her a heads-up that they were going to attack Benghazi. They are pulling 2-3 comments/emails that she made within the first 24 hrs, and screeching, "THERE. SEE, SHE KNEW!!!!!!".
They can not even fathom the idea that maybe it was just her guessing...or, as she stated in the video you posted at post# 44 that the group xxx a-sharia (a known terrorist group) had claimed immediate responsibility for the attack (they later retracted).
Nope. "SHE KNEW!!!"
lol fighting the good fight? please. Mr smyth was not Dodging Sniper Fire in Bosnia like Clinton did. lol
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
