#New Details Discredit Fox News Reports On Benghazi Attacks

[3216 Dead]

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/11/02/1128831/new-details-
discredit-fox-news-benghazi/

New Details Discredit Fox News Reports On Benghazi Attacks

By Hayes Brown on Nov 2, 2012 at 9:47 am


A slew of new reporting this morning debunks Fox News reports claiming
that the Obama administration withheld assistance during the Sept. 11
attack on a U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya. With these revelations, the
combined conservative narrative as led by Fox News — that the Obama
administration failed to respond adequately during the attack and that
mainstream media has not covered Benghazi enough — is in further disarray.

The Los Angeles Times’ version of the CIA’s role focuses the most heavily
on pushing back on Fox’s spin:

“At every level in the chain of command, from the senior officers in
Libya to the most senior officials in Washington, everyone was fully
engaged in trying to provide whatever help they could,” a senior
intelligence official said in a statement. “There were no orders to
anybody to stand down in providing support.”

Fox reporter Jennifer Griffin claimed in an “exclusive” report last week
that the CIA denied Tyrone Woods, one of the four Americans killed in the
attack, permission to help repel the assault. Griffin’s reporting spun
off into a bevy of conspiracy theories on the far right. The Pentagon,
White House, and CIA had all previously denied refusing requests for
support. The New York Times reports on the Pentagon’s involvement:

[A] senior official also sought to rebut reports that C.I.A. requests
for support from the Pentagon that night had gone unheeded.

In fact, the official said, the military diverted a Predator drone
from a reconnaissance mission in Darnah, 90 miles away, in time to
oversee the mission’s evacuation. The two commandos, based at the embassy
in Tripoli, joined the reinforcements. And a military transport plane
flew the wounded Americans and Mr. Stevens’s body out of Libya.

The new reports also contain previously unreported details about the
CIA’s role in Benghazi. President Obama and Secretary of Defense Panetta
did order U.S. forces into the region, but the CIA was the first to
respond to the attack, arriving on the scene in under half an hour.

The lack of security at the outpost in Benghazi, far removed from the
U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, has been the subject of inquiry by both Fox News
and Congressional Republicans. The Wall Street Journal sheds new light
onto why that was the case. The CIA and State Department had entered into
a series of secret deals in which the Agency would provide emergency
security to the diplomats operating within Libya.

While the State Department primarily relied upon local Libyan militias
for day-to-day protection, as well as contracted British private
security, the arrangement between it and the CIA explains why the outpost
seemed under-protected. The revelation also will prompt a renewed look at
the State Department’s decisions to remove Department of Defense-provided
security from the Embassy in Tripoli, which were highly scrutinized
during Rep. Darrel Issa’s hearings.

The primary role of the CIA was intelligence gathering and covert
operations within Benghazi. Agents there operated out of an annex
originally reported to be an offshoot of the diplomatic mission, revealed
officially — and accidentally — during Issa’s highly politicized hearing
into the Benghazi attacks. The Agency’s large presence may also help
explain why the diplomatic compound was open to journalists and looters
for weeks after the attack, as more vital intelligence documents were
collected.

Washington Post’s David Ignatius has gone as far as to produce a detailed
minute-by-minute timeline, of the events that night. These reports
together give the clearest picture yet of the events in Benghazi. Rather
than the Obama Presidency unraveling as the news organization has
claimed, it appears to be Fox News’ narrative that is coming undone
instead.

--
Subscribe:
zepps_essay...@yahoogroups.com
zepps_news...@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe:
zepps_essays...@yahoogroups.com
zepps_news-...@yahoogroups.com

Not dead, in jail or a slave? Thank a liberal!

[MattB]

On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 23:06:50 +0000 (UTC), 3216 Dead <de...@gone.com>
wrote:

Now these stories sound like desperation on the lefts part.

Read something about President Obama or his aides refused requests to
dispatch an AC-130 Spectre gunship. LOL. Well Obama made the right
call there. Wonder who would even make such a request? That would
have tore the Building apart.

After reading this from other sources sound like desperation on the
left to clear Obama of wrongdoing. Another Fast and furious type
deception on the lefts part.]

Obama is good at getting Americans killed. Not so good at fixing the
economy..

[Phlip]

> Now these stories sound like desperation on the lefts part.

What magic world do you live in where a president is expected to go on
TV, every day, and say "The CIA did this, the CIA did that..."

The CIA typically CAN'T let the president disclose every thing they
did, you total moron.

