GOP congressman blasts NY Times Benghazi claims as ‘misleading’

by
December 29, 2013

122813_ANHQ_Benghazi_640
A top congressional Republican is saying a new report that concludes Al Qaeda did not carry out the 2012 attack on the U.S diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, is “misleading.”

The new report published Saturday in the New York Times concludes that there was no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault that killed four Americans on September 11, 2012, and that it appeared that the attack was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made anti-Islamic video, as the Obama administration first claimed.

New York Rep. Peter King, member and former chairman of the House’s Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, told Fox News the argument that the most overtly anti-Western militia, Ansar al-Shariah – not Al Qaeda – led the attack is an academic argument over semantics, considering Ansar al-Shariah is widely believed to be an affiliate terror group of Al Qaeda.

“It’s misleading,” King said. “It’s a distinction without a difference.”

The claims by the New York Times also conflicts with other evidence, including the testimony of Greg Hicks, the deputy of Ambassador Christopher Stevens who was killed in the attack. Hicks described the video as “a non-event in Libya” at that time, and consequently not a significant trigger for the attack

  • Ira Seigel

    If Congressmen Peter King, Darrell Issa and Mike Rogers have CONCRETE information to support their theories, let’s see it. They’ve presented nothing except their unsubstantiated and unverified (and unverifiable) version of events. Politics, not a true desire for truth and to learn from intelligence failures, motivates them.

  • Steven Webster

    We still have not been able to see the real time video or hear from the 30 or so survivors. until we get to know the evidence no meaningful conclusion can reached. But after a year and half what difference does it make any how.

  • Johnnie Simpson

    Yes,the investigation into Benghazi seems to be gaining more steam,so I believe this report is nothing more than a press release trying to make people believe it was much ado about nothing.Isn’t that what Obama has tried to do since day one of this tragic event?I believe Obama is in collusion with our enemies and is the worst traitor in our nation’s history.I’m not one to buy in on conspiracy theories,but I get connect the dots and read between lines pretty good.

  • edgineer

    The MSM putting out the predictable propaganda to change history again. They were very good at covering up the fact that the Democrats are responsible for the economic meltdown in 2008. This is business as usual.

    • Ira Seigel

      Historical revisionism at its finest. “..The ‘fact’ that the Democrats are responsible…”?? Where’s the proof?

      • edgineer

        Can you disprove it?

        • Ira Seigel

          That is an excellent question, my friend, so let me ask you something: Have you ever served on a jury? Have you ever been accused of something – even something minor, by a friend, parent, teacher, boss, etc? Let’s say you were stopped by a cop and he said you were speeding, or drunk. What would you do? Would you just take his word for it, and happily pay the ticket or go to jail, or, if you knew you hadn’t been speeding or drinking, would you demand proof that he clocked you at an illegal speed, or would you ask for a Breathalyzer test? Would you hire an attorney and fight the charge in court? If you did, then the cop would have to testify, and they would have to prove that their radar gun had been calibrated recently, or their breath or blood test they had given you was accurate and their evidence hadn’t been tampered with.
          You see, for almost 1000 years, our civilization has been built on the idea that a man is INNOCENT until proven guilty. In some places – China, North Korea, e.g. – it works the opposite; a person can be accused by the government and that person has to prove his innocence.
          How would you feel if you had been SECRETLY profiled by the TSA and found that you were now on the No Fly List? And you have absolutely NO recourse to fight it? Not an absurd scenario in this day and age, is it?
          So your question – to DISPROVE a statement that you and others have made here – is exactly OPPOSITE what our civilization is built on. When someone makes a claim about something – whether it’s a congressman, FOX commentator, or someone on this website, they need to present some evidence of actual FACTS to back up their claim.
          If not, we might as well be living in the 1950’s, when Congressman Joseph McCarthy could make any outlandish claim about a citizen’s patriotism and – without a shred of actual evidence – have that person’s career and freedom destroyed. Do you want to go back to living in that world?

          • edgineer

            Dear Ira:
            Read the above comment with care. I will abide by your wisdom and therefore ask you to provide proof that your comment is correct. Anxiously awaiting your proof.

