View Single Post
Old Nov 16, 2012, 11:54 AM
RumRunner_1492 is online now
Find More Posts by RumRunner_1492
It's 5 O'clock Somewhere
RumRunner_1492's Avatar
Dayton, OH
Joined Feb 2006
418 Posts
Originally Posted by thunder1 View Post
Can you link to any official statements to back up what you've said? All I've heard is that Petraeus wasn't involved in the statements Rice made. That's certainly not what you're trying to portray here. You do realize that the CIA director isn't the only person in the whole intelligence community, right?
Here is the story of what happened. Note, no talk of any protest. An hour before the attack The ambassador walked a Turkish delegate to the gate. Not something you do when there is a protest taking place.

Prior to the attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi late in the evening on Sept. 11, there was no protest outside the compound, a senior State Department official confirmed today, contradicting initial administration statements suggesting that the attack was an opportunistic reaction to unrest caused by an anti-Islam video.
The officials said that prior to the massive attack on the Benghazi compound by dozens of militants carrying heavy weaponry, there was no unrest outside the walls of the compound and no protest that anyone inside the compound was aware of.

In fact, Stevens hosted a series of meetings on the compound throughout the day, ending with a meeting with a Turkish diplomat that began at 7:30 in the evening, and all was quiet in the area.
When asked about the video starting a protest that led to the attack state department officials said:

"That was not our conclusion," the State Department official said. "We don't necessarily have a conclusion [about that]."

According to Petraeus he said the CIA talking points were edited not to include terrorism. He also

According to Patraeus he knew "almost immeidately" after the attack that it was tied to Al-Queada.

"When he looks at what Susan Rice said," CNN reports, "here is what Petraeus's take is, according to my source. Petraeus developed some talking points laying it all out. those talking points as always were approved by the intelligence community. But then he sees Susan Rice make her statements and he sees input from other areas of the administration. Petraeus -- it is believed -- will tell the committee he is not certain where Susan Rice got all of her information."

So lets re-cap. There was no protest or any proof of a protest from the people on the ground. The State department never felt this had anything to do with a video. The talking points were editted to play down terrorism. Petraeus doesn't know where Susan got her information. It's clear the video had nothing to do with this and the key plays knew "almost immediately" it was a terrorist attack.
RumRunner_1492 is online now Find More Posts by RumRunner_1492
Reply With Quote