The CIA knew within 24 hours the attack on the American consulate in Libya was a terrorist attack
Desperate to find a scapegoat for the cover up, as well as an excuse for the misleading stories coming out of Washington, in the wake of the terrorist attack on the United States consulate in Libya on the anniversary of September 11th which doesn’t implicate the president the Obama regime has been trying to pin the blame on the intelligence agencies.
The Obama regime continues to state that at the time they were using the intelligence they had available, and that intelligence told them this was a protest over a You Tube video.
Despite the Obama regime’s protestations this story isn’t quite accurate because back on October 8th I wrote this post about an aide to Hillary Clinton, Patrick Kennedy, who knew that the attack was a terrorist attack and not a movie critique gone bad within 24 hours of the attack. If he knew it others did as well.
And now today we have learned that the CIA knew within 24 hours of the attack that this was a terrorist attack and the agency in fact sent a report to Washington within that time frame informing them of the situation. This of course is in direct contradiction with what Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have been telling us over the last month or so, isn’t it? The intelligence was there, the Obama regime either willfully ignored it or didn’t bother to read it.
We know that Barack Obama didn’t bother to attend his national security briefings before the attack because he had more important issues to deal with–his reelection–so I wouldn’t be surprised at all to learn he didn’t bother to read the CIA report either.
When speaking to Jon Stewart on his “less than optimal” response to the attack Barack Obama stated that “you find out what is broken and you fix it.” I agree with that but at this point I think we all know what is broken and there is only one thing we can do to fix the problem…..vote Barack Obama out of office in November.
America's Watchtower 
One should never underestimate Team Obama, but with the Benghazi story continuing to unravel I don’t see how Obama doesn’t get seriously hurt by this. Fox is runnung a story that arms from Libya have been moving out of Libya to Syrian rebels via Turkey. Another source I read several days ago talked about this and claimed the Ambassador was involved and that his meeting that day with the delegate from Turkey had to do with arms shipments to the Syrian rebels. If that story gets legs, Obama id toast.
LikeLike
I have also heard rumors that there was a Fast and Furious type scandal involved here with weapons heading over to Syria. I have also heard that the ambassador was involved or was getting too close to the truth and had to be taken out. There are many rumors out there and there is no doubt Barack Obama is trying to hide something.
LikeLike
I had the same hunch as Jim. Though I have gone one more. This may have been a coverup and Stevens was expendable. There was some reason he was not given more security, Perhaps the Turkey delegate was the target as well. Now I will put away my t.f.hat.
LikeLike
There is a rumor out there that Stevens was getting too close to the truth about the weapons heading into Syria so he was taken out. It may be tinfoil hat material, but then again it might not be. What is Barack Obama trying to hide.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Freedom Is Just Another Word….
LikeLike
Thank you.
LikeLike
What Vice President Biden said during his debate was that they were receiving raw material, not analyzed intelligence. The article linked in your post, Steve, says that the Libyan station chief reported to Washington that there was evidence that the assault was carried out by militants, not carried out by a mob pissed off about a video.
There’s a great distance between “having evidence” and “knowing.” There’s a good chance that reports were being received from numerous sources, and those reports each had to be analyzed and evaluated. Adopting the contents of a single report as truth because it’s consistent with your own belief is fine, I guess, if you’re writing a highly partisan blog, but it’s another thing entirely when you’re responsible for the security of American personnel worldwide.
There’s no doubt that something went wrong here, but the partisans blaming the President must accept some of the responsibility themselves, considering their successful efforts in the legislature to reduce the funding for embassy security. There’s also reasonable evidence to suggest that even if the embassy had had all the security it had requested, it would still have been overrun by the militants.
Take good care and may God bless us all!
TGY
LikeLike
Even if it is true that Obama didn’t know this was a terrorist attack when he made his first statements on this he surely knew the truth weeks later when he blamed the attack ion the You Tube video, he continued this lie for weeks after he knew the truth.
LikeLike
Georgia YANKEE, indeed. Your comment indicates a taste for Kool Aid.
LikeLike
It is very important to President Obama that he say “There have been no terrorists attacks on my watch”- and thus the attack on Fort Hood was a ‘job-related incident’ and the attack on our consulate in Libya were ‘the actions of a mob upset at a provoking movie’. The truth does not matter- those were indeed terrorist attacks- and thus for him there is a very real and important desire to use words and rhetoric to disguise and hide the truth.
That’s why we need to support Romney- he may not be perfect, but he does live in this world and not bizarro world, and he does run his life and his business on results and data and not wishes and desires. If you haven’t actively worked yet to get rid of Obama, you’re just talk to- donate to Romney’s campaign, walk door-to-door, post on social networking sites, vote, and get your family to vote.
LikeLike
You make a good point there; it is important for Obama to claim there hasn’t been a terrorist attack since he took office and he is doing everything he can to hide the truth on this issue as well as the Fort Hood terrorist attack.
LikeLike
Fort Hood was “Work Place Violence”? Screaming “Allahu Akbar” from the table while firing into the crowd? Yeah, “work place violence” indeed. Kiss my what?
LikeLike
Absolutely asinine that the Obama regime would classify this as workplace violence when most Americans know what this was.
LikeLike
Trying to cover it’s pisslamic brothers.
LikeLike
More and more, Benghazi-gate is emerging as something that should sink Obama’s chances for re-election.
LikeLike
I agree and I think the longer this plays out the worse it is for Obama as he continues to try to spin this.
LikeLike