Why are they so adamant about standing by this absurd theory that a movie got Ambassador Stevens killed, and that a coordinated attack with mortars and RPGs was **“spontaneous”? **It seems to me like a sure way to piss away his credibility on national security issues. If it was an al Qaeda attack, does that make him look worse than claiming that a movie did all this? -Post #001 09-18-2012, 09:54 AM
I appreciate that you have now agreed that Susan Rice did not blame the movie for the attack.
We know now that Susan Rice and the Administration were stating what the intelligence agencies were telling them.
Here is the FACT that you did not know back in September.
The CIA is the ORIGINATOR of this assessment in the Talking Points that Susan Rice used to say what she said on the Sunday Talk Shows." the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired.
Do you accept that you were wrong in your criticism last year and that you are wrong today to still be claiming that the words such as “spontaneous” and ‘demonstrations’
What the e-mails say:
Page 15 (4:42 p.m.): CIA sends out a new draft for review before sending to the White House.
ORIGINAL CIA revised draft of TALKING POINTS (9/14/12 04:42 PM):
(See Link to Ibtimes for scroll of 100 originals released by the White House.)
We believe based on currently available information that the demonstrations in Benghazi were **spontaneously inspired by the protests **at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo **and **evolved into a direct assault **against **the U.S. Consulate and subsequently its annex. This assessment may change as additional information is collected and analyzed and currently available information continues to be evaluated. On 10 September we warned of social media reports calling for a demonstration in front of the Embassy and that jihadists were threatening to break into the Embassy.
**The crowd **almost certainly was a mix of individuals from across many sectors of Libyan society. That being said, we do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa’ida participated in the attack.
Initial press reporting linked the attack to Ansar al-Sharia. The group has since released a statement that its leadership did not order the attacks, but it did not deny that some of its members were involved.
The wide availability of weapons and experienced fighters in Libya almost certainly contribute to the lethality of the attacks.
The Agency has produced numerous pieces on the threat of extremists linked to al-Qa’ida in Benghazi and eastern Libya. These noted that since April, there have been at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British Ambassador’s convoy. We cannot rule out the individuals has [sic] previously surveilled the U.S. facilities, also contributing to the efficacy of the attacks.
We working with Libyan Authorities and intelligence partners in an effort to help bring justice those responsible for the deaths of US citizens.
Page 21 (5:09 p.m.): A version of talking points is sent to the White House and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence at 5:09 p.m. This is the second draft of the talking points, when the reference to “attack” was changed to “demonstrations.”
Newly Released Benghazi Emails Reveal Talking Points Timeline [FULL TEXT TRANSCRIPT] | IBTimes (see page 14 and 15 on the scroll of 100 email documents}