eXc: Nous aimons la liberté, l'état de droit, l'héritage des Lumières, la séparation de l'église et de l'état, l'humour. Nous n'aimons pas le fascisme, le communisme, l'antiaméricanisme, l'antisémitisme, le racisme, la bureaucratie, les totalitarismes. Nous estimons que le plus grave danger que courent les démocraties libérales est de céder à l'islamofascisme. Lire plus

Election présidentielle américaine/2012: C’est Romney qui avait raison sur Benghazi (People died, Obama lied)

Posté le mercredi 17 octobre 2012 par jc durbant

Au lendemain d’un deuxième débat présidentiel où, multipliant les attaques verbales gratuites et les contre-vérités, un président sortant en chute libre dans les sondages suite au désastre du premier semble avoir réussi à donner le change …

Et où, malgré quelques erreurs tactiques (notamment le pinaillage inutile sur le temps ou l’ordre de parole) et le manque de précision sur certaines de ses propositions, son adversaire républicain a largement tenu sa place et surtout réussi à pointer l’indéfendable bilan du locataire actuel de la Maison Blanche …

Pendant qu’au Pays autoproclamé des Droits de l’homme, les patrons de Jihad-TV et financiers tous azimuth du jihadisme de la Libye au Nord-Mali se voient remercier par une place au sein de l’Organisation internationale de la Francophonie …

Retour, avec le site Factchecker, sur l’évidente opération de dissimulation, pour ne pas dire mensonge y compris pendant le débat, de l’Administration Obama sur l’attaque terroriste de Benghazi.

Opération de dissimulation qui commence dès la première déclaration présidentielle du Rose Garden du 12 septembre où son utilisation réelle du terme « acte de terrorisme », mais dans un sens purement général, vient juste après le rappel appuyé de la volonté des Etats-Unis de « respecter toutes les croyances » et de « rejeter tous les efforts visant à dénigrer les croyances religieuses d’autrui », référence on ne peut plus claire à la version « manifestation qui a dégénéré » et donc à la vidéo anti-islamiste censée avoir déclenché l’attaque.

Et qui, jouant sur la confusion avec les autres manifestations du Monde arabe qui ont suivi et balayant les critiques derrière le rideau de fumée de l’enquête en cours, sera de fait maintenue près de deux semaines quand, sans compter les revendications explicites d’Al Qaeda et le fait qu’il n’y eut même pas de manifestation à Benghazi au moment de l’attaque, les déclarations des responsables militaires et de renseignement américains auront démontré que la vidéo n’était qu’un prétexte pour une attaque délibérément terroriste …

Avec l’évidente volonté de préserver, en cette journée hautement symbolique de l’anniversaire du 11/9 et surtout en pleine campagne électorale (débat d’hier compris!) voyant la première mort d’un ambassadeur américain en service depuis Carter il y a 33 ans en Afghanistan, l’un des rares points forts supposés d’un bilan catastrophique …

A savoir celui d’avoir, grâce notamment aux dispositifs mis en place par son prédécesseur, tenu tête à Al Qaeda …

jc durbant @ 02:27
Catégorie(s): Présidentielle américaine 2012


Laisser un commentaire


3 réponses à “Election présidentielle américaine/2012: C’est Romney qui avait raison sur Benghazi (People died, Obama lied)”

  • 3
    jc durbant:

    WHAT BENGHAZI LIES ?

    The Obama administration and Clinton officials hid this compelling Benghazi e-mail for years. The e-mail makes readily apparent that the military was prepared to launch immediate assistance that could have made a difference, at least at the CIA Annex. The fact that the Obama Administration withheld this e-mail for so long only worsens the scandal of Benghazi.

    Tom Fitton (Judicial Watch)

  • 2
    jc durbant:

    OBAMA LIED, PEOPLE DIED (New releases by Judicial Watch confirm Obama administration’s lies about Benghazi)

    Judicial Watch today released 54 pages of new State Department documents, including a transcript of a September 12 2012, telephone conference call with congressional staffers in which then-Under Secretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy admitted that the deadly terrorist assault on the Benghazi Consulate was not “under cover of protest,” but was, in fact, “a direct breaching attack.”

    The exchange comes late in the conversation with Robert Carter, an aide to Rep. Michael C. Burgess (R-TX). Carter asks Kennedy directly whether this involved a protest, and Kennedy says no:

    Earlier in the briefing, Kennedy also tells a staffer from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the attack was “semi-complex,” and later adds that it included “medium” weapons such as RPGs and/or mortars, indicating some significant planning. Four days later, Susan Rice — also a State Department official at that time — went on four Sunday talk shows to say exactly the opposite. Rice claimed, as did Clinton and Obama for two weeks, that the attack grew spontaneously out of a protest against an amateurish and obscure YouTube video. Not once in these notes does the subject of a YouTube video come up at all.

    That’s highly significant. Kennedy’s description of events in these notes matches pretty well with the final recap, although it appears to elide over the fact that it was two separate attacks over 13 hours rather than just one attack. It’s accurate on the “direct breaching attack” and the use of medium weaponry, all indications of a planned attack, and Kennedy even points out that a terror group had taken credit for the attack without naming it (Ansar al-Shariah, which later turned out to be accurate).

