Benghazi Threads-Merged

[cltrat]

that may be the dumbest thing I have ever seen you post.
More people may likely die today from cancer than Benghazi too,
I guess the the difference is hopefully none of the cancer patients died of incompetence.

 

[2ndGENAMT]

I didn't know Black Friday was a function of the Department of State... I knew there was something to be learned by reading the Forums!

 

[southwind]

I didn't know Black Friday was a function of the Department of State... I knew there was something to be learned by reading the Forums!

If BaRack has his way, it will be !

How dare those Capitalist "Force" people to shop!

 

[700UW]

http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2013/benghazi/?smid=tw-bna#/?chapt=0
 
A Deadly Mix in Benghazi
 

Months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault. The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi. And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.

 

The attack also suggests that, as the threats from local militants around the region have multiplied, an intensive focus on combating Al Qaeda may distract from safeguarding American interests.
 
In this case, a central figure in the attack was an eccentric, malcontent militia leader, Ahmed Abu Khattala, according to numerous Libyans present at the time. American officials briefed on the American criminal investigation into the killings call him a prime suspect. Mr. Abu Khattala declared openly and often that he placed the United States not far behind Colonel Qaddafi on his list of infidel enemies. But he had no known affiliations with terrorist groups, and he had escaped scrutiny from the 20-person C.I.A. station in Benghazi that was set up to monitor the local situation.

 

The other, favored by Republicans, holds that Mr. Stevens died in a carefully planned assault by Al Qaeda to mark the anniversary of its strike on the United States 11 years before. Republicans have accused the Obama administration of covering up evidence of Al Qaeda’s role to avoid undermining the president’s claim that the group has been decimated, in part because of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden.
 
The investigation by The Times shows that the reality in Benghazi was different, and murkier, than either of those story lines suggests. Benghazi was not infiltrated by Al Qaeda, but nonetheless contained grave local threats to American interests. The attack does not appear to have been meticulously planned, but neither was it spontaneous or without warning signs.
 

 

[delldude]

http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2013/benghazi/?smid=tw-bna#/?chapt=0
 
A Deadly Mix in Benghazi
 
 
 

 
So the Times beat out the Obama administration and the FBI in their own investigations?
 
I wonder if the Times was allowed to interview those people who were on site and gag ordered by Clinton and Kerry.

 

[delldude]

Obama's own at NYT running cover again.....must mean Issa got indictments coming.
 

 

 
The new report published Saturday in the New York Times concludes that there was no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault that killed four Americans on September 11, 2012, and that it appeared that the attack was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made anti-Islamic video, as the Obama administration first claimed.
 
New York Rep. Peter King, member and former chairman of the House’s Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, told Fox News the argument that the most overtly anti-Western militia, Ansar al-Shariah – not Al Qaeda – led the attack is an academic argument over semantics, considering Ansar al-Shariah is widely believed to be an affiliate terror group of Al Qaeda.
“It’s misleading,” King said. “It’s a distinction without a difference.”
 
The claims by the New York Times also conflicts with other evidence, including the testimony of Greg Hicks, the deputy of Ambassador Christopher Stevens who was killed in the attack. Hicks described the video as "a non-event in Libya" at that time, and consequently not a significant trigger for the attack
 
It would also contradict a separate report by a leading social media firm that found that the first reference to the anti-Islam film that was initially blamed for sparking the attack was not detected on social media until a day later.

 

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

The indictments will immediately follow the 2011 Depression and the Cain Presidency.

 

[delldude]

The indictments will immediately follow the 2011 Depression and the Cain Presidency.

 
Don't get out or read much, eh Quag's?
 
You've been living a depression that was sugar coated.

 

[Dog Wonder]

Don't get out or read much, eh Quag's?

I usually read indoors.

 

[southwind]

I usually read indoors.

Guess your owner don't care much for your one liners either!

 

[delldude]

http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2013/benghazi/?smid=tw-bna#/?chapt=0
 
A Deadly Mix in Benghazi
 
The investigation by The Times shows that the reality in Benghazi was different, and murkier, than either of those story lines suggests. Benghazi was not infiltrated by Al Qaeda, but nonetheless contained grave local threats to American interests. The attack does not appear to have been meticulously planned, but neither was it spontaneous or without warning signs.
 
 

 
LOL.....
 
 

Congress, in bipartisan tone, disputes report Al Qaeda not involved in deadly Benghazi attack
“I dispute that, and the intelligence community, to a large volume, disputes that,” Michigan GOP Rep. Mike Rogers, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, told “Fox News Sunday.”  
He also repeatedly said the story was “not accurate.”
Rogers was joined on the show by California Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff, who said, “intelligence indicates Al Qaeda was involved.”
 

 

[700UW]

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-12-28/libya-fighters-not-al-qaeda-behind-benghazi-attack-nyt-says

 

[Dog Wonder]

Guess your owner don't care much for your one liners either!

Guess your owner won't let you have any books.

 

[delldude]

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-12-28/libya-fighters-not-al-qaeda-behind-benghazi-attack-nyt-says

 

Yes, There IS Evidence Linking al Qaeda to Benghazi

 
Libyan militants tell the New York Times that al Qaeda is not behind the 2012 Benghazi attack. Some members of Congress have intelligence that says otherwise.
 
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/12/29/yes-there-is-evidence-linking-al-qaeda-to-benghazi.html

 

[Knotbuyinit]

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-12-28/libya-fighters-not-al-qaeda-behind-benghazi-attack-nyt-says

 
Proving, once again, that the NYT is not a credible or reliable source for reporting on stories that might discredit their man in the White house or the current administration. The article is a joke!  There isn't a scintilla of connection between the videotape and the attacks that lasted nearly eight hours, with professional mortar fire onto the annex. 
 
The NYT is going to endorse Hillary for President and this fabrication simply helps pave the way for the "what difference does it make?" candidate.