[Dänk 42Ø]

On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 23:06:50 +0000, 3216 Dead quacked:

> http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/11/02/1128831/new-details-
> discredit-fox-news-benghazi/
>
> New Details Discredit Fox News Reports On Benghazi Attacks
>
> By Hayes Brown on Nov 2, 2012 at 9:47 am
>
>
> A slew of new reporting this morning debunks Fox News reports claiming
> that the Obama administration withheld assistance during the Sept. 11
> attack on a U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya. With these revelations,
> the combined conservative narrative as led by Fox News — that the Obama
> administration failed to respond adequately during the attack and that
> mainstream media has not covered Benghazi enough — is in further
> disarray.

According to ABC News -- which has no known connection to Rupert Murdoch
-- the streets around the embassy were calm and clear shortly before the
attack. This contradicts the Obama administration's claim that the
attack was the result of a protest (against the Mohammed video) that
spiraled out of control. Surveillance video recovered after the bombing
shows that there was no protest that day, yet the Obama administration
continued to parrot the claim for two weeks afterwards.


http://factcheck.org/2012/10/benghazi-timeline/

"There were no protesters at the Benghazi consulate prior to the attack,
even though Obama and others repeatedly said the attackers joined an
angry mob that had formed in opposition to the anti-Muslim film that had
triggered protests in Egypt and elsewhere. The State Department disclosed
this fact Oct. 9 -- nearly a month after the attack."

[Dänk 42Ø]

Are you saying that an elected president is subordinate to an espionage
agency? I thought Chairman Obama promised to Change things like this.



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"Come on, you remember all that stuff. The hallucinations. Everyone said
it was a cock up, the CIA trying experiments into drug warfare or
something. Some crackpot theory that instead of invading a country it
would be much cheaper and more effective to make everyone think they'd
been invaded."



"What hallucinations were those exactly ...?" said Arthur in a rather
quiet voice.



"What do you mean, what hallucinations? I'm talking about all that stuff
with the big yellow ships, everyone going crazy and saying we're going to
die, and then pop, they vanished as the effect wore off. The CIA denied
it which meant it must be true."

-- Douglas Adams, "So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish"

[Mr.B1ack]

On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 23:06:50 +0000, 3216 Dead wrote:

> http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/11/02/1128831/new-details-
> discredit-fox-news-benghazi/


Hey, there's elections going on. Truth is
irrelevant. Perception is all.

[Hell Stomper]

Yes, there was a drone overhead. The footage is being withheld along
with audio recordings of radio transmissions.
There is a big cover-up of the details because they would point to the
fact that Al-Qaeda is alive and well in Libya.
Bottom line, four dead because Obama put politics ahead of American
lives.

[Phlip]

On Nov 2, 11:30 pm, Hell Stomper <stardusth...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Bottom line, four dead because Obama put politics ahead of American
> lives.

15 dead. 4 Americans and 11 Libyans, who died defending us.

[3216 Dead]

And more Libyan contacts at risk for their lives because that asshole Issa
betrayed them in his damp lust to try and find a scandal in that mess.

Party first, America last--that's the GOP.

[3216 Dead]

On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 23:42:53 -0500, Dänk 42Ø wrote:

> On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 23:06:50 +0000, 3216 Dead quacked:
>
>> http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/11/02/1128831/new-details-
>> discredit-fox-news-benghazi/
>>
>> New Details Discredit Fox News Reports On Benghazi Attacks
>>
>> By Hayes Brown on Nov 2, 2012 at 9:47 am
>>
>>
>> A slew of new reporting this morning debunks Fox News reports claiming
>> that the Obama administration withheld assistance during the Sept. 11
>> attack on a U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya. With these revelations,
>> the combined conservative narrative as led by Fox News — that the Obama
>> administration failed to respond adequately during the attack and that
>> mainstream media has not covered Benghazi enough — is in further
>> disarray.
>
> According to ABC News -- which has no known connection to Rupert Murdoch
> -- the streets around the embassy were calm and clear shortly before the
> attack. This contradicts the Obama administration's claim that the
> attack was the result of a protest (against the Mohammed video) that
> spiraled out of control. Surveillance video recovered after the bombing
> shows that there was no protest that day, yet the Obama administration
> continued to parrot the claim for two weeks afterwards.

That was in reference to the embassy in Cairo, earlier that day.

[MattB]

On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 21:24:50 -0700 (PDT), Phlip <phli...@gmail.com>
wrote:

"CIA typically CAN'T let the president" Can't let the President? So
you are saying in Obama's world the elected leader can be told what to
do by the civilian agency answerable to him and the American people?

Liberal type of government where the bureaucrats rule.

Obama failed yet again is the truth.