          • Ira Seigel

            I’m not sure I understand what you’re asking. In my first post, I asked you to provide proof of what you claimed, which was that Democrats were responsible for the economic meltdown in 2008. You then asked me to try and disprove what you claimed. Even after my lengthy response, are you still asking that I disprove your claim?
            How about we try this. I am going to claim that George Bush was involved in a massive conspiracy to destroy the WTC, blame al Qaeda, and launch a war in Afghanistan. A corollary claim is that, conspiring with Tony Blair and the CIA, he knowingly started a war in Iraq knowing that his claims of WMD were outright lies. I am also going to make the claim that Dick Cheney, in his various roles in business and in government over the past 30 years, has conspired with Saddam Hussein and the Iranians to control the flow of oil through pipelines crossing Afghanistan. Heck, while I’m at it, I might as well make the claim that Lee Harvey Oswald wasn’t the lone gunman.
            Now, I don’t have any proof whatsoever that any of my claims are true, but – as I understand it from reading your posts – I don’t need any evidence at all to prove I’m right. Rather, the burden is on YOU to prove me wrong.
            See how this works, and how, if we try to have an intelligent conversation based on your rules, we don’t really deal with realities, but rather what anyone wants to put forward as their version of the truth?
            And that is why, as I’ve said, since the time of the signing of the Magna Carta almost 1000 years ago, we’ve agreed to operate on the laws of evidence. When we don’t, we get the Salem witch trials and the Spanish Inquisition.

          • edgineer

            Ira, Ira Ira….You do not get it?? OK. Let me clarify the obvious.

            You claimed in your statement that for 1000 years people were considered innocent until proven guilty. That is in black and white up above. Now I am asking you to prove that in the year 1014 onward people were considered innocent until proven guilty. This was centuries before the Spanish inquisition, French Revolution etc. so I am anxiously awaiting your proof.

          • Ira Seigel

            Surely I don’t need to point out that ENGLISH law wasn’t followed by the SPANISH during the Inquisition, and by the FRENCH during their revolutionary period (and during the time that they burned witches). The Portuguese and the Dutch, during their periods of conquest, didn’t abide by it. It also wasn’t followed by the Russians during practically all of their history, and certainly not in Muslim countries. But throughout the British Empire, where they brought their laws and customs and commerce, in many instances – NOT ALL – they brought the traditions enshrined in the Magna Carta with them.
            But something tells me you’re not really wanting a history lesson from a complete amateur like myself. I do have the feeling, though, that you’re sitting back laughing, asking me to jump thru one hoop after another with your demand of proof, while you offer nothing in return.
            So let’s get back to your original statement and the reason for my response to you. It’s time for YOU to lay YOUR cards on the table and show me what you’ve got. Any facts or reasoned arguments to back up your statement that “Democrats are responsible for the economic meltdown in 2008”?
            And if anyone else reading this has a logical argument to be made to support this statement, please join in. I have an open mind and I will do my best to remain respectful of anyone who shows me the same consideration.

          • edgineer

            Fair enough. You asked for proof that Democrats caused the collapse of 2009 . But you are going to have to read a little. Google “Affordable Housing Act” and read the various articles published about it. Here is a sample of what you will read.

            “The liberal Village Voice previously chronicled how Clinton
            Administration housing secretary Andrew Cuomo helped spawn the mortgage
            crisis through his pressure on lenders to promote affordable housing
            and diversity. “Andrew Cuomo, the
            youngest Housing and Urban Development secretary in history, made a
            series of decisions between 1997 and 2001 that gave birth to the
            country’s current crisis. He took actions that—in combination with many
            other factors—helped plunge Fannie and Freddie into the subprime markets
            without putting in place the means to monitor their increasingly risky
            investments.”

            Remember that the crisis was called the “sub prime mortgage crisis” and this is why. Once again the Democrats destroyed the US economy and blamed it on someone else.

          • Ira Seigel

            I did do some digging around and found that the article that you quoted comes from Wayne Barrett, an experienced reporter with the Village Voice. And one of his researchers was very involved on the Yale newspaper back then. I would have disregarded it outright if it had come from the CEI or another conservative thinktank. So yes, I respect the source of your information, and, because I’m not an expert or have the time or resources to try to refute IT, I will spend some time finding other sources to present a different viewpoint.
            But it does occur to me to ask: If you’re willing to believe an article in the Village Voice, why wouldn’t you be similarly open to believing the article that David Kirkpatrick wrote in the NY Times, about his Benghazi investigation referenced above?
            In any case, thanks for providing something concrete for me and any other readers here to learn from, rather than just locking your caps on and calling me a “commie”, as one pleasant person did in another part of this website 🙂 I will get back when I have something to further this conversation…

          • Ira Seigel

            The Affordable Housing Act that you referred to above was a bi-partisan law supported and signed by Pres George HW Bush in 1990. Here is part of what George HW Bush said during his signing ceremony:

            “S. 566 contains the Homeownership and Opportunity for People Everywhere — HOPE — initiatives that my Administration submitted to the Congress earlier this year. HOPE represents a dramatic and fundamental restructuring of housing policy. It recognizes that the poor and low-income tenants — not public housing authorities and developers — are our clients. HOPE will do what traditional programs have not done: empower low-income families to achieve self-sufficiency and to have a stake in their communities by promoting resident management as well as other forms of homeownership.