    By September 12th, the State Department knew full well that there was no factual basis to claim that it was anything other than a planned terrorist attack and had already told Congress the same thing. And yet, State and the White House had Rice make that case anyway, less than two months before the 2012 presidential election.

    Interestingly, one staffer wonders about the readiness of the consulate at the time of the attack, given that it took place on the anniversary of 9/11. “Equivalent of defcon 5,” the notes indicate Kennedy’s response — the lowest readiness setting. That’s astounding, given the location of the consulate and the level of protection that we could have expected from the weak Libyan government at that time. Remember, by this time all other Western nations had pulled out of Benghazi because of the threat of terror networks that had already begun operating openly in the failed state. Just a few months earlier, terrorists had attempted a “direct breaching attack” against this same consulate. That certainly might explain why the Obama administration and Secretary of State Clinton were in such a hurry to blame the whole thing on a YouTube video rather than their own lack of preparation and foresight, especially with an election on the near horizon …

    http://hotair.com/archives/2017/02/15/new-foia-release-obama-admin-knew-immediately-benghazi-was-direct-breaching-terror-attack-not-under-cover-of-protest/ (merci james)

  • 1
    jc durbant:

    Morceaux choisis:

    Les Etats-Unis condamnent dans les termes les plus énergiques cette attaque scandaleuse et choquante. Nous travaillons en collaboration avec le gouvernement ibyen pour garantir la sécurité de nos diplomates. J’ai également demandé à mon administration d’accroître notre sécurité aux postes diplomatiques dans le monde entier. Et ne vous méprenez pas, nous allons travailler avec le gouvernement libyen pour traduire en justice les tueurs qui ont attaqué notre peuple. (…) Depuis notre fondation, les États-Unis ont été une nation qui respecte toutes les croyances. Nous rejetons tous les efforts visant à dénigrer les croyances religieuses d’autrui. Mais il n’y a absolument aucune justification à ce type de violence insensée. Aucune. Le monde doit être solidaire pour rejeter sans équivoque ces actes brutaux… Aucun acte de terreur ne saurait jamais ébranler la détermination de cette grande nation, modifier son caractère ou éclipser la lumière des valeurs que nous défendons.

    Président Obama (Rose Garden, 12 sept. 2012)

    QUESTION: “We have reports that the White House said today that the attacks in Libya were a terrorist attack. Do you have information indicating that it was Iran, or al-Qaeda was behind organizing the protests?”
    OBAMA: “Well, we’re still doing an investigation, and there are going to be different circumstances in different countries. And so I don’t want to speak to something until we have all the information. What we do know is that the natural protests that arose because of the outrage over the video were used as an excuse by extremists to see if they can also directly harm U.S. interests.”

    President Obama (Univision Town Hall, Sept. 20)

    QUESTION: “I heard Hillary Clinton say it was an act of terrorism. Is it? What do you say?”
    OBAMA: “We are still doing an investigation. There is no doubt that the kind of weapons that were used, the ongoing assault, that it wasn’t just a mob action. Now, we don’t have all the information yet so we are still gathering.”

    Obama (ABC, Sept. 25)

    We are still doing an investigation. There is no doubt that the kind of weapons that were used, the ongoing assault, that it wasn’t just a mob action. Now, we don’t have all the information yet so we are still gathering.

    Obama (Sept. 25)

    The State Department said Tuesday it never concluded that the consulate attack in Libya stemmed from protests over an American-made video ridiculing Islam, raising further questions about why President Barack Obama’s administration used that explanation for more than a week after assailants killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans. The revelation came as new documents suggested internal disagreement over appropriate levels of security before the attack, which occurred on the 11th anniversary of the Sept. 11 terror attacks on the U.S.

    The Associated Press (Oct. 10, 2012)

    For political reasons, it certainly was in the White House’s interests to not portray the attack as a terrorist incident, especially one that took place on the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks. Instead the administration kept the focus on what was ultimately a red herring — anger in the Arab world over anti-Muslim video posted on You Tube. With key phrases and message discipline, the administration was able to conflate an attack on the U.S. Embassy in Egypt — which apparently was prompted by the video — with the deadly assault in Benghazi. Officials were also able to dismiss pointed questions by referring to an ongoing investigation.

    Glenn Kessler
















  • Notice: Undefined index: p in /home3/baraka/public_html/wp-content/themes/Howl/footer.php on line 59

    Notice: Undefined index: page_id in /home3/baraka/public_html/wp-content/themes/Howl/footer.php on line 60

    Notice: Undefined index: m in /home3/baraka/public_html/wp-content/themes/Howl/footer.php on line 61

    Notice: Undefined index: s in /home3/baraka/public_html/wp-content/themes/Howl/footer.php on line 62

    Notice: Undefined index: cat in /home3/baraka/public_html/wp-content/themes/Howl/footer.php on line 63

    Notice: Undefined variable: PHP_SELF in /home3/baraka/public_html/wp-content/themes/Howl/footer.php on line 65

    Notice: Undefined property: wpdb::$is_admin in /home3/baraka/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 684