U.S. Consulate official: Everyone knew it was a terrorist attack from the get-go

[Little-Acorn]

The American official who was 2nd in charge of the Benghazi consulate was asked if he knew where the information came from that the Benghazi attacks were merely a "demonstration that got out of hand" caused by a video. Did that idea come from the people at the consulate?

The official, Greg Hicks, replied, "everybody in the mission" believed it was an act of terror "from the get-go."

Five days after the attack, CBS was tryng to spread the word that the attacks were just a spontaneous development from demonstrations that had happened far away in Egypt. But then the President of Libya went on "Face the Nation" and said flatly that his government had "no doubt that this was pre-planned, predetermined."

Ten minutes later, our Ambassador Susan Rice went on the same show and repeated her story that the strike began "spontaneously" out of protests in Egypt and was not a premeditated terrorist act.

"I've never been as embarrassed in my life, in my career, as on that day," Hicks told investigators of Rice's appearances.

It's piling higher and deeper.

1.) Did the Obama administration withhold the reinforcements our diplomats kept begging for, to maintain his false story that Al Qaeda no longer mattered?

2.) And when Al Qaeda planned and executed this attack on our consulate, killing Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans, did Obama concoct the tale about "spontaneous protests" to keep the false story going even longer, so he would get more votes in the Nov. 2012 election three weeks later?

----------------------------------------------

Benghazi "whistleblowers" head to House committee - CBS News

Benghazi "whistleblowers" head to House committee

by Lindsey Boerma /
CBS News/ May 8, 2013, 5:52 AM

Hoping to funnel into one chronological timeline the rampantly varying accounts of how President Obama's administration responded last Sept. 11 in the wake of an attack on a U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday will hear from three "whistleblowers" expected to offer testimony enormously at odds with the administration's characterization of a strike that killed four Americans.

Testifying are Mark Thompson, acting deputy assistant Secretary of State for counterterrorism; Greg Hicks, former deputy chief of mission in Libya; and Eric Nordstrom, former regional security officer in Libya. Excerpts of an interview Hicks did with investigators that were released to CBS News' "Face the Nation" on Sunday boomeranged the Benghazi politics back into the spotlight four months after hearings on the issue in the House and Senate.

According to Hicks, "everybody in the mission" believed it was an act of terror "from the get-go." But on Sept. 16 - five days after the attack - U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice hit the Sunday show circuit, peddling the theory that the strike began "spontaneously" out of protests in Egypt and was not a premeditated terrorist act. Rice's spot on "Face the Nation" that day was preceded by the new president of Libya, Mohammed al-Magariaf, who said his government had "no doubt that this was pre-planned, predetermined."

"I've never been as embarrassed in my life, in my career, as on that day," Hicks told investigators of Rice's appearances.

The top official in Libya after Amb. Chris Stevens died in the attack, Hicks said he was never consulted about the administration's talking points that puppeteered Rice's remarks: "I was personally known to one of Rice's staff members," he said. "Even on Sunday morning, I could have been called, and, you know, the phone call could have been, 'Hey, Greg, Amb. Rice is going to say blah, blah, blah,' and I could have said, 'No, that's not the right thing.' That phone call was never made."

 

[tinydancer]

Check this out. Holy toledo.

A State Department official emailed the Libyan President and told him that terrorists were behind the attack.



Secret email reveals top official told Libya's president that terrorists were behind Benghazi attack - four days BEFORE U.S. Ambassador to UN said it was a spontaneous attack

Sept. 11: Terrorists attack the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya

Sept. 12: State Dept. Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs tells Libya's President that Ansar al-Sharia was responsible

Sept. 13: CIA writes candid talking points for members of Congress

Sept. 15: White House deputies edit the talking points, removing all references to Islamic terrorism

Sept. 16: UN Ambassador Susan Rice, in five television interviews, blames the attack on a spontaneous mob angered by an anti-Islam YouTube video



A top State Department appointee told Libya's president one day after the military-style assault on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi that the terror group Ansar al-Shariah was responsible.

But four days later, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations said on television that it was the product of a spontaneous protest.

During a fiery and emotional congressional hearing on the 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Rep. Trey Gowdy read aloud from an email dated Sept. 12, 2012 to senior State Department officers, from Elizabeth Jones, the acting Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs.