            The cornerstone of HOPE is a program to provide grants to enable low-income families and tenants to become homeowners….”

            (The full speech is here: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=19102)

            Were the GOALS of the program positive ones? It sounds like it. But without proper regulations and safeguards, banks and investors got greedy. Many of these safeguards were put in place after the Great Depression, in the Banking Act of 1933, commonly known as the Glass-Steagall Act (a Democratic senator from Virginia and a Democratic congressman from Virginia, respectively). These rules were steadily eroded – yes, by Andrew Cuomo perhaps, and many others – and the act’s 2 main safeguards to the banking system were repealed in the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (a Republican senator from Texas, and Republican congressmen from Iowa and Virgina, respectively) and signed into law by Pres Clinton (a Democrat).

            These are all facts that you can find via Google, Wikipedia, etc

            Regardless of what Wayne Barrett reported in his article of Aug 5, 2008 – at the beginning of the meltdown – it is a fact that the financial slide started in July 2007 when 2 Bear Stearns hedge funds went bankrupt. Bear Stearns was sold to JP Morgan Chase in March 2008 for only $2/share (their stock was at $93/share just a month earlier). Later that summer, Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy, and the economy plummeted down the cliff.

            So you have an article by Wayne Barrett in the Village Voice, and you also have a lots and lots of evidence and history indicating a steadily eroding system of regulations – which the Dodd-Frank Bill tries to fix – that led to the disaster. It sounds like there’s SOME blame to be laid at the feet of the Democrats, but the simple fact is that George W Bush took office in 2001 and he and his administration were “on watch” for the better part of 6 years presiding over an increasingly dangerous (banking) situation.

            And this, from the Wikipedia page for Alan Greenspan:
            “The easy-money policies of the Fed during Greenspan’s tenure (appointed by Reagan and re-appointed by G HW Bush, Clinton, and GW Bush) has been suggested to be a leading cause of the subprime mortgage crisis, which occurred within months of his departure from the Fed, and has, said the Wall Street Journal, “tarnished his image”.

  • WiSe GuY

    The reporter was bought and paid for, by 0bama.

  • WiSe GuY

    That story was bought and paid for by 0bama.

  • harrydweeks

    This is clearly an attempt to exonerate the Liar’s Lieutenant Hillary in order to clear her record before 2016. Sorry NY Times we all know you are the administration’s lap dogs.

  • PBHayes

    This report published in the NY Times is likely nothing more than an Obama Administration press release designed to cover his pathetic ass and that of Hillary Clinton. Do these people actually still believe anyone attributes any credibility to what this government releases. The audacity of Obama and Clinton has no end. Will it take the march of millions of citizens on DC before this government wakes up to the fact we no longer want these people representing us.

    • ndnpatriot

      PB, that is exactly what it will take!! But I have no more faith in “THE PEOPLE”, AS IT IS EVIDENT NO ONE (in numbers that count) ARE WILLING TO TAKE UP THE MANTLE OF OUR “FOUNDING FATHERS”, AND MAKE THE SACRIFICE!! So goes the sacrifice of our country!!

  • James Maxwell

    To expect the truth from government sources about Benghazi is foolish. They
    have already lied and attempted to deceive and deflect any criticism from
    the whut house or the proposed successor by perpetuating their lies and
    misinformation constantly. The news media has used every resource available
    to them to protect and defend the politicos in the democrat party but the people
    are beginning to wake up and see the truth. This was a carefully planned
    attack upon Americans by Al Quada and the muzzie brotherhood.

    • douber1

      all those PUKES are trying to sweep it under the rug
      we must keep it alive so that HEAds will roll
      such as KILLARY

      • ndnpatriot

        douber1, I hope it will happen that way, but look what MAMBY PAMBY representation we have!

?>

Keep the Fake News Media in check.

Don’t let the MSM censor your news as America becomes Great Again. Over 500,000 Americans receive our daily dose of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness along with Breaking News direct to their inbox—and you can too. Sign up to receive news and views from The 1776Coalition!

We know how important your privacy is and your information is SAFE with us. We’ll never sell
your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time directly from your inbox.
View our full privacy policy.

Facebook Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com
Google Analytics Alternative