Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
#1 The emails, obtained from government sources not connected with U.S. intelligence agencies or the State Department and who requested anonymity....
.......but whom wished to defend the constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic, and are located at a remote area of Fort Bragg.
Posted by Besoeker 2012-10-24 02:06||
#2 Lying bastards
Posted by Frank G 2012-10-24 08:01||
#3 Would this count as "The October Surprise"?
No amount of denial by the powers that be can erase the impact of finally being found out.
Posted by Au Auric 2012-10-24 09:27||
#4 Only if people are paying attention.
Posted by lotp 2012-10-24 11:00||
#5 With the rest of Fort Bragg being inhabited by the 82nd Airborne Division including the 2/505 Panthers.
Posted by bman 2012-10-24 11:10||
#6 Darth Bolton just held up a copy of one of the e-mails on Fox. While the recipient names were redacted (blocked out), the office symbols were not. Bolton named off a couple of very high ranking State Dept. offices.
Posted by Besoeker 2012-10-24 11:32||
#7 "Lying bastards"
But we already knew that, Frank.
How can we tell Bambi and his minions are lying? Their lips are moving. >:-(
Posted by Barbara 2012-10-24 11:58||
#8 Quoting Vodkapundit, Stephen Green:
So why the coverup? Why the lame attempt to blame it on a video, the producer of which is still in jail? Why send Susan Rice out on five Sunday shows in one morning to plead ignorance?
It's hard to do victory laps around al Qaeda while al Qaeda is running victory laps around the smoldering remains of our consulate.
Posted by DarthVader 2012-10-24 12:10||
Posted by JohnQC 2012-10-24 14:30||
#10 It is interesting to note who was copied on these emails and reports.
Posted by JohnQC 2012-10-24 14:55||
#11 They also tied it to an international push for censorship.
I seem to remember some other screw-up attempted tie-into a null-and-void of our rights..
Posted by swksvolFF 2012-10-24 16:40||
#12 OK, I'm going to agree with the Administration on one point: the fact that an Islamicist group claimed responsibility is really not necessarily reliable evidence they did it.
Groups jostling for street cred make such claims often. We know that Ansar al Shariah was making a play to lead Islamist groups overall because they organized a meeting in Benghazi earlier this summer and attempted to assert their leadership there. It's quite conceivable that they would lie to promote that assertion.
What chaffs me badly is the overt false assertion about a video-inspired riot. THAT was clearly false and they damned well knew it, or should have.
Posted by lotp 2012-10-24 18:28||
#13 It's quite conceivable that they would lie to promote that assertion.
Also quite conceivable they were telling the truth.
Posted by Glenmore 2012-10-24 18:50||
#14 Gaffney has a great article on Benghazigate in the Washington Times that would explain why they would try to blame it all on a video: In short, it seems President Obama has been engaged in gun-walking on a massive scale. The effect has been to equip America's enemies to wage jihad not only against regimes it once claimed were our friends, but inevitably against us and our allies as well. That would explain his administration's desperate and now failing bid to mislead the voters through the serial deflections of Benghazigate.
Posted by Lumpy Elmoluck 5095 2012-10-24 22:49||
#15 What chaffs me badly is the overt false assertion about a video-inspired riot. THAT was clearly false and they damned well knew it, or should have.
Obama and Hill are both lawyers, yet scapegoated a video producer and US citizen--what about his Constitutional rights? King O arrogantly acts with impunity but this may be his Waterloo.
Posted by Lumpy Elmoluck 5095 2012-10-24 22:59||