The House and Senate Intelligence Committees missed the point BIG TIME — it was not what the memo called the terrorists — it was that Amb RIce said it was a video!

If you read papers tonight (especially the NY Times) about General Petraeus’ testimony today, you will read that General Petraeus said the talking points sent to the White House and Ambassador Rice at first had the specific name Al Qaeda and Ansar al Shariah but that it was CHANGED to read “extremists.” This changed name stuff was the subject of much talk in the two Intelligence Committees.  Did it say Al Qaeda or extremists?

Ok…but so what?  Who cares?  What difference?   The question the Senate and House Committees should have been probing is not the name of the terrorist group in the memo but WHY DID AMBASSADOR RICE SAY VIDEO/PROTEST?  Where did she come  up with that?  She never mentioned a terrorist group so why do we care how the group was identified in the memo?

Check out this excerpt from a New York Times article:

Ms. Feinstein, read the final unclassified talking points to reporters:

“The currently available information suggests 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. diplomatic post in Benghazi and subsequently its annex. There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.

“This assessment may change as additional information is collected and analyzed and as currently available information continues to be evaluated.

“The investigation is ongoing, and the U.S. government is working with Libyan authorities to bring to justice those responsible for the deaths of U.S. citizens.”

So where does Ambassador Rice come up with the video???


Leave a Comment ()