The Benghazi Cover up ... Mas O Menos?

[LoveLife&Laughter]

Does everyone  here believe that there was an attempted coverup after the fact?  Conservatives believe so  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/08/mohamed-gamal-abu-ahmed_n_...

 

When Americans are asked if they believe the White House lied or engaged in a coverup, 54 percent said that inaccurate initial statements from the White House were based on the best knowledge they had at the time.  

 

Forty-eight percent believe the U.S. could have prevented the attack, and 42 percent think it could not have been stopped. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/84260.html

My question is this.  If our CIA and/or our military intelligence only knew about forthcoming riots over some stupid right wing book, how could we have prevented the attack? 
 

[Lifesighs]

I believe the pundits tried to politicize the attack to help them in the election. I'm really disappointed in McCain for his part in that. Fox news and Ruch etc would do and say anything to keep those who pay them happy.

[exedir]

Ah, no....not a cover up but a flawed scenario that was known to be flawed...that the public talking points had been created to reflect a reality that hadn't existed, while the reality that did, exist, was clouded by the fog of events, sorta.

The problem with the flawed scenario, was, it was flawed from the beginning in what was known, that this was an terrorist attack and there was no association with the demonstrations of a YouTube clip taken from the "Innocence of Muslims", a supposed movie that dealt with the prophet in a way that was intended to insult Islam, produced in the United States under murky circumstances.  

The Benghazi  attack occurred on the 9-11 anniversary while there were violent demonstrations that had been ongoing during the day in other Arab and Islamic countries and was done by well armed and coordinated group that not only attacked the consulate, but also attacked a CIA safe house where the deaths occurred of the security men and the ambassador.   Much of what happened was monitored in real time and monitored by a drone already in the air during the events in Benghazi by intelligent agencies and the military, who already had prior warnings as to serious security issues in Benghazi and eastern Libya.

As to what Ambassador Rice was given to present to the TV media has a lot to be explained including why it was Susan Rice in the first place when the issue related to the State Department not the UN as to what happened and who was responsible.  And if not a Secretary of State, if she was not available, why not the deputy secretary of state, say, the deputy in charge of diplomatic security? 

Clearly, the intent was to push Susan Rice's credentials as the next SoS, and clearly it was not a good idea, and clearly as an idea, where did it come from, and as to politics involved, sure, why not.