[Obama's Legion of Flash Mobs]

On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 23:06:50 +0000 (UTC), 3216 Dead <de...@gone.com>
wrote:

>http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/11/02/1128831/new-details-
>discredit-fox-news-benghazi/
>
>New Details Discredit Fox News Reports On Benghazi Attacks
>
>By Hayes Brown on Nov 2, 2012 at 9:47 am
>
>
>A slew of new reporting this morning debunks Fox News reports claiming
>that the Obama administration withheld assistance during the Sept. 11
>attack on a U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya. With these revelations, the
>combined conservative narrative as led by Fox News — that the Obama
>administration failed to respond adequately during the attack and that
>mainstream media has not covered Benghazi enough — is in further disarray.
>
>The Los Angeles Times’ version of the CIA’s role focuses the most heavily
>on pushing back on Fox’s spin:
>
> “At every level in the chain of command, from the senior officers in
>Libya to the most senior officials in Washington, everyone was fully
>engaged in trying to provide whatever help they could,” a senior
>intelligence official said in a statement. “There were no orders to
>anybody to stand down in providing support.”
>
>Fox reporter Jennifer Griffin claimed in an “exclusive” report last week
>that the CIA denied Tyrone Woods, one of the four Americans killed in the
>attack, permission to help repel the assault. Griffin’s reporting spun
>off into a bevy of conspiracy theories on the far right. The Pentagon,
>White House, and CIA had all previously denied refusing requests for
>support. The New York Times reports on the Pentagon’s involvement:
>
> [A] senior official

So it's heresay.

Unless the unidentified senior official goes on record, your story is
bullshit!

also sought to rebut reports that C.I.A. requests
>for support from the Pentagon that night had gone unheeded.
>
> In fact, the official said,

It's bullshit unless it's on record, just like it's bullshit that
Obama ordered everything be done to rescue Ambassador Stevens unless
you can produce the ORDER IN WRITTING!

the military diverted a Predator drone
>from a reconnaissance mission in Darnah, 90 miles away, in time to
>oversee the mission’s evacuation. The two commandos, based at the embassy
>in Tripoli, joined the reinforcements. And a military transport plane
>flew the wounded Americans and Mr. Stevens’s body out of Libya.
>
>The new reports also contain previously unreported details about the
>CIA’s role in Benghazi. President Obama and Secretary of Defense Panetta
>did order U.S. forces into the region, but the CIA was the first to
>respond to the attack, arriving on the scene in under half an hour.

Where's the order, what reports?

>
>The lack of security at the outpost in Benghazi, far removed from the
>U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, has been the subject of inquiry by both Fox News
>and Congressional Republicans. The Wall Street Journal sheds new light
>onto why that was the case. The CIA and State Department had entered into
>a series of secret deals in which the Agency would provide emergency
>security to the diplomats operating within Libya.
>
>While the State Department primarily relied upon local Libyan militias
>for day-to-day protection, as well as contracted British private
>security, the arrangement between it and the CIA explains why the outpost
>seemed under-protected. The revelation also will prompt a renewed look at
>the State Department’s decisions to remove Department of Defense-provided
>security from the Embassy in Tripoli, which were highly scrutinized
>during Rep. Darrel Issa’s hearings.

More top secret bullshit from unnamed sources?

So we'll have to wait for more bullshit?

>
>The primary role of the CIA was intelligence gathering and covert
>operations within Benghazi. Agents there operated out of an annex
>originally reported to be an offshoot of the diplomatic mission, revealed
>officially — and accidentally — during Issa’s highly politicized hearing
>into the Benghazi attacks. The Agency’s large presence may also help
>explain why the diplomatic compound was open to journalists and looters
>for weeks after the attack, as more vital intelligence documents were
>collected.
>
>Washington Post’s David Ignatius has gone as far as to produce a detailed
>minute-by-minute timeline, of the events that night. These reports
>together give the clearest picture yet of the events in Benghazi. Rather
>than the Obama Presidency unraveling as the news organization has
>claimed, it appears to be Fox News’ narrative that is coming undone
>instead.

Bull shit...nothing's changed! Never has the question been answered by
security for the President's Ambassador reduced when he him self asked
three times for more!

[3216 Dead]

Have you looked at the Faux News 'sources'? Their story is crap from the
get-go!

[Phlip]

On Nov 3, 9:06 am, MattB <trdell1234N...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >What magic world do you live in where a president is expected to go on
> >TV, every day, and say "The CIA did this, the CIA did that..."
>
> >The CIA typically CAN'T let the president disclose every thing they
> >did, you total moron.
>
> "CIA typically CAN'T let the president"   Can't let the President?  So
> you are saying in Obama's world the elected leader can be told what to
> do by the civilian agency answerable to him and the American people?

No, MattB - Democrat politicians don't betray their troops' location,
while they are on a mission, just for political gain. You are thinking
of Republican politicians...