Describing a conversation she had with Libyan president Mohammad al-Magarief, Jones wrote in the previously undisclosed email that 'I told him that the group that conducted the attacks, Ansar al-Sharia, is affiliated with Islamic terrorists.'

'Let me say that again,' Gowdy emphasized during the hearing: 'She told him.'



Secret email shows top State Department official TOLD LIBYA'S PRESIDENT on Sept. 12 that terrorists were behind Benghazi attack the day before | Mail Online

 

[g5000]

The official, Greg Hicks, replied, "everybody in the mission" believed it was an act of terror "from the get-go."

Why is what Hicks said sliced and diced into pieces? I am always wary when yellow journalists do that.


Hicks replied "everbody in the mission" "from the get-go".

???

 

[tinydancer]

Gee. I guess you missed the part about the email sent to the Libyan Ambassador by a State Department official that clearly states that this was a terrorist act. She sent it September 12th.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Gee. I guess you missed the part about the email sent to the Libyan President by a State Department official that clearly states that this was a terrorist act.

Obama Fluffers are getting their Presidential knee pads out as this is typed to you

 

[Politico]

And it still is irrelevant.

 

[tinydancer]

Gee. I guess you missed the part about the email sent to the Libyan President by a State Department official that clearly states that this was a terrorist act.

Obama Fluffers are getting their Presidential knee pads out as this is typed to you

It's surreal. And frankly bizarre.

 

[tinydancer]

And it still is irrelevant.

Maybe to you.

But this testimony by the whistle blowers just confirms that Obama, Clinton, Rice and others blatantly conspire to lie repeatedly that this was a spontaneous act over a video.

Complete and utter fabrication. A grand lie and cover up about the truth of this terror attack at Benghazi.

 

[Little-Acorn]

But this testimony by the whistle blowers just confirms that Obama, Clinton, Rice and others blatantly conspire to lie repeatedly that this was a spontaneous act over a video.

Complete and utter fabrication. A grand lie and cover up about the truth of this terror attack at Benghazi.

And not only did Obama et. al. lie and cover up the terrorist origins of the attack and murders AFTER the attacks took place....

.... but they also refused the consulate's repeated requests for reinforcements, more guards etc., for months BEFORE the attacks.

People had been shooting at the compund, throwing explosives over the walls, etc. etc.; and once they blew a hole in the outer wall big enough to drive a truck through. This had been going on for months before the Sept. 11, 2012 attacks.

But Obama had been telling the American public all that time that Al Qaeda had been defeated, was on the run, etc. He had been trying to persuade the American public that he had done a great job as Commander in Chief, so they would vote for him in the upcoming election in three weeks. Sending reinforcements, more Marines etc. to consulates in Libyan d Egypt would have shown that the terrorists there weren't as "on the run" as Obama was trying to claim... so he refused to send the reinforcements, and kept up the narrative "we defeated them" anyway.

So when the attack came on Sept. 11, 2012, the terrorists had far fewer guards to deal with than they would have, were able to break in with relative ease, and wound up killing the Ambassador and three other people.

Obama's only reaction was to fabricate even more lies ("this wan't a real attack, it was a spontaneous protest over a video that went wrong") and send out his minions to spread the word.

Basically, Obama traded four American lives, for votes in the Nov. 2012 election. He was able to keep the fiction of a "defeated Al Qaeda" in place, long enough to count the votes.

As for the dead Americans in the consulate... well, as one of the Obama administration people said about the Fast&Furioous gunwalking scandal, "If you want to make an omelet, you have to break some eggs."

 

[Politico]

And it still is irrelevant.

Maybe to you.

But this testimony by the whistle blowers just confirms that Obama, Clinton, Rice and others blatantly conspire to lie repeatedly that this was a spontaneous act over a video.

Complete and utter fabrication. A grand lie and cover up about the truth of this terror attack at Benghazi.

The testimony has equated to exactly jack shit. An yes it is irrelevant because they'd still be dead either way.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And it still is irrelevant.

Maybe to you.

But this testimony by the whistle blowers just confirms that Obama, Clinton, Rice and others blatantly conspire to lie repeatedly that this was a spontaneous act over a video.

Complete and utter fabrication. A grand lie and cover up about the truth of this terror attack at Benghazi.

The testimony has equated to exactly jack shit. An yes it is irrelevant because they'd still be dead either way.

That's really spot on. Perfect analysis